CA Readers Are, "clueless, equally bitter and uninformed"

[miguelito]

Chris,

 

My humble opinion: As in any shit storm, there's always some blame on each side. I think vinyl does have a resurgence. The fact that Taylor Swift outsold vinyl is a none-issue - and you know it. You review and extol the virtues of multi-thousand-dollar DACs and such - that's a teeny-tiny piece of the audio market and yet important to us. So it looks to me like you were irked and went for the jugular... I don't think that's great.

 

Having said this, your argument that production is so much more important than medium and tech is spot-on... I have so many CDs that sound amazing and so many high res that sound like poop... And the same is true for vinyl.

[miguelito]

Also, one more thing: with ~ $2k worth of a DAC you can get impressive sound - and you're truly reaching the diminishing return part of the quality curve. With vinyl there's a not-subtle-at-all difference between a $1k cartridge and a $10k cartridge. I would argue truly diminishing returns starts at around $30k for the whole rig, if not higher. Plus the inconvenience...

 

[Audio_ELF]

Plus the inconvenience...

[ATTACH=CONFIG]19013[/ATTACH]

As I just wrote on another thread ... the inconvenience actually changes the way "we" listen to music; and if listening to music is the whole experience rather than just the actual sound then perhaps vinyl DOES sound better because of that.

[Jud]

Having met Chris, my own thought is that he might seem more assertive in print than he does in person, where I think an appropriate term would be "mild-mannered" - or "Minnesota nice" for those of you from that part of the world.

 

I'm sure his message *was* controversial (understatement) in the setting, and he was likely put on the panel precisely because of that. I'm not sure when you're speaking to that audience there really is a diplomatic way to say the vinyl "resurgence" is a very small wave for companies involved in the audio world to try to ride to fame and fortune.

 

I have not met Michael Fremer and so I run the risk of being unfair here, but the impression I get is that this is a fellow who has been involved in a lot of arguments and doesn't at all look to avoid them. In fact he may well relish them and the publicity and notoriety they bring. He certainly doesn't seem to have a problem being broad-brush and way over the top in his criticism of CA readers, and I see something like that as qualitatively different than Chris bringing up an unpopular factual point without insulting anyone personally.

[StephenJK]

I agree that vinyl sales are hardly a resurgence. As far as I know, the labels admit that LP sales are less than 1% of their volume. And you can't really compare to CD sales, that's been almost completely replaced with streaming and downloads. But percentage of overall volume is a very telling comment and one that really brings it all down to earth.

 

I do think a lot of people are attracted to LP playback because it is fashionable and there's a bit of a buzz about it.

 

I play LP's all the time, with a Rega P9, a Dynavector Te Kaitora moving coil cartridge into an Audio Research PH-5 phono stage. While playing them, I also record to a Korg MR-2000S digital recorder. Eventually, they all end up on an external USB drive for playback through an Arcam FJM D33 SuperDAC.

 

I guess you could say that I have a foot in both worlds, and don't really see anything wrong with either side. I do agree with points made that there is little benefit in buying a new release on LP if it was recorded, mastered and produced digitally with a final DAC conversion for the pressing plant - may as well just buy the CD.

 

If you're not into playing LP's and never use your turntable, then fine. But there's nothing wrong with that, it's all about listening to music.

[tranz]

Darko put it best: they were both saying the same thing. It was the tone of the first shot across the bow that bothered Fremer. Chris came looking for a rumble.

[BobSherman]

I can't agree with this. I have been listening to both vinyl and digital pretty much daily for 2 decades. My vinyl front end is less than £5k worth and based on what I've heard so far in comparison with my own digital system, I doubt that any current £5k digital front end could better it, let alone "easily outstrip" it. I love digital too and products such as Hugo, HQP and native DSD downloads certainly close the gap, but the gap is still there and in vinyl's favour.

 

Unlike some other posters, particularly so in this thread, I only post opinions on equipment based on what I hear in my own current system. The poster who used the example of his iPhone to arrogantly dismiss all vinyl listening based on what he heard 40 years ago in someone else's system quite literally justifies Michael Fremer's assertion of "uninformed" comment on this site. Avoiding the extremes of price range, I'd pay much more attention and respect to a forum member who has spent similar sums on both digital and vinyl front ends and is prepared to say that digital easily outstrips vinyl.

