The Audiophile Debate

[AnotherSpin]

Both analog and digital recordings are just facsimiles of the real deal.  The original isn't the analog recording, it was the actual performance.  Which format has higher fidelity seems to be a silly debate, when so much of the sound isn't captured perfectly by the microphones, and then you play it back in a room with completely different acoustics.

Just listen to whatever format sounds good to you and enjoy what you have.

I pretty much enjoy what I have and don't care if others succumb to artificial substitutes or have never experienced the real thing. To each his own.

[Daverz]

I've been hearing people say that analog is "more alive" or whatever for 40 years, but for me CDs were obviously better from the beginning.  (But I understand: CD playback doesn't make people feel special, and attempts to tweak it were always rather pathetic.)

I never had very good record playback equipment back then, but now I that I do (Michell Gyro SE with SME 309 arm and various carts, cleaning machines, and other doodads), I'm more indifferent to the format than ever. 

[Florestan]

I pretty much enjoy what I have and don't care if others succumb to artificial substitutes or have never experienced the real thing. To each his own.

The only real thing is attending a live performance. Each and every recording, live and studio alike, analog and digital alike, is an artificial substitute.

[San Antone]

The only real thing is attending a live performance. Each and every recording, live and studio alike, analog and digital alike, is an artificial substitute.

QFT

[T. D.]

I've been hearing people say that analog is "more alive" or whatever for 40 years, but for me CDs were obviously better from the beginning.  (But I understand: CD playback doesn't make people feel special, and attempts to tweak it were always rather pathetic.)

I never had very good record playback equipment back then, but now I that I do (Michell Gyro SE with SME 309 arm and various carts, cleaning machines, and other doodads), I'm more indifferent to the format than ever. 

I've always been a CD person. Kept a turntable until about 2001, but wound up pitching it because vinyl is just too much of a hassle.

But I honestly think that many CDs from the early years of the medium (say through 1988, I don't remember exactly, but early/mid 80s for sure) had really harsh and grating sound. I bought and still own a number I found to be lemons, and to this day avoid pre-1990 release CDs. I don't know the reason for this claimed acoustic anomaly, but I strongly believe in it.

[Spotted Horses]

I've always been a CD person. Kept a turntable until about 2001, but wound up pitching it because vinyl is just too much of a hassle.

But I honestly think that many CDs from the early years of the medium (say through 1988, I don't remember exactly, but early/mid 80s for sure) had really harsh and grating sound. I bought and still own a number I found to be lemons, and to this day avoid pre-1990 release CDs. I don't know the reason for this claimed acoustic anomaly, but I strongly believe in it.

I have the same impression about early digital recordings, and find it applies to the LP releases of early digital recordings. I think it was a combination of shortcomings of early digital recording gear and the desire of the record labels to make the new recordings as "digital" as possible, which involved boosting extreme frequencies. I find the digital glare is sometimes tamed in subsequent masters (Karajan Gold series, for instance).

[AnotherSpin]

I've always been a CD person. Kept a turntable until about 2001, but wound up pitching it because vinyl is just too much of a hassle.

But I honestly think that many CDs from the early years of the medium (say through 1988, I don't remember exactly, but early/mid 80s for sure) had really harsh and grating sound. I bought and still own a number I found to be lemons, and to this day avoid pre-1990 release CDs. I don't know the reason for this claimed acoustic anomaly, but I strongly believe in it.

I've never heard a Led Zeppelin CD that sounds comparable to the original vinyls. Same for almost all rock music from the late 60's and early 70's. Early ECM Records albums (70's) are transferred to compacts terribly. Coltrane sounds different on CDs than on vinyl. As for the classics, the situation is generally more satisfactory. I think that those who came into music at the same time with compacts and not before, mostly don't notice or don't know the difference.

[AnotherSpin]

The only real thing is attending a live performance. Each and every recording, live and studio alike, analog and digital alike, is an artificial substitute.

This is obvious and beyond question. Unfortunately, I can't hear Hans Hotter, Glenn Gould, and Grateful Dead live.

[AnotherSpin]

I've been hearing people say that analog is "more alive" or whatever for 40 years, but for me CDs were obviously better from the beginning.  (But I understand: CD playback doesn't make people feel special, and attempts to tweak it were always rather pathetic.)

I never had very good record playback equipment back then, but now I that I do (Michell Gyro SE with SME 309 arm and various carts, cleaning machines, and other doodads), I'm more indifferent to the format than ever. 

