How is the Vinyl experience?

Maybe I need a better CD player? Audiolab 6200. It does have tough opposition though. Linn sondek carbon with ATOC9. A rega atria phono stage a Krell kav400xi amp and Proac tablette ref9 speakers. I have CD player linked to amp with xlr balanced cables but still prefer the vinyl sound.
 
Old vinyl and modern vinyl are two different animals and should not be confused. They are recorded, mastered and produced very differently and have very different sounds. People talking about the 'original vinyl sound' are generally talking about analogue recorded and mastered music, whose sound engineers employed very different techniques and EQ curves. Modern vinyl is nearly all, digitally recorded, mastered in very much the same way as other modern digital formats. Even the EQ curves are the same as used on CD.
Much of the modern resurgence of vinyl is about marketing, little else. It is very similar sonically to its purely digital equivalent, only the media has changed. I wont even get into data density, RIAA curves or loudness of modern vinyl.
In summary, if you want the original vinyl experience, buy old vinyl - pre 1980ish (and it does sound very different). If you want heavy weight pressings which are much more precise and somewhat more clinical sound, buy modern vinyl, because that is what you are getting.
 
Buying SACD has it's advantages and disadvantages especially for someone starting out with a limited budget. The main advantage is the fact that SACD players do get more information out of redbooks, but those good players are expensive with even the entry level being around the £800 mark as I've previously said.

Perhaps the biggest disadvantage is the actual cost of the discs themselves. Many are collectors items and can demand very high prices, easily going into three figures. The same can be said of collectable vinyl. As pointed out modern vinyl is no better than current CDs from modern artists and suffer from the same compression problems often referred to as the 'loudness wars'.

Starting out now for quality music I think I'd stick with good downloads unless you have very deep pockets.
 
I can sit in my listening position, close my eyes and see the band in their positions.
I am sure that is what you think you are hearing, but very often is not how music is recorded. Yes 60 years ago at Abbey Road, mic arrays would be used in a single mix-down with the whole band playing together in one studio.
Today individual parts are recorded separately on individual tracks. Very often on their own. Sometimes musicians are not even on the same continent, or recorded their individual parts weeks apart. Their are no mic arrays that locate positions of band members in a studio, its all down to the sound engineer where he decides to either pan the sound of an individual track to, or spatially position if he is using some form of spatial mastering such as Dolby Atmos Music -it is all psycho-acoustic.

Some of that 'old vinyl sound' was very much down to the sound of band members playing together, with their imperfections and only using a few mics and it was down to the sound engineer to get all of the mics and instruments balanced right for that overall sound as everything got laid down at once.
Today with the clinical efficiency of modern recordings, where each individual component gets its own track it can be managed and manipulated to exactly how the engineer wants it to sound, not necessarily how it is played (or sung - Autotune - ahem). Modern samplers and sequencers can turn any sound into another sound, without having to re-record new instruments.
Today their is almost zero purity in modern produced music (CD or vinyl) it is all a manipulation within the digital sphere. That is why many people are often disappointed when they hear their favourite band for the first time, live, and it doesn't sound how it did on the recording. Remember 'All Saints' ? Sounded like angels on their album Pure Shores, sounded like Battersea Dogs Home live.
Whereas 'back in the day' what a band sounded like on vinyl, is pretty much what they sounded like live - as that is how they were recorded. And that is why I think that so many people loved vinyl, because what you heard on your Dansette is what you heard in the Cavern.
 
Buying SACD has it's advantages and disadvantages especially for someone starting out with a limited budget. The main advantage is the fact that SACD players do get more information out of redbooks, but those good players are expensive with even the entry level being around the £800 mark as I've previously said.

Perhaps the biggest disadvantage is the actual cost of the discs themselves. Many are collectors items and can demand very high prices, easily going into three figures. The same can be said of collectable vinyl. As pointed out modern vinyl is no better than current CDs from modern artists and suffer from the same compression problems often referred to as the 'loudness wars'.

Starting out now for quality music I think I'd stick with good downloads unless you have very deep pockets.

I have to disagree Sir, I get CD’s from Charity Shops that sound absolutely fantastic on my HiFi Set up.
This has nothing to do with price either as I can afford to buy high end equipment and SACD if I wanted to.
 
