Why is the vinyl revival not taking place in classical music?

[71 dB]

Any variant of "sounds better" is subjective.  It is fact that redbook CDs measure better and are more durable than LPs, but it is possible to prefer the inferior format.

It is also possible (and rather logical) to prefer the better format.

High resolution digital measures better than CD, but it is possible to hear little or no difference.

44.1 kHz/16 bit audio is just enough for human hearing and domestic sound reproduction. The ideal format would be something like 60 kHz/16 bit allowing simpler anti-aliasing and reconstruction filters without unnecessorily high sampling rate. The only benefit some high resolution format bring is the support for multichannel sound.

There are other examples of objectively superior or proper measurements not matching up with preferences.  Tube audio gear measures worse than solid state, and SET noticeably worse, yet there are people who prefer the sound of tube gear.

I often tell people tube amps render everything beautiful and warm. They remove the thrill of ugliness and coldness from the listening experience. It's like having a video format that makes horror movies look and sound like romantic comedies.

Subwoofers are often displayed in showrooms with volume boosted and sometimes set out of phase to offer a bigger, more appealing boom.  A lot of people like that and some make a subwoofer sound like that in their homes, though it is not at all accurate.  Some people enjoy, so I have been told, single-driver, crossover-less speakers.  Every one I have heard (admittedly only a few) sounded terrible - but someone bought and buys these types of speakers.  Outside of audio, in the film era, the most popular consumer print films by sales volumes, by far, had exaggerated color saturation while more neutral print films were used mostly by pros.  (Some of the more neutral films were widely available, not materially more expensive, and relied on the same processing chemistry, so cost and availability were not big issues.)  When TVs are sold today in showrooms, brightness is generally set very high and contrast exaggerated because that is more visually appealing to many people.  I'm hoping that's not how people use them, but I don't know.  Measurements are objective.  Preferences are subjective.

Exaggerated presentation (be it bass level, colour saturation, etc.) is a thing of an audience of low intelligence and education. Smart people understand that neutrality is the way to go. Digital technology is the easiest way for that.

Btw, the TVs have very bright picture in the stores because the lighting is brighter than in typical living rooms where people often turn lights off when watching TV.

[Rons_talking]

The dynamic range of an orchestra is vast. A vinyl disc starts to degrade with each playing, so hiss and pops that you'd ignore on Rock can really be distracting during a long pianissimo section. That's a big deal if you're dealing with an often listened to recording. Then again, I do miss the magazine-like scope of the LP packaging; it's part of what you pay for.

[The new erato]

The vinyl revival isn't driven by fidelity (with the exception of people who prefer vinyl pressings of records which CD versions were butchered in the Loudness war), but by aesthetics and the newfound enjoyment of taking your time to prepare and play a record. The listening, again, becomes a ritual - a ritual that younger generations actually never experienced! Which only adds to the hipness factor.

Also, don't forget the 'mythical' quality of an LP. For example this, in vinyl form, is an artifact that no classical record, however amazing, can match:

I think this is very much to the point.

[Todd]

Exaggerated presentation (be it bass level, colour saturation, etc.) is a thing of an audience of low intelligence and education. Smart people understand that neutrality is the way to go.

This clears one thing up.

[bigshot]

I don't think it has anything to do with sound quality. LP records can sound very very good and not wear out if your equipment is in proper alignments.

The problem is that there are SO many used classical LPs in great condition and fantastic pressings from the 60s and 70s. They sell for a dollar or two a disk- or free if you haul them away! Modern LPs can't compete with that. If someone wants vinyl, there is more than they can possibly fit in their truck going begging for a home.

[Jay F]

The problem is that there are SO many used classical LPs in great condition and fantastic pressings from the 60s and 70s. They sell for a dollar or two a disk- or free if you haul them away!

While the dollar-a-disc myth may have been true at one time, most used classical LPs I bought in the late '90s cost between $3 and $5. And most of them sounded horrible because of surface noise. I bought Bernstein's Mahler in a box set and it criminally noisy. I kept taking chances, as some things sounded wonderful, but I gave the classical LP up entirely when I put on a mint-looking copy of Solti's Mahler 3. Also criminally noisy. I wanted to sue someone. Or punch someone.

And I had a reasonably nice turntable and cartridge through which my rock LPs sounded terrific. Never again.

[DaveM]

As someone who collected recordings during a good part of the vinyl record period and the entire CD era, I'm not sure why vinyl is being declared as de facto not high-fidelity. To me, high-fidelity is a relative, rather than absolute, term when it comes to vinyl vs. CD/digital.

So, during the height of the vinyl classical era, if one had a well-produced recording mastered to high-quality vinyl and played on a system with a high-quality turntable, cartridge, diamond stylus and top pre-amp/amplifier electronics and speakers, one would likely be having a pretty good high-fidelity experience.

However, all that said, the fact is that, when it comes to vinyl, if you factor in the difficulty in matching the lower distortion and greater dynamic range of CD/digital, the wearing of vinyl with each playing, the ever-present (to a greater or lesser degree) ticks & pops and the wow & flutter of the turntable, it's awfully hard for vinyl to compete with CD/digital overall.