For most of the 70's and 80's I listened to vinyls on a Michell turntable with a SME 309 tonearm. With a large powerful amplifier and corresponding huge speakers that took up a significant part of the room's space. This probably has something to do with my love for original vinyls. Equipment also played a role. Everything big and real, from album covers to sound.

[71 dB]

I've always been a CD person.

Same here. I am a CD/SACD/Blu-ray person.

Kept a turntable until about 2001, but wound up pitching it because vinyl is just too much of a hassle.

I have never owned a TT in my life, but I own half a meter of vinyls (100-150 I guess?) I have borrowed my dad's TT to digitize them, but that was long ago. Vinyl is indeed a hassle, but some people seems to enjoy all that hassle...

But I honestly think that many CDs from the early years of the medium (say through 1988, I don't remember exactly, but early/mid 80s for sure) had really harsh and grating sound. I bought and still own a number I found to be lemons, and to this day avoid pre-1990 release CDs. I don't know the reason for this claimed acoustic anomaly, but I strongly believe in it.

My views are a bit different. Yes, early CDs tend to be "harsh", because the know how of how to master for digital formats wasn't there yet, but on the other hand CDs of the 80s don't suffer at all from loudness war. Maybe this is more of a pop music thing, but often for 80s pop music for example the original release offers superior dynamics compared to "remastered" re-releases. For classical music 80s was problematic, but for pop music it is the other way around: 80s was the time pop music didn't suffer from loudness war.

That said, only a fraction of my CDs are from 80's, because I bought my first CD player in 1989 and I wasn't interested of music prior to mid 80s at all (except perhaps John Williams' movie scores). I was only into electronic dance music and forward-looking thinking music will become better and better in the future. Only almost a decade later did I get into classical music buying mostly cheap Naxos CDs of which only a few were from (late) 80s. Whenever I bought a classical music recording from the 80s or earlier, it was a "remastered" release and since loudness war doesn't concern classical music, the sound was good. some 15 years ago I became interested of pop/rock music from the 80s and 70s, but there aren't that many artists from that era I like (those few I like I REALLY like!). This has kept the percentage of "early" CDs in my collection small and frankly the "harshness" associated with them seems overblown to me. In general early CDs had "thin" sound suitable for vinyl. Boosting bass and reducing treble is likely to improve the sound of these discs reducing harshness. 

[71 dB]

I've never heard a Led Zeppelin CD that sounds comparable to the original vinyls. Same for almost all rock music from the late 60's and early 70's. Early ECM Records albums (70's) are transferred to compacts terribly. Coltrane sounds different on CDs than on vinyl. As for the classics, the situation is generally more satisfactory. I think that those who came into music at the same time with compacts and not before, mostly don't notice or don't know the difference.

Music genres have different requirements for how "analog" it should sound. I think punk/rock/metal music should have the most analog sound, because that's music of distortion.   That's why digital releases of punk/rock/metal music should be vinyl rips of the music or be processed with vinyl simulation plugins to make them sound  similar to vinyl. On the other hand, classical music and similar genres benefit the most from digital clean transparency. Other music genres are somewhere in between of these extremes.

[AnotherSpin]

[..]I have never owned a TT in my life,[..]

This explains a lot. Many people like to talk at length about things in which they have no personal experience. What can you do...

[Spotted Horses]

I've never heard a Led Zeppelin CD that sounds comparable to the original vinyls. Same for almost all rock music from the late 60's and early 70's. Early ECM Records albums (70's) are transferred to compacts terribly. Coltrane sounds different on CDs than on vinyl. As for the classics, the situation is generally more satisfactory. I think that those who came into music at the same time with compacts and not before, mostly don't notice or don't know the difference.

Led Zeppelin was notorious for their disdain for the CD format. They didn't allow their catalog to be issued on CD for many years and evidently didn't get involved in the CD releases when they occurred. It they had the CD master might have been better. They should have just put a needle-drop of the original vinyl on the CD issues.

[DavidW]

I've always been a CD person. Kept a turntable until about 2001, but wound up pitching it because vinyl is just too much of a hassle.

But I honestly think that many CDs from the early years of the medium (say through 1988, I don't remember exactly, but early/mid 80s for sure) had really harsh and grating sound. I bought and still own a number I found to be lemons, and to this day avoid pre-1990 release CDs. I don't know the reason for this claimed acoustic anomaly, but I strongly believe in it.