I have to disagree Sir, I get CD’s from Charity Shops that sound absolutely fantastic on my HiFi Set up.
This has nothing to do with price either as I can afford to buy high end equipment and SACD if I wanted to.
Out of curiosity what is your HiFi setup ?
 
Out of curiosity what is your HiFi setup ?

I have a Marantz CD6005 and Marantz PM6005, second hand that I paid £320 for 18 months ago. My Speakers are Wharfedale Diamond 220 (with stands) that I bought from the Classifieds here for £60.
They sound fantastic to me, loud or quiet (depending whether the neighbours are in). :)
 
You'll get advocates on both sides. Vinyl can be great, poor, and everything in between. But that's the same for all formats IMO.

I think if you can get a home dem of a deck from say Rega planar 3 upwards you'd probably enjoy it immensely, and be surprised at just how good it can sound. When I bought my first deck many years ago it was around £350 and I demoed it against a 2k cd player ( I was looking at second hand on the cdp and could only afford one or the other) I ended up with the deck as it sounded great and the cdp player sounded, well like a cd player lol.

There is a frame of mind element, as said by others in the thread the very act of putting on a record usually means it's not about background music. This in itself probably puts you in a psychological place to listen and enjoy.

It can be a pain, but most modern decks don't need much TLC once set up. Though a damaged needle, scratched vinyl, or untraceable hum can really annoy! Vinyl is also heavy, bulky, and often expensive

Here's a good read from a digital advocate explaining some of the reasons why vinyl often sounds better Digital Vs Analogue Audio - The Loudness War

I think it takes a bit of the fanboy sting out of the arguments, and explains why some of us argue our cause so fervently.

I love music so I like both ends of the spectrum. Streaming is awesome, the ability to have it anywhere and the choice (and quality) blows my mind when I compare my days to walkmans and cassette. But personally when I want to really sit and take pleasure in music then vinyl is still often my preference
 
I have to disagree Sir, I get CD’s from Charity Shops that sound absolutely fantastic on my HiFi Set up.
This has nothing to do with price either as I can afford to buy high end equipment and SACD if I wanted to.
I don't know what your disagreeing about. I'm just talking about the cost of setting up an SACD system with the intended purchasing of SACD titles. It's far more expensive that buying a CDP and discs from a charity shop. I wish I could find SACD titles in such shops as the main source of SACD is Discogs.

As far as players themselves are concerned then up until a couple of weeks ago besides my three SACD players, two of which are standalone stereo and one UD player and I also owned a Marantz cd6006. For critical listening they have all been hooked up to a Lehmann Linear headphone amp and Oppo PM1 headphones.

In order of their ability with redbook playback it's Denon DCD 2500, Marantz sa8005 and Marantz pm6006. Bear in mind that the Marantz share the same Cirrus Logic DAC yet the 8005 performance is superior to the 6006, which is not unexpected with the 8005 costing three times that of the 6006. The Denon eclipses both Marantz players and by some margin.

The cost of setting up SACD is expensive. Having looked on Peter Tyson's website the cheapest SACD player is the Arcam CDS50 at £590, followed by a Denon DCD1600 at £1000, Yamaha CDS2100 at £1500, Denon DCD2500 at £1900, Technics G700 at £2500, Marantz KI Ruby at £2700 up to the Marantz Premium 10 at a whopping £6500.

I was actually quite shocked by how much better my Denon was over the Marantz sa8005 and although I didn't pay anything like the PT price I do consider it money well spent not only for it's superb SACD playback but with it's ability to eke every ounce of information out of redbooks. It's pointless though owning a standalone SACD player without getting tempted into buying SACD titles and I have over the last year or so spent well over £1000 on such discs at an average price of £30.
 
How is the Vinyl experience?

Well ... it is what it is ...and... it is not what it is not. Be sure you understand what it is and what it isn't before you go diving in. Many people are thrilled with the vinyl experience, and equally many people are disenchanted.

You have to figure out which of those people you are.

Steve/bluewizard
 
I don't know what your disagreeing about. I'm just talking about the cost of setting up an SACD system with the intended purchasing of SACD titles. It's far more expensive that buying a CDP and discs from a charity shop. I wish I could find SACD titles in such shops as the main source of SACD is Discogs.

As far as players themselves are concerned then up until a couple of weeks ago besides my three SACD players, two of which are standalone stereo and one UD player and I also owned a Marantz cd6006. For critical listening they have all been hooked up to a Lehmann Linear headphone amp and Oppo PM1 headphones.

