Digital files sound a trillion times better, all vinyls are printed differently and sound quality varies between turntables. If you really want the vinyl experience, just search for your favourite albums on soulseek with the term "vinyl rip". If you really want a tangible picture of your favourite albums, go print them out at the store, it will be 10000x better quality
Collecting big, physical records of your favorite music and the ritual involved in playing them is really cool. Other than some early shitty digital masters, music *will* sound better digitally though.
>If you really want a tangible picture of your favourite albums, go print them out at the store, it will be 10000x better quality
This is blatantly false. How often can you find ~3600x3600 lossless images of the cover art you'd need to print at a comparable quality to a vinyl release?
They are ok if you like searching for new/old/unique music. I get most of my records for free or very cheap and all my home stereo equipment was free or cheap as well. It certainly doesn't have to be a huge money-pit.
Personally, I believe cassettes are a lot more interesting and useful from a technology perspective. Collecting cassettes and making mixtapes is pretty fun. You can record to a tape off of a computer, CD or record and use Dolby noise reduction to get a very high-quality recording.
Dolby S or dbx are the only good noise reductions.
Dolby B is just a joke and doesn't do enough to justify its use.
Tape is definitely the more fun and engaging hobby music format. It also doesn't require incredibly expensive equipment like vinyl does.
(unless you go all the way to Reel to Reel)
>Dolby B is just a joke and doesn't do enough to justify its use.
It is supposed to reduce tape hiss and it works for that. Dolby C works even better but it's only useful if the equipment inteded for playback supports it.
Yeah it reduces tape hiss. But always fricks with the audio.
Better to just use higher quality tape and record a hotter signal onto them.
2 years ago
Anonymous
When you record with dolby, the volume of the frequency range where tape hiss lives is boosted, Then on playback, the volume of that frequency range is reduced. Hope I didn't just blind you with science.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Have you even tried Dolby S or dbx?
Or are you just hipstermaxxing and using whatever you can find to record on, and flicking the switches to get your frequency responses messed up.
It's FUN technology.
It's also nice hobby on its own.
It's nice to see how this analogue shit still holds some degree of quality despite the years.
Just bear in mind it will never surpass digital.
Just don't get attached much to it.
Can be good if you have a good setup overall and that the vinyl you are playing isn't a shit press. If you have gone the audiophile route the whole thing is fussy but isn't entirely a waste if you are pursuing quality and ripping LPs into digital that have no known digital copy.
A suitcase Crosley turntable for the hipster scene will have nothing on a audiophile set up (such as a good choice of cartridge/ stylus, turntable, phono box and integrated amp).
Fortunately I have had a good experience with my setup and don't regret the hobby but I can confirm that may not be for everyone and if you are listening to modern music then LPs have no real benefit over digital due to digital mastering (different for old albums with analogue mastering where the digital remaster was done poorly).
Love them. I have been collecting for 10 years. I make it a point to buy the records I consider my favorite or those I can't live without.
Interactive, tangible media is pretty underrated
Vinyl is an inherently moronic format that was dead by the early 1980s and should have been replaced with Digital Audio Tapes or some other 8mm tape format storing digital data. Barring that, we should have been using Magneto-Optical or just CDs.
Vinyl is nothing more than a series of compromises to get it to actually work. You can't make the bass too thumping or the needle jumps, and treble is cut a bit to preserve the cutter head from overheating when it goes over the fancy disc covered in soft nail polish. Then it gets stamped and made into masters, which themselves are prone to errors. And then you stamp it onto soft plastic. Dumb. When the consumer gets it, it's a nice piece of artwork, but that's not where the actual utility of the album comes from. I don't buy albums for the covers; I buy albums for the music. And to have it come on a format which by definition requires me to have a super special awesome setup that is anywhere from 1.5K+ to get anything decent, which has to be constantly calibrated, researched? Yeah, I played that game, I'm out.
There was a reason Compact Discs won in 1985. They were reasonably portable, they were reasonably easy to care for, they didn't fricking degrade, and held 2-3x as much music per disc.
