las <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Vinyl on a good system sounds as good as any CD, and FAR better than
>>any MP3.
>
>How is that possible?? The cut off for frequencies on vinyl is 15,000
>hz. The dynamic range is at best probably 70. Channel separation is
>much lower. THD is much higher. The S/N ratio is bad. Even the best
>equipment will give you ticks and pops. There is hum and hiss.
First of all, there are LPs without a "cutoff" of 15kHz. Second, even if all
LPs were limited to 15kHz, the fact of the matter is that most humans over
the age of 15 can't really hear above 15kHz anyway. So that whole argument
is pretty much irrelevant.
But all that aside, just because you haven't heard a good system, doesn't
mean they don't exist. People who are "vinyl purists" as you say actually
take care of their LPs, their cartridges, their equipment. Your statement
that "Even the best equipment will give you ticks and pops. There is hum and
hiss" is simply *not* true. A good system with cared-for equipment and vinyl
is quiet and pop-free.
>From time to time I hear "vinyl purists" make claims like yours. But
>they never sight any double blind studies. They present no data or
>facts to support their position.
I've seen plenty of "double-blind" studies in magazines over the years. But
I've also been in a room with a high-end system switching back and forth
between CD and vinyl of the same high-end recording (well-recorded and
mastered and pressed). No one in the room (all high-end audio people
suspicious of vinyl) could tell which was vinyl -- not from "ticks and pops"
nor from "better" sound. A few people *preferred* one over the other, but
surprisingly a lot of people picked vinyl. This scenario is a common one,
Larry. Maybe if you were in that room you would have picked vinyl, too ;)
The point is not which is better, CD or vinyl; the point is that good vinyl
on a good system can sound just as good as CD.
Granted, you have to spend a LOT more money on a vinyl system, and put a LOT
more care into it, to get sound comparable to a CD system, but that's
another story.
>Anyone can claim that anything is better than anything else and from
>the subjective standpoint the fact that something may sound better to
>you, you can make that statement. But on a factual basis everything
>points to the opposite.
Not at all; I have heard plenty of theories as to why vinyl can sound as
good as CD, starting with the fact that CD is a digital representation of an
analog signal, and because CD must go through A/D and D/A processing and can
be affected much more by interference, jitter, and all the other things
high-end audio magazines like to use to describe its faults :) There is a
lot to be said for analog being a shorter path from source to output. Again,
I'm not saying one is better than the other -- I'm just pointing out that
your positions aren't as "factual" as you would have me believe. They are
just as much opinion as anything else here.
>When you make a statement like you did, you have to qualify it by
>saying "in my opinion". There are equalizers because to different
>people think different settings sound better. But in strict terms of
>fidelity the CD has to come out on top unless you copied it from
>vinyl :).
Not at all -- vinyl and CD are both pressed from the same master. Vinyl is
analog to analog. CD is analog -> A/D processor -> CD. There is no objective
evidence that CD is better, Larry. We could debate theories all day and no
one would be right. The fact that so many people think vinyl is better --
people who are knowledgeable about both audio and music -- tells me that
vinyl can at *least* sound as good as CD given good equipment and care.
If you're even in Los Angeles (I used to live there), there is a shop called
Ambrosia Audio. Drop in and say hi, and ask them to show you their rigs --
take a listen to their vinyl rig and their digital rig, then tell me that CD
is hands-down better than vinyl. I guarantee you wouldn't be able to ;)
P.S. Lest anyone get the wrong idea, I'm a CD person. I have maybe 20
records that haven't been touched in years. So I'm not some vinyl nut trying
to hang on to my vinyl dreams for dear life ;) I'm just objective to know
that all the hype about CD being so superior is just that -- hype. CD is a
great medium, especially since it's compact and it's easy to use and care
for. However, remember in 1981 when it was supposedly the best sound
possible? Then there was 20-bit, and *that* was the best sound possible.
Then there was HDCD, and *that* was the best sound possible. Now there are
DVD-A and SACD, both of which are "revolutionary" -- hmmm... makes you
wonder...
>I can't believe that your older LPs don't have audible ticks and
>pops. My vinyl collection (which I have been selling off) start in
>the early 60's. I had very good equipment. But even right out of the
>shrink wrap I would always hear some ticks and pops.
That's because you don't clean them out of the box. Think about it -- a
record is literally cut out of a smooth piece of vinyl. There's going to be
residue, just like when you drill into wood. They don't really clean them
well when they're pressed. Anyone who is serious about vinyl knows that the
first thing you do with a new LP is clean it.
>LPs are also highly susceptible to temperature and other things that
>can result in warping.
But if you take care of them they never warp. LOL, even CDs will warp if you
leave them in a hot car. In fact, a properly stored LP will not warp at all
despite the temperature (LOL, unless it's so hot that it literally melts,
which would be death for any format).
>Their playing speed was also variable. The majority of all but the
>highest end turntables were belt driven. This is a poor way to keep
>the speed of the platter constant.
Actually, that's not true, unless you're talking about cheap turntables. The
highest of the high-end turntables are all belt-driven, Larry. Belt-driven
turntables actually have a smoother, more reliable movement because any
variation in the motor is smoothed out by the belt so that it won't reach
the platter. As for speed, any good turntable has excellent rotational speed
stability.
It sounds like your ideas about vinyl were developed, as you said, in the
early 60s, but they haven't been updated in quite a while. I really do
encourage you to visit a high-end audio shop and challenge them to change
your mind about the sound of vinyl. I think you'll be amazed at how good it
really sounds -- I was.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word
"unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