In order of their ability with redbook playback it's Denon DCD 2500, Marantz sa8005 and Marantz pm6006. Bear in mind that the Marantz share the same Cirrus Logic DAC yet the 8005 performance is superior to the 6006, which is not unexpected with the 8005 costing three times that of the 6006. The Denon eclipses both Marantz players and by some margin.

The cost of setting up SACD is expensive. Having looked on Peter Tyson's website the cheapest SACD player is the Arcam CDS50 at £590, followed by a Denon DCD1600 at £1000, Yamaha CDS2100 at £1500, Denon DCD2500 at £1900, Technics G700 at £2500, Marantz KI Ruby at £2700 up to the Marantz Premium 10 at a whopping £6500.

I was actually quite shocked by how much better my Denon was over the Marantz sa8005 and although I didn't pay anything like the PT price I do consider it money well spent not only for it's superb SACD playback but with it's ability to eke every ounce of information out of redbooks. It's pointless though owning a standalone SACD player without getting tempted into buying SACD titles and I have over the last year or so spent well over £1000 on such discs at an average price of £30.

I disagreed with “ good downloads”. Just my opinion that I prefer CD.
 
I think that if the OP is looking for better quality than Redbook 16/44.1 then @gibbsy was saying that HD Audio downloads are a much more cost effective option than SACD.

I have both an extensive CD collection and Hi Rez Audio collection, plus Amazon Music HD streaming and the most cost effective solution is streaming as it opens up an almost infinite library of music. That said I am currently listening to BBC1's Live Lounge 2015 on CD because there is no substitute for the overall satisfaction of owning physical media and putting a shiny disk into that drawer. I am also listening to it on my Ghetto Hifi in my office that would make many so called audiophiles (whatever they are) toes curl - as I run JBL Control1's with a Yamaha YST-SW105 sub, but for my listening, when I am working it actually delivers a really nice sound, with just a hint of LF from the sub, that is easy to listen to.
 
I'm never going to do downloads, too old to change now. The only streamed music I listen to are videos on You Tube. Two years ago I thought I would never be that extravagant and buy SACDs even though I've had SACD capability for almost ten years. Now I can't get enough of them and with the acquisition of the Denon 2500 they sound better than ever. However it's an expensive way of listening to music, as good as it is, as such streaming HiRes is far more cost effective for someone starting on their HiFi journey.
 
I think unless you were buying 192/96 Studio Masters as downloads @gibbsy it would be a retrograde for you in quality and to be honest no cheaper.
For us 'youngsters' embracing the interwebs is far easier :laugh:
 
I'm never going to do downloads, too old to change now. The only streamed music I listen to are videos on You Tube. Two years ago I thought I would never be that extravagant and buy SACDs even though I've had SACD capability for almost ten years. Now I can't get enough of them and with the acquisition of the Denon 2500 they sound better than ever. However it's an expensive way of listening to music, as good as it is, as such streaming HiRes is far more cost effective for someone starting on their HiFi journey.
It is expensive (vinyl in my case) but I keep reminding myself that 4k films are £20-25 a disc and I'll re-listen to an album way more than I'd rewatch a film! I thought that SACD had gone tbh. Are they still releasing new albums?
 
It is expensive (vinyl in my case) but I keep reminding myself that 4k films are £20-25 a disc and I'll re-listen to an album way more than I'd rewatch a film! I thought that SACD had gone tbh. Are they still releasing new albums?
Yes, MoFi and Analogue Productions are regularly producing new titles, not from current artists but from back catalogues. There is a very big customer base for classical music, which really suits SACD, and they come out almost on a weekly basis. I was rather hoping for a 50th anniversary release of Bridge Over Troubled Water but so far that's a no show although it was sort of half promised by MoFi.
 
Interesting discussion. I'm a recent, well for the past 6 months, convert to vinyl. Well I say convert but I like both digital (through my Roksan k3 DAC) and vinyl on my Rega P1.

Thing is, I listen to music made by relatively obscure techno artists. Right now I'm listening to Commit - Remote Viewing. Labels like this still care about how the vinyl versions sound. Often, when buying the vinyl you get a lossless version as well and I think the only thing limiting my vinyl playback is my equipment.

Very expensive though...
 
