Moving on from vinyl

[Dave2002]

You raise a many good points Dave
IMHO, vinyl, at best, can come close to equaling good digital, but it sure takes a lot of work to get there, and great digital, such as High Rez downloads, of SACDs that can have their DSD fed into a high quality DAC, or Blu Ray Audio, simply can't be mentioned in the same breath as vinyl. Reel to reel tape also bests vinyl, but the choices of material on both ends of the replay chain are scarce, and tape is subject to degradation.
This months Hi Fi News has an article on vinyl pressing plants that mentions that due to the degradation in master tapes, 95% of new lp issues are made from a digital file. That is astounding. If one wants to hear digital files, why not just play them digitally, instead of extracting them from a slab of petroleum that is being slashed with an expensive sewing needle?

Before Christmas I went into an HMV shop - yes there still are some. I even bought a few CDs there. What was a surprise was that the LP section had expanded, and there are new LPs from current pop stars, as well as some "oldies". These are obviously new albums, which almost certainly were recorded digitally, and edited digitally, so what's the point? I had previously noted a revival of LP albums which now seem to be spilling back over into other shops, but I was surprised at the size of shop space set aside for these. I was also surprised at the prices, which were relatively high. I think CDs are cheaper.

A case might be made for LPs where the original recordings were made using analogue tape masters. Also, as noted, tape masters can and do deteriorate over time, some very badly, so it's possible that a 40-50 year old LP can now be the best representation of a recording made in the period from around 1950 to 1975, and the best hope for creating a digital copy of some good earlier performances/recordings. If copies of older LPs can be found, and cleaned, then some digital remastering would be possible, though at least one post on this thread has suggested that with good equipment, for listening purposes, it is preferable to play the LP - though that will in time degrade and/or destroy it.

[umslopogaas]

#29 richard, if you got big improvements every time you upgraded the turntable - and I'm sure you did - I would put those improvements down to the fact that you also upgraded the cartridge at the same time. As I said, if a turntable goes round at a constant 33 1/3 rpm and doesnt rumble, what more can one costing ten times as much deliver? And from personal experience I got a big improvement when I upgraded cartridges from Goldring to Ortofon on the same turntable and arm.

[umslopogaas]

#31 Dave 2002, I suppose the point about digitally recorded vinyl is that if people have paid for equipment to play vinyl, they need vinyl to play on it. I quite agree that it seems pointless to put out digital recordings on vinyl when the CD medium is so much more convenient, but there must be a demand for vinyl or the manufacturers wouldnt provide it.

And there is definitely a demand for vinyl out there, my hifi dealer stocks several different turntables and a variety of new vinyl discs. Interestingly he also stocks CD players, but not CDs, other than a few for demonstration purposes, if I want a CD he has to order it in.

[Dave2002]

Umslops

You are right about those who have kit needing records to play on it. Seems a bit of a so-called lifestyle choice though, and really should be pointless for modern digital recordings.

Those who like older recordings may want a turntable for different reasons. Then it becomes arguable/questionnable whether CD or LP is to be preferred. I agree with Alain that some CD transfers don't sound as good as the equivalent LPs on good tts. (with good arms and cartridges). That's not always the case though, and on the whole CD provides a significantly cheaper way of getting reasonable sound quality.

Some people don't want "reasonable" but strive for excellence and outstanding recordings. That might only be possible with a high expenditure, whether on digital or analogue equipment. Great if they can afford it.

[richardfinegold]

#29 richard, if you got big improvements every time you upgraded the turntable - and I'm sure you did - I would put those improvements down to the fact that you also upgraded the cartridge at the same time. As I said, if a turntable goes round at a constant 33 1/3 rpm and doesnt rumble, what more can one costing ten times as much deliver? And from personal experience I got a big improvement when I upgraded cartridges from Goldring to Ortofon on the same turntable and arm.

It could be, but there were also improvements in vibration control and speed stability. Gee, one never has to think about this stuff with digital

[pastoralguy]

Mrs PG and myself are fortunate in having a very good Hi-Fi shop very close to where we live. It's run by a very pro-active couple who regularly have events that are well attended by the local cognoscenti. The last event they had was a turntable day where various decks were paired with very esoteric equipment that was well out of our price range but we were curious nonetheless.

The couple are lovely and very welcoming and tolerate my daft questions with patience. Anyway, we arrived early and had the shop to ourselves for about half an hour. Mrs. PG is a big Eurythmics fan and they were kind enough to play a side of their Greatest Hits album on a truly wonderful system and it sounded pretty fantastic.

The problem came when we requested they play a couple of singles that we'd had from yesteryear and had had reasonable use. One was Kate Bush's 'Wuthering Heights'. Immediately the stylus hit the vinyl the surface noise was apparent. Frankly, the cd sounded so much better. This got me thinking about the difference between the two records. The Kate Bush was an ordinary production single that would possibly have been bought at Woolworths whereas the Eurythmics album was a modern high quality vinyl that had obviously been produced to compliment an expensive system.

This got me thinking about who these fantastic turntables are aimed at. The only reason I would want an expensive turntable would be to play recordings that are unavailable on cd or download. But, presuming the vinyl would be low cost production records then all a good system is going to do is emphasis that the quality wasn't good. I recently came across an Lp of the violinist Alan Loveday playing two Beethoven sonatas which have, to my knowledge, not been released on cd. However, since Loveday wasn't a 'big name' the record was on a budget label with, in my experience, low production values.

I suppose it's 'better than nothing' but it's a lot of money to pay for a second rate experience.

Does anyone have opinions on this?

(I should also mention that I requested to hear a 10" vinyl of Beethoven's 4th Symphony played by a British orchestra well known to these boards. The equipment revealed that the wind intonation during the introduction was 'creative'! I played the record on my late Auntie Mary's 'Dansette' machine and the approximation was much less noticeable).

[Ferretfancy]

I would never part with my LPs. Back in the 1970's I experimented a lot with so called high end turntables before buying a Linn Sondek LP 12 second hand from a colleague. I've had it upgraded a couple of times and still use it regularly on my collection of 2000 odd LPs
Most of the discs are in excellent condition, and I have cleaned most of them using a little method of my own with no need to buy a Keith Monks machine.
It's very unfortunate that many people succumbed to the mistake of using high compliance moving magnet cartridges and trying to achieve good performance with low tracking weights. The SME arm, right the way up to MarkV,has been very much a culprit in this regard with its chattery knife edge suspension which causes wear and tear making the stylus unable to trace the groove properly.

The Linn uses a moving coil Ittok cartridge and tracks at 1.9 grams with low compliance. I still have quite a few early stereo discs, some of which have not yet appeared on CD, and they reproduce perfectly. One example is the sadly uncompleted set of Haydn symphonies with Leslie Jones and the Little Orchestra of London on very early Pye Golden Guinea.

I'm not going for the argument that analogue is inherently better than digital, but it is a pity that so many people are rejecting the pleasure it can give.

Which reminds me, I haven't listened to the "Horn Signal' for a while, hear goes !

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

Most of the discs are in excellent condition, and I have cleaned most of them using a little method of my own with no need to buy a Keith Monks machine.

I tried many cleaning methods, including a wet cleaner during playing (not good, and led to the following).

Unable to afford a Monks machine, I discovered a kit called Cantorion, which washed the LPs and dried them off quickly. It was quite laborious, and needed practice to do a good job, but was worthwhile.

It's very unfortunate that many people succumbed to the mistake of using high compliance moving magnet cartridges and trying to achieve good performance with low tracking weights. The SME arm, right the way up to MarkV,has been very much a culprit in this regard with its chattery knife edge suspension which causes wear and tear making the stylus unable to trace the groove properly.

I was unaware of this, though it makes sense if the knife-edge contact is vulnerable to damage.