I've heard that was due to a particular Sony ADC that was frequently used at the time.  Many remasters are breathing new life into some of those recordings though.

[AnotherSpin]

Led Zeppelin was notorious for their disdain for the CD format. They didn't allow their catalog to be issued on CD for many years and evidently didn't get involved in the CD releases when they occurred. It they had the CD master might have been better. They should have just put a needle-drop of the original vinyl on the CD issues.

It seems to me that this is not so. LZ compacts came out quite early, from mid-80s for sure, and many times since then. But it's not about LZ only. I can't immediately remember which rock albums from 60s-70s were re-released on compacts well. In some rare cases, like Steven Wilson's remixes, but this is only now, many years later.

[Irons]

I suppose (hope) within time this debate will disappear up it's own backside. I think we all should listen to music in a format we enjoy most. For me that happens to be vinyl and I don't believe my ears are made of cloth so find it tiresome when I'm told "distortion makes vinyl attractive". Poppycock. 

[DavidW]

I suppose (hope) within time this debate will disappear up it's own backside. I think we all should listen to music in a format we enjoy most. For me that happens to be vinyl and I don't believe my ears are made of cloth so find it tiresome when I'm told "distortion makes vinyl attractive". Poppycock. 

For me there are two formats to be avoided-- audio cassette and low bitrate mp3s.  We live in a world where we can buy digital downloads, cds and lps at low cost.  We live in a world where streaming is what we want, when we want it and sounds way better than radio.  Life is good.

[71 dB]

This explains a lot. Many people like to talk at length about things in which they have no personal experience. What can you do...

I have personal experience. In my youth I heard tons of jazz played by my dad on vinyl + all those 100-150 vinyls I own which I ripped and cleaned in computer.

[71 dB]

We live in a world where we can buy digital downloads, cds and lps at low cost.

I wish I could buy any CD at low cost... 

The Carpenters' "Ticket to Ride" SHM-CD is back in stock in WOWHD, put since it is a Japanese import CD, the asked price is 19 euros*. That's already expensive, but if I order it, 20 % VAT is added because it comes outside EU meaning 22.80 euros (about $25). Thanks to WOWHD offering free shipping on everything it isn't much more! About 23 euros isn't "insane", but I don't need a brand new Japanese SHM-CD! I'd rather collect a used normal CD for 5 euros, but since this albums has never been released on CD at huge amount of copies (The Carpenters fans don't like CD?), the used CD market is crazy and the asked prices on Ebay are shocking, as are the shipping costs! So, this Japanese import SHM-CD is actually the cheapest option for me! 

* It's not like there has been a huge orchestra and choir required. It is decades old music needing only remastering. The Carpenters music should be released as cheap some 10 or so CD boxset containing most/all of their albums and then some, but no! They can do it with ABBA but The Carpenters is too "obscure" of a group for that. Maybe I need to become an ABBA fan?

[T. D.]

I wish I could buy any CD at low cost... 

The Carpenters' "Ticket to Ride" SHM-CD is back in stock in WOWHD, put since it is a Japanese import CD, the asked price is 19 euros*. That's already expensive, but if I order it, 20 % VAT is added because it comes outside EU meaning 22.80 euros (about $25). Thanks to WOWHD offering free shipping on everything it isn't much more! About 23 euros isn't "insane", but I don't need a brand new Japanese SHM-CD! I'd rather collect a used normal CD for 5 euros, but since this albums has never been released on CD at huge amount of copies (The Carpenters fans don't like CD?), the used CD market is crazy and the asked prices on Ebay are shocking, as are the shipping costs! So, this Japanese import SHM-CD is actually the cheapest option for me! 

* It's not like there has been a huge orchestra and choir required. It is decades old music needing only remastering. The Carpenters music should be released as cheap some 10 or so CD boxset containing most/all of their albums and then some, but no! They can do it with ABBA but The Carpenters is too "obscure" of a group for that. Maybe I need to become an ABBA fan?

That Carpenters SHM-CD is in stock at cdjapan for 1714 yen, approx USD 11.39 at time of posting.
https://www.cdjapan.co.jp/searchuni?term.media_format=cd&q=carpenters

Shipping from Japan is fierce, but if you cobble together an order of 6 (say) or more CDs that are hard to find elsewhere, the package becomes reasonable.

I occasionally order from cdjapan and am a satisfied customer. I maintain a "wishlist" (or "bookmarks" in their terminology) on the site.