Spent last night 8 till midnight playing my vinyl.
All old vinyl - non of those digital remastered rubbish.
Dark side of the moon, blonde on blonde, Rumours and ziggy stardust, those albums made my hairs on my arms stand up. So good, close my eyes and they were there in my music room playing right infront of me.
Non of those above on CD sound anywhere near the vinyl originals.
It is so much better than digital CD's.😀
 
Spent last night 8 till midnight playing my vinyl.
All old vinyl - non of those digital remastered rubbish.
Dark side of the moon, blonde on blonde, Rumours and ziggy stardust, those albums made my hairs on my arms stand up. So good, close my eyes and they were there in my music room playing right infront of me.
Non of those above on CD sound anywhere near the vinyl originals.
It is so much better than digital CD's.😀
I have DSOM and Blonde on Blonde on SACD. With DSOM I have the 2003 EMI edition that has the same DR as any of vinyl releases of the album and it's a very spacious mix. The clocks are amazing. With Blonde Columbia edition, it's not one of Dylans best mixed albums on any media, that's probably Blood on the Tracks MoFi edition, another I have on SACD.

With Rumours it's probably one of the best recorded albums on any media, even CD and one of the best is the German 1994 pressing which has an average DR of 15. When Rumours first came out I bought and returned two albums as they both had more snap crackle and pop than a breakfast cereal box. I shall have to buy the SACD out of curiosity and a quick look on Discogs have shown the Japanese pressings have started to fall in price. Hmm, Christmas present to myself?
 
Those entrenched in either digital or vinyl camps, dare I say, are missing the point completely? You cannot compare the two because they are both totally DIFFERENT formats, they sound different and they will never, ever, ever, regardless of how much money one spends, sound the same. it’s a nonsense for anyone to suggest one format is better than the other, because they are, yep you got it, different! it’s simply down to personal taste and for me, as an owner of digital and analogue formats, I play a music format dependent on time, mood, oh and if the wife and kids are out and I’ve got peace. so, today its Greg Brown, on Vinyl.

If the thread owner is still considering vinyl and not lost the will to live, I hope he gives vinyl a try, who knows, he may enjoy the difference.
 
If i had not seen it from references to official Sony review material, I would have assumed it a hoax, the latest Sony Music Player Digital audio the NWA 55 has a specific Vinyl mode. Which works by deliberately inserting low levels of noise and distortion into a digital playback in order to mimic the performance. Not just random noise , but frequencies and overtones linked to tracking arm dragging ,and rumble and surface noise from vinyl . The theory being that it gives the brain more work to do,and real venues are never as quiet as the home ...
 
Last edited:
Evening all, Haven't posted in years but have been lurking recently and had forgotten I'd previously registered.

There are two kind of people in the world - Song people and Album people.

A perfect summary in my very humble opinion, don't invest in vinyl unless you're willing to listen to albums. I'd also add "Collector" to Steve's list as some of my buys fall into that category.

I've bought approx 60 new vinyl LP's in last 2-3 years. I've been been disappointed with a small number of them. In the case where I've the same album on CD and in 75% of those cases find the CD a better listen than the vinyl they are certainly sharper and definitely louder.

Not sure if that's the system (Yamaha RN602, Nad turntable and entry level Denon CD Player) or are newer LP's generally "quieter" ?
 
the latest Sony Music Player Digital audio the NWA 55 has a specific Vinyl mode. Which works by deliberately inserting low levels of noise and distortion into a digital playback in order to mimic the performance

Now that's what I call technological advancement. Future models should add modes to simulate valve amps, overloaded inputs, speakers connected out of phase, digital drop-outs and a neighbour hammering on your wall telling you to keep the noise down.

Whatever next!

Actually, some Barefoot Sound DSP studio monitors incorporate a "HiFi" setting. Rather disrespectful, I think:

'With the turn of a knob one can switch from the MicroMain27’s brutally revealing “Flat” response to the warmer and sweeter “Hi-Fi” setting, generically emulating the sound of some high end consumer audio gear'.
 
The thing is some people will really believe the BS. Sounds tailor made for Currys.
 
Just wondering, which of the world famous musicians listen via digital or vinyl media.
Did read somewhere Bowie and Dylan liked to use vinyl as their favorite front end.
Does Paul Simon use a Linn LP12?
 

The latest video from AVForums

Is 4K Blu-ray Worth It?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom