- cross-posted to:
- music@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- music@lemmy.world
You must log in or # to comment.
CDs are just digital files plus waste. Vinyl is a musical ritual.
CD is still the only way to buy a digital popular music in most countries.
Don’t forget digital music stores like Qobuz and www.bandcamp.com.
Artists get more money when you buy their music outright instead of stream it.
Bandcamp was bought by Epic Games, who fired half the staff and sold off the remainder to some kind of nebulous music licencing platform. I wouldn’t cheer them on much longer, I see dark days ahead.
Seriously? Fucking hell, that’s depressing.
It isn’t owned by epic games anymore, it was bought by Songtradr. https://www.songtradr.com/blog/posts/songtradr-bandcamp-acquisition/
Yup that’s the “nebulous music licencing platform” I was referring to
No it’s not. The iTunes Music Store is available in the majority of countries in the world. Plus there are other services that cover some of the other countries. Vanishingly few people can choose only a CD.
You don’t own the music you license through iTunes though.
Pretty sure it’s DRM-free.
Only since 2007…
EMI was the first domino to fall after Job’s famous Thoughts on Music open letter.
The other labels followed suit shortly after.
That open letter will be old enough to vote in less than ten months.
No, I’m certain 2007 was just six or seven years ago, right? Right?
You don’t own the music you buy on a CD either. You are buying a license to the music and physical storage of it. If you want you can burn your iTunes songs on a CD and you’re in the same situation.
You own a copy of a copyrighted material. The copy is yours. No DRM, no remotely removing your ability to use it.
You own your own hard drive. That copy of an iTunes song is yours. No DRM, no remotely removing your ability to use it.
No DRM, no remotely removing your ability to use it.
Yet.
How is that different from iTunes?
You do know that the content in the iTunes Store isn’t the same in each country?
I am aware, but unless you’re saying iTunes doesn’t sell pop music in most markets, it’s not really relevant.
Many people don’t listen to local music or pop music. It’s very relevant if you can only get real music on a physical medium.
And out of everything available iTunes is your first choice too?
Soms people here on Lemmy are even more insufferable than any other social media.
Don’t you dare buy a cd with the music you like. BUY FROM ITUNES, while in the next thread they say FUCK APPLE.
You completely missed the point of what you are replying to. The point isn’t that you SHOULD buy music from online sources instead of CDs. The point is that CDs aren’t “the only way to buy a digital popular music in most countries.” They are directly contradicting a point someone else made by saying CDs are not the only way to buy digital popular music in most countries. They even specifically said popular music, not whatever niche music some random person is into. They also mentioned iTunes because it services 119 markets, which directly counterpoints the statement about being available in most countries. They never advocated for iTunes like you imply.
It’s almost like you lack reading comprehension. “Soms people here on Lemmy are even more insufferable than any other social media.”
Many people don’t listen to local music or pop music.
I was responded to a comment about the availability of pop music.
And out of everything available iTunes is your first choice too?
Yes, the largest digital music store is, naturally, the first one I searched for availability numbers for (119 markets).
I don’t really understand the rest of your rant.
I think you can use iTunes as a catch all for sales of digital files, including bandcamp. As opposed to a physical disc or a subscription. FWIW I was just looking this up on the RIAA website and you can run reports by year or year over year comparing media options. It’s really interesting to see which year each format peaked. Eg 8track 1978, cassette 1989, CD 2000, digital file 2012. It doesn’t include limewire /napster (non-revenue) so the unit counts are a bit depressed. I wish it included pre-iPod mp3 players and blank CD sales.
Internet access and existing devices would also play a role, but I don’t know a region like that to comment further
The music on iTunes is compressed and doesn’t sound as good as a CD does.
Not to mention they can revoke your access to your music on iTunes. No one can take away your CD unless they break into your house!
Even a human with very good hearing and knowledge of how a song is supposed to sound cannot tell the difference between CD quality audio and 256k AAC like iTunes uses.
Don’t believe all the nonsense audiophiles keep spewing out. Human ears suck. If we hadn’t had our giant brains to compensate, we’d be practically deaf.
This. People assume that because it’s “compressed” it must sound flatter, less dynamic, or just vaguely worse than uncompressed audio, despite the fact that audio compression specifically uses psychoacoustic models to remove the bits of data that our human ears and brains cannot hear to begin with.
Expectation bias is a helluva drug.
Even FLAC is compressed. Which is how I procure my music because I have the storage space.
Yup, although that doesn’t stop some weirdos out there claiming that CDs sound better than FLAC.
FLAC is compressed, but unlike lossy codecs like AAC and MP3, FLAC is fully lossless. Lossy codecs delete information the authors believe you won’t notice, lossless compression keeps all the data and just tries to fit it in a smaller space. The original recording can be perfectly reproduced (taking into account sample rate and depth).
psychoacoustic models
Sometimes they mess up. Actually only ever noticed it once and that was years ago CD vs. ogg vorbis at full quality level, this track. Youtube version is even worse, it seems (from memory): The guitars kicking in around 30 seconds should be harsh and noisy as fuck like nothing you’ve ever heard, they’re merely distorted on youtube.
Then lossy codecs are a bad idea for archival reasons as you can’t recode them without incurring additive losses – each codec has a different psychoacoustic model, each deletes different stuff. Thus, FLAC definitely has a place.
Killer samples do happen, sure but vorbis at Q9? I’m highly dubious. That track in particular just sounds badly recorded to begin with. If you have that same version in FLAC i would be interested to see some ABX test results or test it myself.
For archival purposes, though, I agree FLAC is the way to go.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
I would guess that the fact that people aren’t all using some kind of standard-response reference headphones is probably going to have a considerably-larger impact on the human-perceivable fidelity of the audio reproduction than any other factor.
This is true. That said, I’ve seen people claim that nobody can tell the difference between lossless and 128kbps mp3, but that’s complete bullshit.
Though once you get above 192, it’s pretty indistinguishable.
Would really depend on the version of MP3. The first versions had some major issues with artifacts being introduced. People probably listened to that and concluded all compressed music must be shit. Later versions were much better, even though I would think 128k is probably too low and would be noticeable with some effort. I agree, starting at 192k and people can’t tell anymore.
Does anybody use MP3 anymore? I don’t really know to be honest.
Not to mention they can revoke your access to your music on iTunes.
iTunes got rid of DRM a decade and a half ago.
Sure but if you don’t have the song downloaded on your PC and they remove it from your library you can’t redownload it.
Most people aren’t backing up the songs they buy on iTunes.
Thank goodness they’ll let you redownload your CD if it gets damaged…
I don’t agree. It depends how the song was ripped and how the original was mastered. I did so much A/B testing at the time and found I couldn’t tell the difference between VBR 256 AAC and the CD. 128k mp3 sounded worse, 320k mp3 is pretty safe, but there were a lot of improvements to LAME over the years so newer files sound better. The biggest difference is the mastering. Generally 1980s reissues of 1970s analog masters sound worst, 1990s is best, 2000s everything got remastered to make it loud and crush dynamic range. The only real innovation since is Dolby Atmos on Apple Music which really brings alive the promise of 1970s quadraphonic.
iTunes music store is not available in mainland China, which is 1/5 of the world’s population
Yes, but this is about what is available in most countries, not what is available in all countries. That still leaves 119 markets and 80% of the world’s population being available. Pretty sure that counts as “most.”
Also, the point isn’t about iTunes, it’s about alternatives to CDs for digital music. China likely has some online store to buy music, but I have no idea.
To make the claim 80% of population has it you have to have the numbers, since South Korea doesn’t have it, a lot of African countries (just going down the list, Algeria, Angola, Benin, etc) don’t have it
It looks like half of the world doesn’t have iTunes music purchases
They do, maybe, but the streaming services often can’t get the original master so they play rerecordings of the songs
I just pirate it
vinyl is cool, but cd is the digital recording, mastered in a known manner, to a high degree. It’s the most consistent form of product you will get from music. Plus it’s a physically collectable thing. And it’s cheap.
I’m not made of money over here.
I’m not made of money
Capitalism: “Oh, yes, you are.”
the thing that capitism doesnt understand about me, is that i don’t care about money.
deleted by creator
Vinyls break easily and sound kinda meh, even with decent equipment. CDs have fairly good quality and are easy to store and handle. Honestly I get why people like vinyl, big discs are fun and tinkering with analog stuff is its own hobby, but when it comes to collecting I prefer CDs.
I like old vinyl because these are my grandparents’ and parents’ records which I have heard myself a few times in my childhood.
I don’t get recording digital data, then writing it to an analog medium which is then sold 15 times more expensive than it historically was.
No one can take the music on your CD’s from you. I bought loads if sings and albums from Google Music and they are all gone now
This is a reason to avoid DRM, not digital files in general.
(My condolences for being bitten, though.)
Google Music had DRM free downloads, so the DRM wasn’t the problem - it was that they didn’t download them before Google Music was shuttered.
No one can take my flacs either. 🐷🧇
RIP
🐷🧇
😢
CDs are digital files plus ownership.
Once you download a music file, nobody is taking it away from you.
And CDs can have DRM just like any other digital media.
No, a CD that carries the actual CD logo cannot have DRM. It is true that the music industry has often pushed ‘enhanced’ formats that look like CDs that do; SACD, for example.
Ownership is different to possession, and I want to actually own my music, not just possess the files.
No, a CD that carries the actual CD logo cannot have DRM.
Is this true? If so, I’m guessing it’s purely due to limitations in the hardware, rather than lack of will? I can’t imagine CDs coming out these days and not having some sort of DRM.
Nintendo was able to figure it out with GameCube games…
You can definitely put DRM-protected content onto the physical CD media - that is exactly what SACD is. But then it isn’t an audio CD, even if it will play on a regular CD player. Search for “nonstandard or corrupted” on the Wikipedia page https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_Disc_Digital_Audio .