 

+1

[beerandmusic]

I agree with this 100%

 

[video=youtube;hh-23EUP-s8]

[Jimmypowder]

+1

 

Who is really uniformed ?Read my comments about listening to good vinyl systems 2 years ago . Flat , dull & terrible dynamics .

[tranz]

Good video.

 

Guess we all need a PCM DAC, a DSD DAC, a turntable and provenance to know how it was recorded originally to enjoy music the best way in each format.

[BobSherman]

Who is really uniformed ?Read my comments about listening to good vinyl systems 2 years ago . Flat , dull & terrible dynamics .

 

Then it was not a good system, or what you listened to was poorly recorded. Your level of knowledge on this subject is rather limited. Please be smart enough to realize this.

[Jimmypowder]

Then it was not a good system, or what you listened to was poorly recorded. Your level of knowledge on this subject is rather limited. Please be smart enough to realize this.

 

Please be smart enough to know vinyl audio quality is not as good , generally speaking , as digital .

[Paul R]

Also, one more thing: with ~ $2k worth of a DAC you can get impressive sound - and you're truly reaching the diminishing return part of the quality curve. With vinyl there's a not-subtle-at-all difference between a $1k cartridge and a $10k cartridge. I would argue truly diminishing returns starts at around $30k for the whole rig, if not higher. Plus the inconvenience...

 

One of the things that always strikes me is just how different each format is from the other, sound wise. I can clearly hear vinyl on a digital system with some needle drops. I can clearly hear a "digital" sound on some tape recordings of CDs. (shrug)

 

No one format necessarily and inherently sounds better than another format, but the tech specs for some formats are much much better than competing formats. What does that tell one when looking for audio gear?

 

-Paul

[Doak]

Chris,

 

"My humble opinion: As in any shit storm, there's always some blame on each side."

 

Agreed.

 

So: What a dick. = Take your pick.

[miguelito]

Vinyl audio quality plain sucks . It's a fad . But I can see where some folks would like warm harmonic distortion . It easier

to listen to and can sound pleasant .

 

Now that I have reinforced this threads title ! Lol.

 

I don't think you've listened to a properly set up $30k+ rig yet...

[miguelito]

One of the things that always strikes me is just how different each format is from the other, sound wise. I can clearly hear vinyl on a digital system with some needle drops. I can clearly hear a "digital" sound on some tape recordings of CDs. (shrug)

 

No one format necessarily and inherently sounds better than another format, but the tech specs for some formats are much much better than competing formats. What does that tell one when looking for audio gear?

 

-Paul

 

Yes, agree. Yet there's a magical ability for almost any reasonable format to transport you with a good recording of good music.

[miguelito]

As I just wrote on another thread ... the inconvenience actually changes the way "we" listen to music; and if listening to music is the whole experience rather than just the actual sound then perhaps vinyl DOES sound better because of that.

 

I find some magic in popping a CD in the player and listening to it.

[SeeHear]

Except, and I did read Chris' recounting yesterday, I don't recall that Chris argued anything was superior; rather, he challenged the assertion that vinyl is "huge." He then opined (correctly, IMHO) that the recording process was more important than the medium. I've been reading Mikey's articles for many years - far longer than I've been reading Chris'. I've never met him, but he doesn't strike me as one who would tolerate well not being totally agreed with in a setting (and regarding a subject) where he believes he's the alpha. Some people welcome debate, others view disagreement as a personal affront.

 

Granted, I was not there and can only comment based on my perceptions borne from their respective recounting of the event.

 

That's funny.. No my point really was that it comes off as sort of petty. Fremer the vinyl guru, vs Chris the digital guy both trying to argue for their chosen formats superiority.. Seems like it got out of hand and egos have started to battle, rather than just moving on.

 

But I'm not going coment anymore since it drags it out and this silly spat needs to die, no one benefits

[BobSherman]

One of the things that always strikes me is just how different each format is from the other, sound wise. I can clearly hear vinyl on a digital system with some needle drops. I can clearly hear a "digital" sound on some tape recordings of CDs. (shrug)

 

No one format necessarily and inherently sounds better than another format, but the tech specs for some formats are much much better than competing formats. What does that tell one when looking for audio gear?

