Much of the great rock records recorded before 1989 will sound better as LPs. The Bob Marley catalog is a good example of this.
Some new albums sound noticeably better than CDs. Other albums sound very similar in both formats.
In both cases, LP sound quality depends on quality of home audio equipment and record cleanliness and upkeep.
If you own a home, enjoy album artwork and enjoy rock music, set aside some cash and go for it. But, before you jump in, be ready to spend at least $500 to buy good equipment.
If you still plan to move around and don't listen to many records at home, skip it for now.
If you do jump into LPs, here's a good example of a "good buy" on the Web: I just spent $30 for The Black Crowes "Warpaint" and Tom Petty's "Wildflowers" on 180-gram vinyl. Free delivery from Elusive Disc.
Both those records could be had in high-quality digital format for much less and they'd sound great on great digital home audio equipment.
But I'm betting that if I share a joint and grab a beer, listening to Petty's "You Don't How it Feels" on spinning vinyl will be similar to viewing the Mona Lisa in Paris. But you can't smoke joints in the Lourve.
i cant keep the dust off of my vinyl! what kind of preventative measures does everyone do to keep the dust off?
Sure, i can clean them with the record cleaning brush and fluid - but i would rather clean them as little as possible, but i cant stop this evil static - and dust jumps on the record instantly!
my older records arent as static-ky - seems like newer and heavier weight vinyl attracts more dust.
Vinyl is just trendy now. Most of the music is recorded digitally. Also vinyl is a huge waste of resources and doesn't recycle well.
I agree, a lot of vinyl now is digitally recorded, therefore losing the advantage of the analogue recording. I'm also thinking that a lot of people hear the 'richer' sound, etc. because they convince themselves it's there (even on the digital recordings). Maybe, and just maybe, some may get a 'better' sound as they may have invested in better quality equipment than they had with just CDs (as vinyl aficionados will say you need damn good equipment to get full effect). I grew up with vinyl and I'm not convinced. There's no more ritual putting on an lp than there is putting on a CD.
I do buy vinyl but for the art, though. I know I will need to duck from stuff thrown at me, but I don't listen to vinyl anymore and haven't for years. My turntable is in the attic.
Vinyl is just trendy now. Most of the music is recorded digitally. Also vinyl is a huge waste of resources and doesn't recycle well.
I agree, a lot of vinyl now is digitally recorded, therefore losing the advantage of the analogue recording. I'm also thinking that a lot of people hear the 'richer' sound, etc. because they convince themselves it's there (even on the digital recordings). Maybe, and just maybe, some may get a 'better' sound as they may have invested in better quality equipment than they had with just CDs (as vinyl aficionados will say you need damn good equipment to get full effect). I grew up with vinyl and I'm not convinced. There's no more ritual putting on an lp than there is putting on a CD.
I do buy vinyl but for the art, though. I know I will need to duck from stuff thrown at me, but I don't listen to vinyl anymore and haven't for years. My turntable is in the attic.
Vinyl is trendy but not "just" trendy. Older rock albums simply sound better. More recent CDs however do sound very good.
For me, playing records is a more satisfying ritual then playing CDs or high-res digital files from an iPod or computer.
In my opinion, the best argument against vinyl is that it requires time, money and storage to execute well. In other words, it's pain in the ass. But there is a sound quality payoff for many, many records.
My point is that it's all in the mastering. There are plenty of old records that sound horrible compared to their CD counterparts. There are also albums that have never been mastered well on CD, so the vinyl sounds better. Some newer vinyl is genuinely mastered better than the CD version, yet others are exactly like the CD and really just a novelty item (Backspacer for example).
I am a web designer. I go am at a computer 17 hours a day. I enjoy getting up and changing a record and hearing something warm.
1 aspect that hasn't been discussed is speed of a record vs speed of a CD. Sounds silly, but some albums are slightly slower or faster on vinyl. A song at 142 beats per second on CD could be at 138 on vinyl. Now to the everyday user there isn't much of a difference, but it will sound slightly different.
Th only reason I know that is because my friends album came out on vagrant. When the album was pressed to vinyl it was a different speed. Apparently this is a fairly common occurrence that there are slight variance in beats per minute.