Point being, that IMO, high-fidelity is/was possible with vinyl, but is/was simply too much trouble compared to CD/digital and when both systems are compared at their best, CD/digital wins. Because of that, I have no interest in listening to my vinyl records anymore or in buying any more of them.

[Todd]

One for vinyl fans?

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

My personal "vinyl revival" involves collecting LPs which are unavailable in some other format, or which I just happen to like for some whimsical reason.

However, all that said, the fact is that, when it comes to vinyl, if you factor in the difficulty in matching the lower distortion and greater dynamic range of CD/digital, the wearing of vinyl with each playing, the ever-present (to a greater or lesser degree) ticks & pops and the wow & flutter of the turntable, it's awfully hard for vinyl to compete with CD/digital overall.

I agree that CDs win on points. I often like LP because of extraneous factors, like the extensive liner notes or more impressive cover art.

[Todd]

Amazon Germany lists a pretty healthy selection of new classical vinyl.  Carlos Kleiber is getting the vinyl reissue treatment, and some new releases are being issued, too.  UMG seems especially active.  Niche within a niche, still, but more fresh pressings are out there.

[ZauberdrachenNr.7]

Interesting perspectives here, albeit nonclassical per se :  http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/07/world/vinyl-records-future-lifestyle/index.html

[Mirror Image]

I own several classical LPs and I've never heard one that could match the frequency range and pure dynamic quality of a CD. I love the sound of vinyl for jazz and even rock music, but when it comes to classical, I think the CD was the best thing to happen for this genre.

[Jay F]

I own several classical LPs and I've never heard one that could match the frequency range and pure dynamic quality of a CD. I love the sound of vinyl for jazz and even rock music, but when it comes to classical, I think the CD was the best thing to happen for this genre.

I don't know if I would ever have become a classical listener if not for CD. By 1986, I probably had 12 classical LPs. Somehow, listening to them never compelled me to buy more, to become a collector of classical. But when CD came along, I realized I didn't want to replace my entire rock collection with CDs. One day, I was at a store and Brendel's Schubert 960/Wanderer disc was playing and I just had to buy it. It was one of those 3 for $25 sales that changed every Friday, so I bought Brendel's Mozart 23/27 and HvK's 1977 Beethoven 9, and eventually my classical CD collection numbered in the thousands (well, slightly over 1,000). I don't know if this would have happened if LP had remained the dominant medium.

[CRCulver]

Interesting perspectives here, albeit nonclassical per se :  http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/07/world/vinyl-records-future-lifestyle/index.html

Thanks for posting that. The survey linked to there confirms own anecdotal experience in a city with a large student population who have imported many features of the American "hipster" stereotype, is that while vinyl is increasingly sold in bookstores and dedicated shops, the personal acquaintances of mine who buy it only want the physical artifact for collectability. They have no intention of listening to it, and indeed, they don't even own a turntable.

I myself have been buying pop music and jazz vinyl while actually listening to the albums through FLACs that I torrented from filesharing communities. Often the cover art makes it a great room furnishing. However, I don't feel the same drive with classical music. Perhaps one reason is that my favourite labels put out a lot of hybrid SACDs, and I want to buy those to support the release of multichannel audio. But another reason would definitely be that I buy a lot of classical recordings, and as vinyl is typically more expensive than CD, I can save money by going for the latter.

[Mirror Image]

I don't know if I would ever have become a classical listener if not for CD. By 1986, I probably had 12 classical LPs. Somehow, listening to them never compelled me to buy more, to become a collector of classical. But when CD came along, I realized I didn't want to replace my entire rock collection with CDs. One day, I was at a store and Brendel's Schubert 960/Wanderer disc was playing and I just had to buy it. It was one of those 3 for $25 sales that changed every Friday, so I bought Brendel's Mozart 23/27 and HvK's 1977 Beethoven 9, and eventually my classical CD collection numbered in the thousands (well, slightly over 1,000). I don't know if this would have happened if LP had remained the dominant medium.

These thoughts pretty much match my dad's. I think he had owned many classical LPs, but when the CD came out and more recordings were being issued, he said he had no use for LPs any longer. What you wrote above and what my dad has said speaks volumes of the kind of audio quality a CD can deliver to the listener.

[Elgarian]

I'm reminded of something Bob Dylan said some years ago. I'm taking him out of context, but no matter: it makes the point I want to make. He said that the problem with modern records is that they don't sound like records any more.

Of course he wasn't talking about classical music, but the key thing is that the sound of 'records' (as they were, I suppose mostly in the 50s and 60s) had become the thing he was wanting to recapture. But the point of hi fidelity had never been to try to make music sound like records: it was to try to make records sound like music.

It's impossible to generalise because there's such a wide variation in factors other than 'digital vs vinyl', but I presume that the warm kind of distortion that LPs offer is attractive to some people, for whom surface noise and pressing distortion (which were always unbearable for me) aren't perceived as troublesome. And there's nothing wrong with listening to what you like, for heaven's sake - the issue isn't one with a moral imperative involved. But I suspect that underlying it run two distinct threads of differing expectations about what people want to hear in their homes, even though they may say (and believe) they are chasing the same thing.