3 ms·
I have to disagree: a well-mastered recording on vinyl is superior to a high-resolution, digital recording when the music has been auto-tuned, mastered, remaste
by isolli 8y ago
I have to disagree: a well-mastered recording on vinyl is superior to a high-resolution, digital recording when the music has been auto-tuned, mastered, remastered, and compressed to death. (I'm talking about dynamic-range compression here.)
- nkozyra 8y agoSounds like you're conflating the playback format with the production then. Nothing's stopping you from putting brick wall compressed mastered music on record just as nothing's stopping you from putting a track with more dynamic range on cd.
- isolli 8y agoYou're right, except that in practice some wonderful historic recordings are only available on vinyl, so a blanket statement like: "I have come to hate the vinyl format" should be qualified.
- mikestew 8y agosome wonderful historic recordings are only available on vinyl Now you're conflating the media with the content.
- timrichard 8y agoHave to disagree. With the mechanical wear interaction between the stylus and groove, it's often estimated that you start to lose detail after about 10 plays. Plus a whole lot of EQ compromises have to be made to stop the stylus jumping out of the groove, which don't exist on digital formats. So if you add up the HF and LF rolloffs, rumble, wow, and general snap crackle and pop from vinyl that probably isn't completely dust-free, you have a grab-bag of imperfections that won't exist in a FLAC file ripped from a CD when it was mint and free of read errors.
- stordoff 8y agoThere's nothing stopping you avoiding all of these things on CD. All things being equal, the CD will sound superior to the vinyl (at worst equal to it).
- isolli 8y agoSome recordings are not available on CD, or only terribly remastered. I haven't looked into downloads, but I doubt they are better remastered.