\Th only reason I know that is because my friends album came out on vagrant. When the album was pressed to vinyl it was a different speed. Apparently this is a fairly common occurrence that there are slight variance in beats per minute.
I think that has more to do with the turntable it's being played on, rather than the record itself. If you have a pitch adjuster, you can correct it.
If your an art lover, like myself, vinyl is your drug. Bigger artwork, bigger everything. The smell, feel & touch of vinyl is sweet. .
I couldnt agree more - i grew up with vinyl and started going to concerts in the 70s. And the artwork was always a big part of it. Nearly every Pink Floyd and Led Zeppelin album had fantastic artwork, inside and out, and often albums came with extras, like posters and stickers (everyone had the same Pink Floyd poster on the wall, which came with Dark Side of the Moon). In fact, Peter Grant had negotiated a provision in Led Zeppelin's contract that gave them freedom to do lots of wild things with their artwork at the record company's expense (e.g., Led Zeppelin III had a working wheel that you spun and changed the images and even their single albums usually opened up like a double, with great artwork inside). Im so happy that vinyl is making a strong comeback, along with great artwork (though, for some bands, like PJ, its like it never left).
Memories. Fav was In Through The Out Door......wet sleave and colors appeared. Inevitably after a few beverages I whip out my collection, purchased in 70's, drop disc on the Technics and crank the ole Marratz.......fountain of youth.
My point is that it's all in the mastering. There are plenty of old records that sound horrible compared to their CD counterparts. There are also albums that have never been mastered well on CD, so the vinyl sounds better. Some newer vinyl is genuinely mastered better than the CD version, yet others are exactly like the CD and really just a novelty item (Backspacer for example).
I believe Evacuation Rules is correct, which adds another layer to record collecting. It really can be annoying to decide where to spend cash on LP and turntable stuff.
But, there are occasional payoffs. For example, I got a Neville Brothers album via Craigslist for $1 a year ago. It sounds great. Great bass. Great vocals. And I never would have downloaded it or bought the CD. Vinyl can open unexpected doors.
Also, one other quick point: Kids love record players. LPs are a great way to engage kids in rock and pop music. My daughters and I choose a record and then truck it into the living room in a toy dump truck. Then we press buttons and watch the needle drop. They cheer when music appears. I like to play M.J.'s "Off The Wall" with them.
i cant keep the dust off of my vinyl! what kind of preventative measures does everyone do to keep the dust off?
Sure, i can clean them with the record cleaning brush and fluid - but i would rather clean them as little as possible, but i cant stop this evil static - and dust jumps on the record instantly!
my older records arent as static-ky - seems like newer and heavier weight vinyl attracts more dust.
see that's what i'm talking about.
seems like a pain in the ass to me.
just my opinion.
*~Pearl Jam will be blasted from speakers until morale improves~*
I couldnt agree more - i grew up with vinyl and started going to concerts in the 70s. And the artwork was always a big part of it. Nearly every Pink Floyd and Led Zeppelin album had fantastic artwork, inside and out, and often albums came with extras, like posters and stickers (everyone had the same Pink Floyd poster on the wall, which came with Dark Side of the Moon). In fact, Peter Grant had negotiated a provision in Led Zeppelin's contract that gave them freedom to do lots of wild things with their artwork at the record company's expense (e.g., Led Zeppelin III had a working wheel that you spun and changed the images and even their single albums usually opened up like a double, with great artwork inside). Im so happy that vinyl is making a strong comeback, along with great artwork (though, for some bands, like PJ, its like it never left).[/quote]
Memories. Fav was In Through The Out Door......wet sleave and colors appeared. Inevitably after a few beverages I whip out my collection, purchased in 70's, drop disc on the Technics and crank the ole Marratz.......fountain of youth.[/quote]
I still have my copy, purchased in 1979, of "In Through the Outdoor", including the brown bag it came in! I forgot about the changing colors!
Comments
yeah i don't get it either because doesn't vinyl sound all crackle-y?
or does just old vinyl sound like that?
Some new albums sound noticeably better than CDs. Other albums sound very similar in both formats.