It’s my understanding that only conforming CDs can carry the CD logo. It’s usually on the case, not the disc itself, and it isn’t always there, particularly when the case isn’t a jewel case. All the same, I think that most things that look like CDs are conformant.
Yeah, but I imagine that CD logo is a “stamp of quality” of sorts that tells you that the disc inside fits an agreed upon, unified set of standards. And one of those standards is “no DRM.”
Point was, if that standard was created or updated today, there’s no shot that they wouldn’t require DRM.
Maybe I’m wrong though and that’s not at all what the CD logo means.
That’s true, but they did already try it and it didn’t catch on. There’s a section about it on the Wikipedia page (“Copy protection”).
That section also mentions that Philips stated that these discs couldn’t have the CD logo on them. Since Philips was behind SACD, together with Sony, you’d think they wouldn’t have imposed that restriction on themselves if they had the choice.
I download my MP3 and FLAC files and then I own them and play them on any device I want.
There certainly are some services where you can legally download MP3 and FLAC files. Bandcamp, for example. If you download your music like that then, yes, you do own it.
But I’m not aware of anywhere you can get music from the major music labels nowadays (Amazon used to sell MP3s and so did Google Play Music, but neither does any more). If you do, I’d love to know.
On the other hand, you can still - although it’s getting harder - buy CDs for major label artists and then you own the music (that copy of it).
True, CDs are the most reliable way to get the digital file.
7digital is a site where I’ve bought major label music and get the files. If it’s not on bandcamp it’s often on 7digital. They don’t have everything though.
Thanks for the tip - they do seem to have a lot. I had assumed that the labels had made it unprofitable for that type of service to exist. I guess maybe it’s simply that there is more money to be made from streaming.
Amazon does still sell digital music files, you just need to find the “digital music” section in Movies, Music and Games if that link doesn’t work for you.
But you’re right about google music, it got turned into youtube music and I’m pretty sure it doesn’t allow purchasing and downloads. I’d imagine apple also still lets you buy music, but I’ve never actually used them before and don’t plan to start now.
I’m glad I saved my CDs, as I was able to rerip them to FLAC and undo the mistake my juvenile self made of ripping to WMA. I still keep the CDs to play in my car from time to time
While I agree with you, I still want to be able to buy CDs.
I do miss caring about my CD collection. I still have them but I have nothing to play them on.
What is everyone’s opinions on the sound quality of vinyl?
I understand the collectibility of physical media, and the novelty of owning a vinyl and the machine that plays them. The large art piece that is the case (and often the disc itself). Showing support for your favorite artists by owning physical media from them.
Those are great reasons to collect vinyl.
But a lot of my friends claim vinly is of higher audio quality than anything else, period. This is provably false, but it seems to be a common opinion.
How often have you seen this and what are your thoughts on it?
Technically CD quality digital is superior, but the recording and mixing can have a lot to do with it. For example, it could be that an decades old Dark Side Of The Moon on vinyl (played on proper equipment) could sound better than a modern remastered CD with maximized loudness (See the “loudness wars”).
It’s not impossible, although the loudness wars are pretty much over nowadays. All major music services and players have volume normalisation, many by default, so there’s not much point to it any longer.
Also it’s pretty tough to find a decades old record still in mint condition, and the sound quality of vinyl gets worse every time you play it.
and the sound quality of vinyl gets worse every time you play it.
If you handle them correctly, it will not happen to any noticeable degree in any of our lifetimes or the following generations. It is durable material.
Higher audio quality than CD? No, that is demonstrably false.
More pleasant to listen to than CD or other digital formats? Yes, that I agree with. It’s entirely subjective, but I’m definitely not alone in the feeling. The fact it is hard to quantify is why lots of people don’t “get” vinyl until they’ve sat and heard it on a decent system. Something about it is pleasing. As another commenter mentioned, it might just be the imperfections.
So I guess it’s a bit of a philosophical question. If CDs technically sound better, but vinyl sounds more pleasing: does the vinyl then sound better? People tend to chase pleasure, and in the time it takes someone to explain how much lower the noise floor is on CD or how we can only perceive so many samples, etc, etc – you could have been chilling with multiple records and had a great listening experience.
If it was just about the sound, then you could get the exact same results by recording the vinyl player directly to a lossless format and playing that back, but it wouldn’t be quite the same. Big part of it is just the fact that you are using a vinyl player and these huge fragile disks that makes it an enjoyable experience by itself.
Yes, totally agree. Vinyl rips still lack something. A lot of it is about practice, which makes it harder to quantify.
Of course. There is no doubt that the ritual of handling the record and playing it on the turntable is a huge part of it. Personally it makes me appreciate the music more because it is kind of an effort to get it playing in the first place, and you just want to listen to the record in a session, instead of just having it as a backdrop which so much streamed music is.
IMO is just placebo effect. In a blind experiment, all else being equal, I doubt you would be able to tell the difference between a vinyl and a CD. That’s my two cents
I know for a fact I would hear the difference – but primarily because of the imperfections in the vinyl, as well as the different bass response. I can rule out placebo.
