5 ms·

Whenever I hear people talk about the superior sound quality of vinyl my response is "Yeah, there's nothing quite like the sound of a rock being dragged over bu

Whenever I hear people talk about the superior sound quality of vinyl my response is "Yeah, there's nothing quite like the sound of a rock being dragged over bumpy plastic!"

captainredbeard 6y ago
Let me translate to what they are trying to say: "the dynamic range in the music mastered for vinyl sounds good".
- isolli 6y ago
  Yes, by buying a vinyl record from the 70s (especially from renowned labels), you're buying a sound that is free from the digital remastering craze of the following decades.
  - stjohnswarts 6y ago
    Is that really true though? If they have the original recordings (which have a much better dynamic range than vinyl) the digitally remastered ones can indeed be more true to the sound of the original recording.
    - isolli 6y ago
      They can be, for sure, but in my experience it's hit and miss. For instance, I believe the CD reissues of Living Stereo records (from the master tape) are very good. On the contrary, I once bought the integral of Hector Lavoe, remastered, and the sound was very disappointing, with excessive highs giving an unnatural quality to the sound. Whereas my experience with vinyl records from Decca/London pressed in the 70s is consistently good. If you're willing to experiment and take risks, you can probably find good and bad everywhere. I was suggesting a disappointment-minimizing path...
stjohnswarts 6y ago
Well a lot of CD's swapped out loudness (amplitude) for dynamic range and really they aren't much better than vinyl. So there's a bit of truth to it. A properly mastered CD is far superior to vinyl in a technical sense. Not being an audiophile though I don't mind either as long as the record ain't scratchy and it's not a cheap deck with crappy electronics. Obviously the best "sound" is in the ear of the beholder and some people prefer the sounds of their child/teen years to a higher fidelity version available on CD.

Whenever I hear people talk about the superior sound quality of vinyl my response is "Yeah, there's nothing quite like the sound of a rock being dragged over bumpy plastic!"

captainredbeard 6y ago

Let me translate to what they are trying to say: "the dynamic range in the music mastered for vinyl sounds good".

isolli 6y ago
Yes, by buying a vinyl record from the 70s (especially from renowned labels), you're buying a sound that is free from the digital remastering craze of the following decades.
- stjohnswarts 6y ago
  Is that really true though? If they have the original recordings (which have a much better dynamic range than vinyl) the digitally remastered ones can indeed be more true to the sound of the original recording.
  - isolli 6y ago
    They can be, for sure, but in my experience it's hit and miss. For instance, I believe the CD reissues of Living Stereo records (from the master tape) are very good. On the contrary, I once bought the integral of Hector Lavoe, remastered, and the sound was very disappointing, with excessive highs giving an unnatural quality to the sound. Whereas my experience with vinyl records from Decca/London pressed in the 70s is consistently good. If you're willing to experiment and take risks, you can probably find good and bad everywhere. I was suggesting a disappointment-minimizing path...

stjohnswarts 6y ago

Well a lot of CD's swapped out loudness (amplitude) for dynamic range and really they aren't much better than vinyl. So there's a bit of truth to it. A properly mastered CD is far superior to vinyl in a technical sense. Not being an audiophile though I don't mind either as long as the record ain't scratchy and it's not a cheap deck with crappy electronics. Obviously the best "sound" is in the ear of the beholder and some people prefer the sounds of their child/teen years to a higher fidelity version available on CD.