In both cases, LP sound quality depends on quality of home audio equipment and record cleanliness and upkeep.
If you own a home, enjoy album artwork and enjoy rock music, set aside some cash and go for it. But, before you jump in, be ready to spend at least $500 to buy good equipment.
If you still plan to move around and don't listen to many records at home, skip it for now.
If you do jump into LPs, here's a good example of a "good buy" on the Web: I just spent $30 for The Black Crowes "Warpaint" and Tom Petty's "Wildflowers" on 180-gram vinyl. Free delivery from Elusive Disc.
Both those records could be had in high-quality digital format for much less and they'd sound great on great digital home audio equipment.
But I'm betting that if I share a joint and grab a beer, listening to Petty's "You Don't How it Feels" on spinning vinyl will be similar to viewing the Mona Lisa in Paris. But you can't smoke joints in the Lourve.
i cant keep the dust off of my vinyl! what kind of preventative measures does everyone do to keep the dust off?
Sure, i can clean them with the record cleaning brush and fluid - but i would rather clean them as little as possible, but i cant stop this evil static - and dust jumps on the record instantly!
my older records arent as static-ky - seems like newer and heavier weight vinyl attracts more dust.
I agree, a lot of vinyl now is digitally recorded, therefore losing the advantage of the analogue recording. I'm also thinking that a lot of people hear the 'richer' sound, etc. because they convince themselves it's there (even on the digital recordings). Maybe, and just maybe, some may get a 'better' sound as they may have invested in better quality equipment than they had with just CDs (as vinyl aficionados will say you need damn good equipment to get full effect). I grew up with vinyl and I'm not convinced. There's no more ritual putting on an lp than there is putting on a CD.
I do buy vinyl but for the art, though. I know I will need to duck from stuff thrown at me, but I don't listen to vinyl anymore and haven't for years. My turntable is in the attic.
Vinyl is trendy but not "just" trendy. Older rock albums simply sound better. More recent CDs however do sound very good.
For me, playing records is a more satisfying ritual then playing CDs or high-res digital files from an iPod or computer.
In my opinion, the best argument against vinyl is that it requires time, money and storage to execute well. In other words, it's pain in the ass. But there is a sound quality payoff for many, many records.
1 aspect that hasn't been discussed is speed of a record vs speed of a CD. Sounds silly, but some albums are slightly slower or faster on vinyl. A song at 142 beats per second on CD could be at 138 on vinyl. Now to the everyday user there isn't much of a difference, but it will sound slightly different.
Th only reason I know that is because my friends album came out on vagrant. When the album was pressed to vinyl it was a different speed. Apparently this is a fairly common occurrence that there are slight variance in beats per minute.
I think that has more to do with the turntable it's being played on, rather than the record itself. If you have a pitch adjuster, you can correct it.
Memories.
I believe Evacuation Rules is correct, which adds another layer to record collecting. It really can be annoying to decide where to spend cash on LP and turntable stuff.
But, there are occasional payoffs. For example, I got a Neville Brothers album via Craigslist for $1 a year ago. It sounds great. Great bass. Great vocals. And I never would have downloaded it or bought the CD. Vinyl can open unexpected doors.
Also, one other quick point: Kids love record players. LPs are a great way to engage kids in rock and pop music. My daughters and I choose a record and then truck it into the living room in a toy dump truck. Then we press buttons and watch the needle drop. They cheer when music appears. I like to play M.J.'s "Off The Wall" with them.
see that's what i'm talking about.
seems like a pain in the ass to me.
just my opinion.
Memories.
I still have my copy, purchased in 1979, of "In Through the Outdoor", including the brown bag it came in! I forgot about the changing colors!
6/24/08 (MSG1)
6/25/08 (MSG2)
7/1/08 (Beacon Theater -NYC)
10/30/09 (Philly3)
5/18/10 (Newark, NJ)
5/20/10 (MSG1)
5/21/10 (MSG2)
10/18/13 (Brooklyn 1)
10/19/13 (Brooklyn 2)
5/1/16 (MSG 1)
5/2/16 (MSG 2)
3/30/20 (MSG)
9/3/24 I(MSG1)
9/4/24 (MSG 2)