Something about it is pleasing. As another commenter mentioned, it might just be the imperfections.
I think it’s the slight hissing sound you hear as the needle drags. That faint, slightly pink noise isn’t dissimilar from white noise people use to go to sleep, and I think human brains like that sort of sound.
I know it’s not highest quality.
For me, the imperfect sound is what makes a nicer experience. Slight hum, little pop once in a while, teensy skip, etc.
Not to mention that I’m far more inclined to listen to an entire album because of the need to interact with the vinyl to set the needle and flip sides.
At the risk of sounding critical of your hobby, to argue the imperfections improve the experience sounds somewhat culty.
I understand there is something akin to “character” which you don’t get from something highly polished. I know when things sound too clean it can feel sterile.
I accept vinyl has a collectors value, but anything claims regarding preference come across as either pretentious or deluded (to me, as someone who probably can’t tell the difference).
I don’t proclaim that vinyl is superior or something everyone should listen to.
Just trying to convey how I hear it.
98% of my listening is my MP3 playing from my phone’s Bluetooth.
Vinyl has a slow progression in quality degradation due to friction that creates a certain kind of sound warmth that is pleasing to our ears. This can also be relicated digitally, but the imperfections and feelings associated with the physical ritual actions of loading a record can’t.
Vinyl just has more engagement going on despite the sound quality being lower. Kind of like how some people have fondness for fireplaces despite central heating being technically better at maintaining a warm temperature.
Some people confuse the extra engagement with sound quality because a lot of people just don’t think things through.
Vinyl has a slow progression in quality degradation due to friction
With conventional record players with a mechanical head. I suppose that you could probably use an optical one – I remember reading about that being used by archivists.
google
Yeah.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_turntable
The thing I think I remember reading about was apparently this related thing:
The IRENE system uses a high-powered confocal microscope that follows the groove path as the disc or cylinder (i.e. phonograph cylinder) rotates underneath it, thereby obtaining detailed images of the audio information.[9] Depending on whether the groove is cut laterally, vertically, or in a V-shape, the system may make use of tracking lasers or different lighting strategies to make the groove visible to the camera. The resulting images are then processed with software that converts the movement of the groove into a digital audio file.[10]
An advantage of the system over traditional stylus playback is that it is contactless, and so avoids damaging the audio carrier or wearing out the groove during playback.[1] It also allows for the reconstruction of already broken or damaged media such as cracked cylinders or delaminating lacquer discs, which cannot be played with a stylus. Media played on machines which are no longer produced can also be recovered.[6] Many skips or damaged areas can be reconstituted by IRENE without the noises that would be created by stylus playback.[5] However, it can also result in the reproduction of more noise, as imperfections in the groove are also more finely captured than with a stylus.
considers
If you can get multiple physical copies of an analog recording, you could probably scan them and use statistical analysis to combine information from the physical copies, eliminate damage from any one copy.
Yes, I was referring to the most common way of playing vinyl records with a physical needle.
Combining multiple records could give you an average, but it would both lose the things that make vinyl and experience like pops from dust specs and imperfections. Plus a cleaner copy could be had from the masters used to press the vinyl records. You know, the same master that is used to make exact duplicates for CDs.
Recreating an approximation of a lost master recording from multiple vinyl records with voice reduction on the imperfections would be an interesting idea, so my guess is someone has already done that 😉
that engagement materially impacts sound quality because you’re actively listening.
It impacts the perception of sound quality, not the actual sound quality.
You could get engagement through digital audio files too, though.
But I’d argue that it doesn’t affect the sound quality, but the enjoyment of the sound. The sound waves themselves don’t actually change because we’re actively engaging.
The best explanation I’ve seen is that music is mixed differently for CD/streaming and vinyl.
For mass market, the move has been to mix for louder bass and similar things. The idea being that it makes the music more popular. But it also makes it difficult to appreciate anything but the bass.
On vinyl, you can’t max out bass like that, it won’t work on the format. So they have to give it a normal mix instead, making it sound better. In theory CDs should sound better than vinyl, but because of the music production trends, it doesn’t currently.
This is correct, although it’s not the bass that is limited on vinyl; it’s the dynamic range compression (or ‘loudness’) in general.
Published 1989, posted on YouTube 17 yards ago:
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/3Gmex_4hreQ
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
So you have to fiddle with the volume less on vinyl?
That’s the one good selling point I’ve heard for vinyl so far.
I like this take. it’s probably also why I’m gravitating towards cassettes now, you don’t need a special mix but you also can’t just max the volume because magnetic media saturates and distorts quite quickly.
A new record sounds pretty good when played on a good turntable with a good cartridge, but it’s not as good as a properly mixed CD or lossless audio file. A worn or dirty record sounds like crap. A cheap turntable will also sound like crap and a ceramic cartridge wears out records fairly quickly.