 

-Paul

 

+1

[beerandmusic]

Except for new digital recordings, the quality test for digital remasters is how well it reproduces the analog recordings...and many will argue that there isn't any good music that compares to old music, and that is probably particularly true of rock music...

[Jimmypowder]

I don't think you've listened to a properly set up $30k+ rig yet...

 

I haven't Miggy . But if I hit some music moguls place while I'm in L.A. I might. If I do

I will write down every piece of equipment and my listening impressions.

 

My in -laws are music execs ,pretty much know everyone in the music industry along with many

famous artists .

[miguelito]

I haven't Miggy . But if I hit some music moguls place while I'm in L.A. I might. If I do I will write down every piece of equipment and my listening impressions.

 

My in -laws are music execs ,pretty much know everyone in the music industry along with many

famous artists .

Keep in mind setup and record quality (meaning whether it's been cleaned properly) also matter. It's a complete PITA, but there's a lot of magic and sound in it. I would definitely say that dull, flat and no dynamics is pretty much the opposite of my experience with these systems.

 

I used to own a ~$1,000 rig - Rega (which I modified to have a balanced cartridge connection), Dynavector 10x4, some ok phono stage. I would call that sound dull and uninteresting compared to a high end digital system of today. I gave it all to my nephew when I moved to my current system. If and when I decide to vinyl it up again I will have to commit about $25k into it, I think. I'm a bit on the fence since I am so overworked these days...

[senorx]

I find it ironic in the extreme that when it comes to all the tiresome obj/subj debates on this site, subjectivists always end up saying "How dare you tell me what I hear or don't hear," but when it comes to analog/digital, the vinyl brigade (and I'd wager that there is a rather large overlap between the two groups) always ends up saying, in essence, "You're wrong, you obviously haven't heard a good enough setup." I never thought I'd say this, but, how dare you try to tell me that I'm wrong? You don't know what I can hear. Trust your ears, (but not yours, or yours).

[wgscott]

I find it ironic in the extreme that when it comes to all the tiresome obj/subj debates on this site, subjectivists always end up saying "How dare you tell me what I hear or don't hear," but when it comes to analog/digital, the vinyl brigade (and I'd wager that there is a rather large overlap between the two groups) always ends up saying, in essence, "You're wrong, you obviously haven't heard a good enough setup." I never thought I'd say this, but, how dare you try to tell me that I'm wrong? You don't know what I can hear. Trust your ears, (but not yours, or yours).

 

That's a very good point.

[gmgraves]

Much as I love a good Dean Martin record, Dino has left us. For better or worse, we are still here, and the music of our times - with the exception of an occasional novelty - is recorded in PCM. I don't see how a PCM transfer to vinyl can exceed the quality of PCM decoded by a good DAC. While I don't believe that the sound quality of vinyl will exceed that of well-recorded digital played back over a good system, I think that vinyl may capture more accurately what engineers and artists of the "analogue era" had in mind when recording, mixing, and mastering the music of their day. So if you predominantly listen to the music of yesteryear, then vinyl may be the way to go. I won't be joining you.

 

I think that Fremmer was wrong for using the tone that he did.

 

 

Remember, not everybody cares for "the music of our time". I think you will find that most of the people here are over 50, and the music they like (even if they are rockers) was recorded in analog, and digital releases of this material are just remasterings of the old analog master tapes. In the classical and jazz worlds, the truly greats are gone: Ormandy, Gould, Von Karajan, Casals, Getz, Monk, Miles Davis. All of that stuff was recorded on analog and the original releases were on LP. Some have been transferred to CD and even to hi-res, but not all of it. I have some CD reissues of analog material that sound far better than the original vinyl (mostly JVC XRCDs) but most don't sound as good. Why not? Several reasons. Indifferently mastered is sometimes the answer, but mostly it's because the old analog tapes have deteriorated to the point that nothing can be done to them to make them as good as they were when the original LPs were mastered from them back in the day.