Then digital shit got usable in ~2004 when a confluence of factors came together. MP3 was standardized, and disk drive sizes enabled people to just store thousands of MP3s. Now you can get a 4TB HDD on eBay for 60 USD and a new 1TB for 40USD, so you can easily store thousands of FLACs in any quality you desire. And play them endlessly, carry them anywhere, and play them on anything, and all you need is a device and a set of decent headphones. Beyerdynamic DT770 are good entry level and are what, 150-170 USD? So why waste your money and your time?
Maybe it's just the speakers I got, but I swear vinyl sounds better/clearer/bassier coming out of my setup than it does coming out of my computers studio monitors.
I can physically feel the bass and I can hear stuff in the recording that I couldnt hear as clearly before. It's a super subtle distinction that probably isn't worth the price, but I'm enjoying it.
2 things could be going on here, either you're a fricking moron who truly believes objectively inferior vinyl sounds better than digital or you likely have a poorer digital set up then your vinyl set up. Did you purchase a DAC? Are your digital tracks loseless?
What's a decent turntable setup for a few hundred eurodollars? There's some old albums I'd like to digitize for myself that I can only find on vinyl.
I don't need any fancy automatic features or a case of audiophile-grade wood, I just need it to keep a stable speed and accept commonly available needles.
I assume modern very cheap turntables don't keep stable speed? But is vintage any better given that their motor might've been running for nearly half a century by now?
Are you implying it is some kind of israelite thing going around this?
hipster consoomer gadget
This is pretty much what I expected.
I just need someone to talk me out of this.
Digital files sound a trillion times better, all vinyls are printed differently and sound quality varies between turntables. If you really want the vinyl experience, just search for your favourite albums on soulseek with the term "vinyl rip". If you really want a tangible picture of your favourite albums, go print them out at the store, it will be 10000x better quality
Collecting big, physical records of your favorite music and the ritual involved in playing them is really cool. Other than some early shitty digital masters, music *will* sound better digitally though.
>If you really want a tangible picture of your favourite albums, go print them out at the store, it will be 10000x better quality
This is blatantly false. How often can you find ~3600x3600 lossless images of the cover art you'd need to print at a comparable quality to a vinyl release?
>fell for the technics meme
Van Life is where it's at.
This. An authentic Soundwagon gives the ultimate vinyls experience.
>vinyls
>"vinyl"
zoomer alert
They are ok if you like searching for new/old/unique music. I get most of my records for free or very cheap and all my home stereo equipment was free or cheap as well. It certainly doesn't have to be a huge money-pit.
Personally, I believe cassettes are a lot more interesting and useful from a technology perspective. Collecting cassettes and making mixtapes is pretty fun. You can record to a tape off of a computer, CD or record and use Dolby noise reduction to get a very high-quality recording.
Dolby S or dbx are the only good noise reductions.
Dolby B is just a joke and doesn't do enough to justify its use.
Tape is definitely the more fun and engaging hobby music format. It also doesn't require incredibly expensive equipment like vinyl does.
(unless you go all the way to Reel to Reel)
>Dolby B is just a joke and doesn't do enough to justify its use.
It is supposed to reduce tape hiss and it works for that. Dolby C works even better but it's only useful if the equipment inteded for playback supports it.
Yeah it reduces tape hiss. But always fricks with the audio.
Better to just use higher quality tape and record a hotter signal onto them.
When you record with dolby, the volume of the frequency range where tape hiss lives is boosted, Then on playback, the volume of that frequency range is reduced. Hope I didn't just blind you with science.
Have you even tried Dolby S or dbx?
Or are you just hipstermaxxing and using whatever you can find to record on, and flicking the switches to get your frequency responses messed up.
moronic in general, 10x more moronic for new releases.
hipster cope
It's FUN technology.
It's also nice hobby on its own.
It's nice to see how this analogue shit still holds some degree of quality despite the years.