With a CD, there is very little difference in sound quality between the cheapest player you can find and a high end player. The CD will always sound the same until it’s too worn out to play at all.
CD sound is better. But I like how big the pictures of the albums are with vinyl. Vinyl is more about the ritual though. With all the pop sounds and stuff I wouldn’t prefer it over CD.
I like to buy older albums that were mastered for vinyl, like Steely Dan, some prog rock like Yes or Pink Floyd. It gets a lot closer to listening to how the artists would have been hearing their product
Either 0 difference from digital or worse due to skipping/bad record quality. Rap records are especially bad and I stopped buying them.
Personally, I buy them because my internet is unreliable, it makes for some nice decoration and it’s nice to actually own something in 2024 (especially since Spotify keeps deleting random artists/songs from my playlists).
I enjoy the warmer sound of vinyl but I buy the albums I love on it because of the lack o convenience. I can’t shuffle and I have to actually interact with it every 20ish minutes to flip or change discs. It makes me actually listen to music, track order, mix, and properly enjoy the work that went into the whole album making process.
So I use streaming when I just want something on in the background and vinyl when I want to properly listen to an album.
Vinyl is worse quality, the vinyl disk’s height is a physical constraint that CDs / DVDs do not have.
Define quality.
First problem would be defining what “quality” means. On one hand vynil just has a continuous grove which needle follows. For this reason it’s infinitely precise, as there’s no interpolation or sample frequency. But on the other hand if master was digital and of shit quality, then benefits of analog mean nothing. Also widely used 44KHz sample rate is no accident, it’s exactly double of what human hearing can perceive. So even if you go higher, average listener wouldn’t be able to hear the difference.
Music is also mastered differently for vynil. Base is centered and audio is processed to reduce chances of skipping tracks. This is why decent phono amplifier is needed to revert those changes. Digital stays good or shitty no matter how many times you copy the file.
Overall sound quality is good, in both digital world and analogue. I have both high quality FLACs and some really great records which people would struggle to figure out if the sound they are hearing is digital or not. Personally I prefer vynil because the centered base. It makes other instruments more pronounced and you get to experience same music in a bit of a different way. Vynil being manual as it is also forces you to listen to entire side since it’s not easy to change tracks and authors by clicking next.
Vinyl sounds good, but has too much noise to be the best. Although that could just be my cat’s fault, realistically - i spend a lot time removing hair from records.
Too much noise? Older records sure. But new stuff? On mine you can’t tell the difference. There’s no hum, no crackling, no noise. It is recommended to brush your records before playing though. Perhaps that’s the problem?
The records are new, and I brush them before each use. I’ve used different carts so that’s probably not the issue either. Maybe I just got all bad records… Maybe I could hear a difference on yours. Who knows at this point
Odd. But yeah, many factors.
Not an audiophile, but had experience with vinyl and CDs while growing up in the 90s and imo vinyl COULD sound better if you spent a lot of money on high end equipment. But with the equipment us normies had, the cds sounded much better. It had a much lower barrier if you didn’t have a large amount of time and money to invest. I’d suspect things are similar now.
I read somewhere that about 50% of vinyl owners don’t have a player. Presumably that 50% only have very few records and bought them for the looks, but still.
Vinyl records sounds great despite their technical inferiority to CDs and streaming (with the right equipment of course, but that applies to all formats). They do not necessarily sound better, but there is an element of customisation with them which you can’t get with CDs or streaming. Most importantly the cartridge on your turntable. Different cartridges have different soundscapes. There is of course an element of quality connected to price of cartridge, but over a certain price you are not necessarily buying a better sound but a different sound. Many vinyl record listeners, especially audiophiles, have different cartridges which they can switch out on their turntable, based on which kind of sound you want coming out of your system.
I know it may be difficult to comprehend for people who haven’t personally listened to such differences themselves, but I assure you it is not audiophile snake oil, it is a very noticeable phenomenon. That is a pretty unique capability of vinyl which I can’t really compare to anything with other formats.
deleted by creator
people are idiots, possibly from inhaling the toxic fumes of unregulated PVC
deleted by creator
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Its worse in the best way IMO.
The main reason I buy vinyl is for the other reasons you mentioned, but the imperfections of vinyl gives it a less robotic and sterile feel. It’s like listening to digital drums vs acoustic drums.
There’s also the ritual of playing vinyl that’s real satisfying
It’s good.
And I bet horse carriages outsold the Ford Model-T this year too
i wouldnt say vinyl is comparable to horse drawn carriages.
Because CD is a medium for data shrinking in popularity and vinyl is a token of being cool growing in popularity, of course it does.
I think of this clip every single time Chris Pirillo pops up in pop culture somewhere.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
Just waiting for wax cylinders to come back
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
I want to know what “other” is that is also clobbering CDs. Can’t say it’s streaming because it’s physical media. The article mentions that half a million cassettes were sold, but that doesn’t really answer the question. That “other” takes up a lot of space relative to CDs so I’m pretty curious.