[Dave2002]

It's very unfortunate that many people succumbed to the mistake of using high compliance moving magnet cartridges and trying to achieve good performance with low tracking weights. The SME arm, right the way up to MarkV,has been very much a culprit in this regard with its chattery knife edge suspension which causes wear and tear making the stylus unable to trace the groove properly.

Are you really sure of that? Have there been any really serious studies of the effects of playing weight on long term (or even rapid short term) damage to LPs? I used to track with an SME at lowish playing weights, but I wasn't aware of too much damage. I agree that there did seem to be a consensus that very low weights would cause damage, and that cartridges couldn't really track properly at ultra low tracking weights.

Re the use of moving coil cartridges, which I always aspired to but never managed to attain, the received wisdom was that they were better, sounded better etc., even though tracking at somewhat higher playing weights. However there was at least one report by I believe a respected writer after many years that the added ambience (or whatever) from mc cartridges was actually due to a resonance effect between the cartridge and the vinyl surface, so not in fact due to a more "realistic" or "accurate" rendition of what was recorded in the grooves.

I always thought, or perhaps hoped, that I would eventually return to this, and get a really good vinyl set up, but the reality is that although I don't want to part with my LPs yet, they are in limbo, and I think that it would cost £000s to get kit to make them sound good, and the money might be better spent on other things - perhaps even a new DAC - or maybe a holiday!

[Pianoman]

Having just come back from one of the biggest hifi shows in the country at Scalford Hall, it's just confirmed something I think I already knew - namely, that vinyl can indeed sound superb, but it needs LOTS of patience, love, attention, etc etc. This is an amateur show, but these guys are real enthusiasts, with the right sort of backgrounds to have some incredible machinery on display. Most of them admit that you have to spend big to get the most out of records, and that there are still inherent niggles that often need sorting out. Of course, they see it as all part of the love of vinyl, so putting a record on is almost a ritual. I got a whiff of nostalgia (literally, with those sleeves and inserts...) and one of them put on a disc of Walcha playing Bach that sounded wonderful - but that set up ran to something like 40K ! In the next room, a relatively cheap cd player and decent floorstand speakers were used to play exactly the same recording on cd and, you guessed it, it sounded wonderful as well. The original mastering is really the crux, then speakers and room interaction, and tbh, most half-decent systems these days sound pretty good. In fact, on a final note, one guy had risen to a 'challenge' to put a system together for less than £100, which he duly did from ebay, gumtree, re-cycled bits etc and people's jaws hit the floor when it was revealed what he'd spent...

[Ferretfancy]

Are you really sure of that? Have there been any really serious studies of the effects of playing weight on long term (or even rapid short term) damage to LPs? I used to track with an SME at lowish playing weights, but I wasn't aware of too much damage. I agree that there did seem to be a consensus that very low weights would cause damage, and that cartridges couldn't really track properly at ultra low tracking weights.

Re the use of moving coil cartridges, which I always aspired to but never managed to attain, the received wisdom was that they were better, sounded better etc., even though tracking at somewhat higher playing weights. However there was at least one report by I believe a respected writer after many years that the added ambience (or whatever) from mc cartridges was actually due to a resonance effect between the cartridge and the vinyl surface, so not in fact due to a more "realistic" or "accurate" rendition of what was recorded in the grooves.

I always thought, or perhaps hoped, that I would eventually return to this, and get a really good vinyl set up, but the reality is that although I don't want to part with my LPs yet, they are in limbo, and I think that it would cost £000s to get kit to make them sound good, and the money might be better spent on other things - perhaps even a new DAC - or maybe a holiday!

In my admittedly limited experience, moving coil cartridges are less prone to 'needle talk' than moving magnet designs. There is of course the disadvantage that the low output of moving coils requires low noise pre-amps to get the best results.I use a Linto pre-amp to feed into the Meridian sound processor.

On a facetious note, I always picture you surrounded by technology but with not much time to listen. How many upgrades do you manage in a year?

