"David Looser" wrote in message
...
"Keith G" wrote




You need to realise that some people (includes me and my partner) don't
perceive that 'dramatic improvement' - quite the opposite. I suspect you
are one of those people who hover over the speakers and only hear the
surface noise from LPs...??


Had you omitted "quite the opposite" I'd have had no problem with that
statement. If people say that vinyl is good enough, that they either can't
hear the difference or don't care I can understand that. So as some people
like the physical presence of an LP, the big sleeve etc. and many also
enjoy the "retro" experience of rotating turntables and all the rest of
business that goes with playing vinyl I can see why some may prefer it.
I've heard some say that it's a nostalgia thing, that records from the 50s
and 60s *should* be played as they would have been when new, that the
clicks and pops are all part of the authentic experience, well fair
enough.


So far, so good.



But you said "quite the opposite", implying that, to you, CD sounds
*worse*. Now that I cannot understand. In what way, exactly, does CD sound
worse?


Easy: it sounds comparatively lifeless and flat. There is not so much
'presence' and 'depth' as there is with a record. My partner, a musician
with a very good ear, goes as far as to say she thinks CDs sound 'veiled' -
I don't go quite this far myself.

Other aspects of CDs don't do them any favours: the 'large' small size - ie
not really small but not large either, just big enough to make the 'sleeve
notes' impossibly small and the 'artwork' too small to count and then
there's the truly ****ty jewel cases. They go on too long when they have
been 'filled up' and the fact that they are all on the same side means
there's no welcome interlude when you need to flip the disk.

Sorry if it upsets you but, quite simply, I never really 'took to them'! :-)

Easier to say why I prefer vinyl - from the moment the needle goes down with
that little crackle to announce the beginning of the music to the little pop
when the needle is lifted off at the end of the side! Bliss!



I've told you what is better about it: no surface noise, no impulse noise,
dramatically less distortion of the sort which leads to a strained quality
on high-level high pitched sounds such as violins or female voices. So
what, exactly, is worse about the sound quality of a CD?


See above



You accused me of "hovering over the speakers" to hear the improvement
that CD offers. Actually the improvement is clearly audible in normal
listening, but are you not "hovering over the speakers" to hear whatever
it is about the LP that you appear to like?


No, frequently I'm two rooms away (when I'm on this computer)! The sound
just floods the place and does not seem to diminish!


The bizarre thing IMO is that some audiophools will spend a fortune on an
ultra-expensive turntable with, presumably, the intention of minimising
the distortions that are the audible signature of vinyl. Why not simply
get a CD player and be done with them altogether?


You're not getting it, are you? Play the ACA You Tube I referenced and see
if you can see anything in what they say - probably the best collection of
Audiophools on the planet but they do seem to get a great deal of
pleasure/satisfaction from their kit!

It's all kinda why bake a cake when you can get a 'perfect' Mr Kipling from
the supermarket, ain't it?

:-)

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"David Looser" wrote in message
...
"Keith G" wrote


You need to realise that some people (includes me and my partner) don't
perceive that 'dramatic improvement' - quite the opposite. I suspect you
are one of those people who hover over the speakers and only hear the
surface noise from LPs...??


Had you omitted "quite the opposite" I'd have had no problem with that
statement. If people say that vinyl is good enough, that they either
can't
hear the difference or don't care I can understand that. So as some
people
like the physical presence of an LP, the big sleeve etc. and many also
enjoy the "retro" experience of rotating turntables and all the rest of
business that goes with playing vinyl I can see why some may prefer it.
I've heard some say that it's a nostalgia thing, that records from the
50s
and 60s *should* be played as they would have been when new, that the
clicks and pops are all part of the authentic experience, well fair
enough.


So far, so good.



But you said "quite the opposite", implying that, to you, CD sounds
*worse*. Now that I cannot understand. In what way, exactly, does CD
sound
worse?


Easy: it sounds comparatively lifeless and flat. There is not so much
'presence' and 'depth' as there is with a record.

"Lifeless and flat" is a description of your emotional response to what you
hear, and it can be affected by all sorts of things such as how loud you
play the material (do you subconsciously play LPs louder?) or could even be
simply a direct result of your preference for the medium.

My partner, a musician
with a very good ear, goes as far as to say she thinks CDs sound
'veiled' -
I don't go quite this far myself.

That's interesting, because if I was asked to state *the* one main
subjective improvement in going from LP to CD I'd say it was the clarity,
the lack of "veiling".And there is a technical reason for this, harmonic and
intermod distortion, both present in fairly large amounts on an LP, masks or
veils low-level detail in the original sound.

Other aspects of CDs don't do them any favours: the 'large' small size -
ie
not really small but not large either, just big enough to make the 'sleeve
notes' impossibly small and the 'artwork' too small to count and then
there's the truly ****ty jewel cases.

I agree about the jewel cases, when they break I put the CDs in one of those
"CaseLogic" carry-cases, which means I can store a lot of CDs in a small
space (important to me as I don't have a lot of storage space). If I need to
transport a single CD I use a DVD case.