I dug into the RIAA Source PDF the article references for what “other” means:
“Includes CD Singles, Cassettes, Vinyl Singles, DVD Audio, SACD”
Ahh, perfect, thanks, I genuinely appreciate it. I should have done that myself, shouldn’t I?
Eh, I have a lot of questions after articles, few are worth going down the rabbit hole for unless others show interest, no worries!
Not something I follow, but I recall reading that SACD is favored as being the highest-fidelity format generally available today (well, physical format…if you get something online, could be at whatever resolution you want).
I also recall reading – probably a more-meaningful factor than the actual physical constraints – that because the people who were buying them were rabid about audio quality and were annoyed by dynamic range compression, that the people mastering didn’t make hot recordings, so the media format avoided the “loudness war”.
googles
Hmm. Apparently not any more, at least not always:
At least for a little while SACD/DSD/24bit 96k releases were immune to loudness wars. However over the last 5 years or so I’m noticing a lot of high res releases, either remasters, remixes or new releases in high res have become victims of the loudness wars. The latest release of Electric Lady land is a prime example, horrible clipping and single digit DR ratings.
Why? These releases are not meant for portable headphone consumption why are they doing this? Why are supposedly trained audio engineers going along with this? Clipping and low DR ranges is a quantifineable error. People that buy high res releases will want full DR to play on their home audio system.
Why has this horrible practice infected what should be audiophile class recordings?
Honestly, digital music vendors should just include a dynamic range metric. Hell, let artists sell different versions of a song if they want. MP3 and I think all other popular formats have ReplayGain or equivalent, so one should be able to optimize the recording for reproduction accuracy rather than to just achieve a desired volume.
I’d assume it is for digital downloads.
If I am not purchasing LPs, I try to purchase MP3s/FLAC that I can copy and move around as I please.
Hm, digital downloads count as physical media? I might? be able to see the merit in that classification but I’m not entirely convinced.
I should comment AFTER I read the article.
If it is for physical sales only I would have to guess we are looking at things like cassette, USB drives and limited releases on other obscure formats like minidisk.
I knew piracy was eating into music sales but poor artists and distributors only generating less than $2 of revenue in the US per year? That’s like 1 CD in a clearance sale. They should start a charity.
If you’re curious, nearly half a million cassettes sold last year, too, according to Billboard.
I’m more curious about who’s still selling music on cassette and who’s willing to buy it.
Vinyl, which tends to be pricier than the newer format, also far outstripped CDs in actual money made, raking in $1.4 billion compared to $537 million from CDs.
Vinyl is definitely overpriced these days. I do love all the art and care that artists seem to put into their vinyl releases, but typically I’m spending $30-$50 on a new vinyl release. But what am I going to do? Not buy that limited edition colored vinyl gatefold with art and lyric pages?
Well, you could always just download the music, art and lyrics from the internet, since it is the year of our lord 2024
Yeah, at this point you’re paying because it’s a collector item, or to support the artist, not for the actual content of the package.
I also just really like the physical media. Putting on a record is ritualistic at this point.
I buy mine from the merch stand at the artist’s show, they usually go for 20€-30€, even the limited edition ones.
I view vinyls as collectors items, not something you actually listen to. I still buy CDs because I hate the idea of subscription services.
Depends really. Seller am buying from has for example AC/DC records for 26$ a piece or 16$ a piece for CD. You simply can’t compare the two and the difference is 10$. They of course have 50th anniversary edition for 42$, but that’s up to you.
I’d buy the vinyl as a collectors item, but the CD to upload on to my phone.
Wow. What is that ‘other’ physical medium? Is MiniDisc also coming back and beating CDs?
Some artists in the punk scene are putting out cassettes.
There are things like Super Audio CDs and MACDs etc… I believe there may even be some blue ray audio releases.
Those are kind of rare, though; can they really be outselling CDs by so much? Or maybe the author mislabeled the key and ‘other’ is supposed to be the sliver on top?
I don’t know how widespread it is outside of metal, but I’ve been seeing more and more bands offering tapes. Sometimes a release is only on tape, other times the tape might be $6, the CD $15 and the LP $25, so there are different ties available for those who want a physical copy. I probably got 10 tapes or so within the last year.
Tape makes a lot of sense audio-quality wise especially for people who insist on analogue for some silly reason, the prices don’t make sense, though: Tapes are expensive to manufacture. CDs and vinyl are pressed whole while tapes need to be run through a machine, centimetre by centimetre. Though maybe for small runs it does make sense as you don’t need a physical master.
You hit the nail on the head. Even ten years ago people would use national audio and get the shortest run possible (50 units).
I never got below $2 unit cost, but there’s good money to be made selling short runs of tapes after a set.
A whole $1.91!! Wow!
yeah, because if you buy something digitally, it will get stolen from you.
Vinyls are great, but I can’t copy them to my phone so I still have to buy a CD with it.
As someone who used to be a member of what.cd, and still has a bunch of incredible sounding FLAC vinyl rips of albums, this definitely is not true.