Just bear in mind it will never surpass digital.
Just don't get attached much to it.
This.
Enjoy it, just don't fall for the audiophile nonsense.
This guy gets it.
>tonearm with no counterweight
I wouldn't play any of my records on that thing.
Can be good if you have a good setup overall and that the vinyl you are playing isn't a shit press. If you have gone the audiophile route the whole thing is fussy but isn't entirely a waste if you are pursuing quality and ripping LPs into digital that have no known digital copy.
A suitcase Crosley turntable for the hipster scene will have nothing on a audiophile set up (such as a good choice of cartridge/ stylus, turntable, phono box and integrated amp).
Fortunately I have had a good experience with my setup and don't regret the hobby but I can confirm that may not be for everyone and if you are listening to modern music then LPs have no real benefit over digital due to digital mastering (different for old albums with analogue mastering where the digital remaster was done poorly).
CDs don't snap crackle and pop. Or skip. You should try one out. They just came out around 1980 or so. Way better.
Too bad CDs have no soul.
>muh intangibles
you got nothing
Love them. I have been collecting for 10 years. I make it a point to buy the records I consider my favorite or those I can't live without.
Interactive, tangible media is pretty underrated
The computer equivalent of vinyl is punch cards.
>collecting plastic
Vinyl is an inherently moronic format that was dead by the early 1980s and should have been replaced with Digital Audio Tapes or some other 8mm tape format storing digital data. Barring that, we should have been using Magneto-Optical or just CDs.
Vinyl is nothing more than a series of compromises to get it to actually work. You can't make the bass too thumping or the needle jumps, and treble is cut a bit to preserve the cutter head from overheating when it goes over the fancy disc covered in soft nail polish. Then it gets stamped and made into masters, which themselves are prone to errors. And then you stamp it onto soft plastic. Dumb. When the consumer gets it, it's a nice piece of artwork, but that's not where the actual utility of the album comes from. I don't buy albums for the covers; I buy albums for the music. And to have it come on a format which by definition requires me to have a super special awesome setup that is anywhere from 1.5K+ to get anything decent, which has to be constantly calibrated, researched? Yeah, I played that game, I'm out.
There was a reason Compact Discs won in 1985. They were reasonably portable, they were reasonably easy to care for, they didn't fricking degrade, and held 2-3x as much music per disc.
Then digital shit got usable in ~2004 when a confluence of factors came together. MP3 was standardized, and disk drive sizes enabled people to just store thousands of MP3s. Now you can get a 4TB HDD on eBay for 60 USD and a new 1TB for 40USD, so you can easily store thousands of FLACs in any quality you desire. And play them endlessly, carry them anywhere, and play them on anything, and all you need is a device and a set of decent headphones. Beyerdynamic DT770 are good entry level and are what, 150-170 USD? So why waste your money and your time?
What's a cheap table I can get to play records?
AT-LP60's are fine.
>No tracking force, anti-skate, or cartridge alignment
>Can't change the cartridge at all
Just spring for a LP120 instead.
Maybe it's just the speakers I got, but I swear vinyl sounds better/clearer/bassier coming out of my setup than it does coming out of my computers studio monitors.
I can physically feel the bass and I can hear stuff in the recording that I couldnt hear as clearly before. It's a super subtle distinction that probably isn't worth the price, but I'm enjoying it.
2 things could be going on here, either you're a fricking moron who truly believes objectively inferior vinyl sounds better than digital or you likely have a poorer digital set up then your vinyl set up. Did you purchase a DAC? Are your digital tracks loseless?
What's a decent turntable setup for a few hundred eurodollars? There's some old albums I'd like to digitize for myself that I can only find on vinyl.
I don't need any fancy automatic features or a case of audiophile-grade wood, I just need it to keep a stable speed and accept commonly available needles.
I assume modern very cheap turntables don't keep stable speed? But is vintage any better given that their motor might've been running for nearly half a century by now?
They're ok of you want to see your music go SPIN