They go on too long when they have
been 'filled up' and the fact that they are all on the same side means
there's no welcome interlude when you need to flip the disk.

Well there you go. What to you is a "welcome interlude" is to me a PITA

Sorry if it upsets you but, quite simply, I never really 'took to them'!
:-)

It doesn't upset me, it intrigues me :-)

Easier to say why I prefer vinyl - from the moment the needle goes down
with
that little crackle to announce the beginning of the music to the little
pop
when the needle is lifted off at the end of the side! Bliss!

With respect Keith, that's a statement of the fact that you do prefer it,
not why you do!


The bizarre thing IMO is that some audiophools will spend a fortune on an
ultra-expensive turntable with, presumably, the intention of minimising
the distortions that are the audible signature of vinyl. Why not simply
get a CD player and be done with them altogether?


You're not getting it, are you? Play the ACA You Tube I referenced and see
if you can see anything in what they say - probably the best collection of
Audiophools on the planet but they do seem to get a great deal of
pleasure/satisfaction from their kit!

I don't dispute that they enjoy playing with their expensive toys, I enjoy
playing with vintage electronics, but I don't claim that it outperforms
modern kit!

It's all kinda why bake a cake when you can get a 'perfect' Mr Kipling
from
the supermarket, ain't it?

Sorry, invalid analogy. Leaving aside the fact that Mr Kipling cakes are
anything but "perfect", you are discussing the satisfaction of making
something yourself, rather than buying it off the shelf. Did you build your
turntable, arm and cartridge yourself?, do you record your own LPs? If not
then you haven't baked the cake have you?

David.

"David Looser" wrote


But you said "quite the opposite", implying that, to you, CD sounds
*worse*. Now that I cannot understand. In what way, exactly, does CD
sound
worse?


Easy: it sounds comparatively lifeless and flat. There is not so much
'presence' and 'depth' as there is with a record.

"Lifeless and flat" is a description of your emotional response to what
you
hear,


Of course it is - I listen to the sound, I don't measure it -
(comparatively) lifeless and flat is what I *perceive*.


and it can be affected by all sorts of things such as how loud you
play the material (do you subconsciously play LPs louder?) or could even
be
simply a direct result of your preference for the medium.


My preference for vinyl has been rock-steady for all of my listening life -
not from some quick shot back to back comparison. Picture this: all alone in
the privacy of my own room I will almost *always* put an LP on, not one of
the 50 or so 'special' rip CDRs (mostly female vocal) that are stacked only
a few feet away!


That's interesting, because if I was asked to state *the* one main
subjective improvement in going from LP to CD I'd say it was the clarity,
the lack of "veiling".And there is a technical reason for this, harmonic
and
intermod distortion, both present in fairly large amounts on an LP, masks
or
veils low-level detail in the original sound.



Forget all that - try comparing say Miles Davis' Kind Of Blue on CD and LP
(I have both) and see on which one are the instruments better separated.



[CDs]
They go on too long when they have
been 'filled up' and the fact that they are all on the same side means
there's no welcome interlude when you need to flip the disk.

Well there you go. What to you is a "welcome interlude" is to me a PITA


Each to his own. I am probably on the 7th or 8th LP since lunchtime (was
outside for a while this afternoon) and one is playing right now, but 60 or
70 minutes straight of a CD would drive me nuts!!


Easier to say why I prefer vinyl - from the moment the needle goes down
with
that little crackle to announce the beginning of the music to the little
pop
when the needle is lifted off at the end of the side! Bliss!

With respect Keith, that's a statement of the fact that you do prefer it,
not why you do!


I thought that had been well covered: I prefer the sound and I prefer the
'handling' experience.



You're not getting it, are you? Play the ACA You Tube I referenced and
see
if you can see anything in what they say - probably the best collection
of
Audiophools on the planet but they do seem to get a great deal of
pleasure/satisfaction from their kit!

I don't dispute that they enjoy playing with their expensive toys, I enjoy
playing with vintage electronics, but I don't claim that it outperforms
modern kit!


If it does the job well enough? Think of a 'classic car' and a modern BMW
one behind the other in traffic: they are both doing the same job at the
same speed but both providing their driver with different experiences.


It's all kinda why bake a cake when you can get a 'perfect' Mr Kipling
from
the supermarket, ain't it?

Sorry, invalid analogy. Leaving aside the fact that Mr Kipling cakes are
anything but "perfect"


But they are - no burnt bits and no squashed pastry or broken pie crusts
unless you have abused the items and damaged the packaging.


, you are discussing the satisfaction of making
something yourself, rather than buying it off the shelf. Did you build
your
turntable, arm and cartridge yourself?, do you record your own LPs? If not
then you haven't baked the cake have you?


Well, I built the amp from a pile of parts, the speakers from sheets of MDF,
the Phono Stage from a kit and I replinthed the turntable with kitchen
worktop offcuts; I guess you could say it was at least 'boil in the bag'!!
:-)