I still reminisce about my Oink ratio. Seeded Rosetta Stone on a university connection. Access to the school’s radio station’s library.
Probably the closest I’ll come to generational wealth, my grandchildren could have leeched music on my account and I’d still be positive.
What used to have staff picks where the download amount wouldn’t count negatively towards your ratio, but the upload amount would. When the Beatles remasters came out in 2008 or 2009, they put the entire collection on there, including the FLAC version. It was like 9+ gb I think, all of which was free in terms download amount. All it took was uploading for a few hours and I got my ratio into double digits. Basically made it so I never had to worry about it ever again.
It’s not true that I cannot copy my vinyls to my computer? Okay how do I do that then? It just has the red and white left and right cables going to an amp, and then my receiver. Kinda new to vinyls over here
Maybe try Google? As I said, I downloaded them I didn’t rip them myself. There was this person with the username “PBTHAL” that always had to best lossless vinyl rips, if you do a search that includes that name, you might find alternate download sources for them. I think they ran their own site where they posted all of their rips outside of what, but don’t know if it’s still there. They were also very thorough while explaining the process, equipment, cables, etc. for each and every rip. This person was really a perfectionist, and boy did it show. There were albums that they ripped and then refused to upload because they didn’t feel their rip was perfect enough.
Absolute fucking legend.
I even have FLACs of reel-to-reel versions of all Zeppelin albums, as well as, Bowie, Dylan, et. al. and they sound fantastic. Don’t ask me how it’s done. And given the pedigree of that website, these people took the ripping process incredibly seriously.
Haha nice, that’s an area of music collection as a hobby that I’ve never explored., and I can really appreciate that level of dedicstion. Thanks for letting me know, I’ll see if I can even find my type of metal on there
You might be able to find some dedicated metalheads ripping vinyl, but my experience was that it seemed to be done more with albums that were released prior to the rise of digital music. I feel like it makes more sense when the album was written and recorded with vinyl in mind, otherwise you’re taking a digital recording and putting it on a record so I’m not sure you’re going to get anything that sounds better by ripping the vinyl over just ripping the CD. If that makes sense.
I could be wrong though…
Yeah, and with the style of the few albums I do have on vinyl, the vinyl rexord sound kinda goes with the sound of their subgenre so I do enjoy the vinyl listening experience there, and they do sound different than on Spotify.
But when I own my own copy of an album, I want to remove it from Spotify and have my own copy of it on my own device. So if I’m just doing it to be able to listen to music that I paid for on vinyl on my phone when I’m not home in front of the turntable, then that’s good enough.
I notice now, some new vinyls on Bandcamp come with digital download, which is cool, but not if I bought it at a show.
Man do I miss what cd. I love RED. But what will always have a special place. I still have tons of merch I bought from what. T-shirts, coffee mug, koozie and so many rippy stickers. I still wear the shirts in my regular rotation
I’ve got a what.cd hoodie lying around somewhere. Wore that thing out for years, so it’s falling apart at this point.
Well, there’s still RED and it has almost has vinyl rip for every famous album. I wasn’t a what cd member but RED has a huge collection. If you aren’t in music trackers anymore you should checkout RED
Yeah but it’s members only right? Frankly, I’m just too old and lazy and don’t care enough about that stuff anymore to go through a whole interview process and shit.
Do they have PBTHAL vinyl rips? Those were my favorite by far. That person really knew WTF they were doing.
Do they have PBTHAL vinyl rips?
Yes, there is a collage of 578 pbthal rips
🤤
Yeah but it’s members only right?
Yeah but what cd was a private tracker too right?
I’m just too old and lazy and don’t care enough about that stuff anymore to go through a whole interview process and shit.
Well, considering you were a what cd user, I think you can easily clear that, the wait for the interview is ridiculously annoying though. I had to wait for weeks for that.
Do they have PBTHAL vinyl rips?
I don’t know, have to check. I am just tired of the grind these days and just visit it when my friend asks for an album’s flac, or if I get freeleech tokens.
Yeah but I would need to “prove” I was a member, and it’s not like I still have any kind of evidence. In fact, I got super lucky to get into what in the first place as I just happened to have a screenshot of my OiNK title bar/ratio because I was messing with different CSS themes months/years prior. So when OiNK died, I was able to get into what pretty easily by showing that screenshot.
I have no such thing for what.
Yeah but I would need to “prove” I was a member
Idt you need to prove that unless they ask you specifically or you say it by yourself.
They don’t care what private trackers you are/were in as long as you pass the interview.
Right. I was able to skip the interview process for What because I was a member of OiNK and got lucky enough to find someone on reddit to send me an invite. The whole idea of interviewing to join a torrent site rubs me the wrong way and as I said above, I don’t really care about that stuff enough anymore to go through the hassle.
Such an amazing resource that was, not only did it have the albums available, but several different pressings, source media, and versions of each one. Something no commercial entity can come close to offering at any price.
I own a USB turntable with an ADC in it. It’s got a USB cable sticking out the back. I can rip vinyl to whatever digital format you want.