I used to know a guy who had a magnificent collection of exotic fish, and in his tiny flat there was no room for humans at all with this enormous tank filling the room! As for holidays, he could never have one, because he was the only person who could be trusted to look after them. I imagined that one day a la Clouseau and Kato (?) the whole lot would crash through the floor into the old couple's flat below!

You could of course emulate Mr Pooter, " Good old Broadstairs ! )

[Dave2002]

In my admittedly limited experience, moving coil cartridges are less prone to 'needle talk' than moving magnet designs. There is of course the disadvantage that the low output of moving coils requires low noise pre-amps to get the best results.I use a Linto pre-amp to feed into the Meridian sound processor.

On a facetious note, I always picture you surrounded by technology but with not much time to listen.

Technology yes - but I do get time to listen, and I do go to live concerts, plays, operas, films and various other things get done too.

How many upgrades do you manage in a year?

Not too many. I assume you mean computers. Probably one a year on average, some years I just don't bother. Re kit for playing music - not many at all. I still have kit which is around 35-40 years old.

You could of course emulate Mr Pooter, " Good old Broadstairs ! )

Should I think of you as Mr Gowing or Cummings? Mrs Beck's establishment is too close to the railway station.

[Ferretfancy]

Technology yes - but I do get time to listen, and I do go to live concerts, plays, operas, films and various other things get done too.
Not too many. I assume you mean computers. Probably one a year on average, some years I just don't bother. Re kit for playing music - not many at all. I still have kit which is around 35-40 years old.

Should I think of you as Mr Gowing or Cummings? Mrs Beck's establishment is too close to the railway station.

More an elderly Lupin!

[richardfinegold]

Having just come back from one of the biggest hifi shows in the country at Scalford Hall, it's just confirmed something I think I already knew - namely, that vinyl can indeed sound superb, but it needs LOTS of patience, love, attention, etc etc. This is an amateur show, but these guys are real enthusiasts, with the right sort of backgrounds to have some incredible machinery on display. Most of them admit that you have to spend big to get the most out of records, and that there are still inherent niggles that often need sorting out. Of course, they see it as all part of the love of vinyl, so putting a record on is almost a ritual. I got a whiff of nostalgia (literally, with those sleeves and inserts...) and one of them put on a disc of Walcha playing Bach that sounded wonderful - but that set up ran to something like 40K ! In the next room, a relatively cheap cd player and decent floorstand speakers were used to play exactly the same recording on cd and, you guessed it, it sounded wonderful as well. The original mastering is really the crux, then speakers and room interaction, and tbh, most half-decent systems these days sound pretty good. In fact, on a final note, one guy had risen to a 'challenge' to put a system together for less than £100, which he duly did from ebay, gumtree, re-cycled bits etc and people's jaws hit the floor when it was revealed what he'd spent...

I think you summed it up nicely. Vinyl can sound superb, but it is a lot of work and expense.
U.K. Studies quoted by British Hi Fi writer Paul Messenger in the current issue of Sterephile show that half the current lps are purchased by people that don't own turntables. Perhaps they wish to hang the record jacket on the wall as artwork.
Newly produced lps use digital files 95% of the time due to deterioration of master tapes.
It just strikes me as so stupid that people pay something like 40 K for a turntable that will reproduce every wart of a digital file that is embedded in petroleum because it sounds more 'real' to them

[Cockney Sparrow]

For an unaccountable reason my twenty something daughter wanted a vinyl record player....So I found myself fettling a player long in storage (I'd like to be convinced this is a longer term interest before serious money is spent). I am struck, as others here, by the fine engineering (and associated cost) necessary to reproduce music in an inferior quality. Also the opportunity for the audio alchemists to advise on the necessary combinations and upgrades (and associated costs). I am so pleased to have left all that behind, and am waiting for my opportunity to suggest my offspring return to the world of Spotify or the iPhone/iPod.

The best summation I have heard is that the only justification for a highly capable vinyl replay system is to use it to digitise the recorded material. Exactly. (In my view, of course - no offence intended to those who want to spend thousands and many hours, its a free country).