ION TT-USB master race!
My record player has a USB port…
Oh , mine doesn’t . I’m new to vinyl, and have less than 10 in my collection. My turntable was given to me by a friend.
So yours can copy to a computer via USB?
In theory, yes. I’ve never actually plugged it into a computer. It’s a Sony PS-LX300USB. Looks like you can pick one up used for less than $100. Might be worth it if you’re currently buying everything twice.
Sweet, thanks for the info! I’ll check it out
I have a audio technica AT-LP120-USB and it shows up in Audacity as an input source. my good speakers are hooked up to my livingroom PC + TV anyway, so playing back \ recording through audacity is the only way I’ve ever used the player.
Shiiiiit, okay I like that setup. My computer is connected to my tv which has ARC to th receiver, so I could totally do that too
Aux cable from the out port to input on PC. Open recorder app and hit record. Save files. Upload to phone.
Why though? Just rip a CD or download the file. It’s better quality and less effort.
Well ya, but I thought the we were talking about ripping vinyl
you could get the vinyl rip, and listen them on your phone. idk whether it might sound the same like the exact vinyl but it’s better than Spotify if you have a decent headphones.
Vylin is mixed differently.
BaseBass is usually centered instead of leaning on any channel at a time. This is to reduce chances of skipping. I personally prefer my music that way because drums and bass always feel in the middle leaving room for other instruments to expand on the side.Bass*
And vinyl*
Ahh, I see. Setting sail to get something I’ve legitimately paid for IS an option. I’d still rather do it myself now that I’m finding out it’s an option with the right equipment
I don’t really buy vinyl to listen to it, but for the larger cover art and liner notes
The only vinyls I buy are from charity shops or because I love an album so much that I want it as a collection (I’d also buy the CD to actually listen to)
Yeah, I haven’t bought a new record in a long time, and one of my most prized albums is a 1970 radio-played copy of The Kinks “Lola vs. Powerman and the MoneygoRound” complete with the dates and times they played Lola."
That is definitely something I loved about LPs. I used to have a big book of album cover art. I have no idea what happened to it unfortunately, but I used to pore over it. Liner notes are less of an issue with the internet, but the shrinking of art was a very unfortunate result of CDs.
I remember getting a copy of Jethro Tull’s “Thick as a Brick” that came with a whole-ass newspaper they made folded into the liner with lyrics and pictures. That’s something you can only do with vinyl.
Definitely. Similarly, Negativland’s album Escape From Noise came with both a bumper sticker and a booklet all about the history of Negativland.
I was thinking about investing in a vinyl player recently and was really sad to learn Vinyl is actually worse for audio quality. The standard thickness of the disk is a physical limitation for frequencies which means the sound gets “squished.”
Not only that, but all the “better sound” arguments are just about all the mistakes in the audio, like scratches and bumps.
Digital has no mistakes, it will always sound the way it is intended.
But of course some times “the way it is intended” is not the preferable way (see my other comment to OP).
There’s nothing stopping you still! I find the ritual of placing the disc and needle and turning it over halfway through is quite satisfying. It really makes me feel as though the music is more valuable and I’ll be more likely to actively listen rather than if I just put it on my phone with the tap of a button
STFU shill bot, I came here to shit on Vinyl not listen to you rant.
you seem to be a toxic moron
Sometimes you have to be very direct in order to shut down conversations with lemmings.
Yeah, vinyl is more about the haptic experience of putting that giant black disc onto the player and watching the needle slowly scrape away that 30-40 dollar item. It’s not about the sound quality. I think with listening to vinyl listening to music becomes more of an experience, because of all the manual steps involved. And with albums these days artists seem to put more effort into them then at the time the CD came around.
It is true that vinyl records have a smaller dynamic range than CDs and digital streaming, but it can also be a blessing in disguise on account of the loudness wars. A lot of modern digital music since the 90s have been brickwall mixed so they can be played on devices with inferior speakers or headphones and still sound loud and punchy, but that same music will sound awful and distorted on proper hifi systems.
Because vinyl records have a (slightly) smaller dynamic range they have to be mixed and mastered separately from CDs and streaming, and some times that means the vinyl edition has the only properly mixed sound. And even if the vinyl version gets a brickwalled mix, then it is still slightly better than the brickwalled CD or stream versions simply because the dynamic range capability is lower, so the brickwall is smaller so to speak.
Anyway, even compared to non-brickwalled CDs or streaming, vinyl still holds it own on proper hifi systems, there is nothing wrong with the sound experience under the right circumstances, and it is that combined with the physicality which is the draw for most vinyl collectors I think. It is inconvenient, expensive and often times inferior (especially if you find scratched up used copies), but that is exactly the attraction. It makes listening to the music an event.
Most vinyl record collectors still listens to other formats, because of course in the car or some other place you are forced to, so it is not an either/or situation either.
I expect artists to record the media as they intended it to be heard, idgaf if you think it sounds better after you cut the limbs off of it.
