What’s So Great About Vinyl, Anyway?

I am a reformed audiophile. A hybrid type of sound geek, with one foot in the strange world of excellent sound and the whackos who populate it, and the other among the great unwashed normal people who get along just fine with, you know, anything you can buy at Target and factory stereos in their cars.

That’s not saying much apropos to vinyl, yet, except that I do have an ear — and appreciation — for geeky “audio-synchrocies” between the formats. For the record, my ears cannot take any normal, mass-produced computer audio system; I rolled my own rig with a 250-watts-per-channel 1980s Adcom power amp hooked up to my Mac, which serves as a preamplifier through which I pump my MP3s out to Cambridge Soundworks Newton M80s. In the man-cave — our house’s half-finished basement has a stone foundation, which isn’t magic, acoustically, but it’s not bouncy like the usual rec room — I have a vintage ’80s EV club PA I bought from a DJ off Craigslist suitable for a 300-capacity. Plug my iPod right into a tiny mixer that an ex-wedding DJ gave me. Crown amp, 600 watts a side. Freakin’ loud for weightlifting time, I tell you.

I settled on this gear after years of experimenting, thousands of dollars down the tubes, and hundreds of hours squandered at hi-end audio shops sampling different systems and musics to figure out that most of the audiophile products are a lot of hot air to part you from your hard-earned income. No doubt this stuff sounds better, but incrementally so: To get what I would consider a couple hundred bucks’ worth of incremental improvement, you gotta spend thousands more. And nod in appreciation when the salesperson asks how great it sounds.

Sure, you can do better than Target. The trick is, investing the same amount of money in used high-end gear on Craigslist, eBay, and other outlets where the people who dropped full retail on gear dump their components after the Next Big Thing catches their fancy. Spend any more, and you might as well be shredding it. As they upgrade into a financial stratosphere that real adults with real children dare not spend on sound systems, hardcore audiophiles’ leave-behinds truly are good enough for the rest of us who are tired of Korean, Chinese, and Taiwanese audio gear that turns good music into something sounding akin to my 4-year-old beating on a steel garbage can with a couple sticks.

Still not saying anything about vinyl–except that normal music fans should rightfully beat on me for having egregiously overpowered systems, basically the audio equivalent of Ford Excursion SUVs. While some in the audio-clique think like me, more snobby audiophiles will poo-poo my hubris. Especially if they’re vinylphiles (an especially nerdy subcommittee of the audiophile geeks) and their dorkier cousins the speakerphiles. Because despite all that purty, clean wattage, I’m still using for speakers what they would consider crude implements of audio cavemen. They’ll say my source material, MP3s, is the weak sister of vinyl. Warm, beautiful vinyl. Vinyl, which cannot be enjoyed without a thousand-dollar needle suitable only for playing properly cared-for, pristine platters.

And that’s where me and the audiophile upper crust part ways: I can’t abide by vinyl’s charms. There are no charms. It’s all in your head, guys. Or if there is an incremental difference, it’s so incremental that it makes your thousand dollar (for the cheap ones) turntable with its thousand dollar (for the cheap ones) quality cartridge seem to me like a grossly ill-conceived investment that could have been spent on some great soul, jazz, blues or R&B MP3s long out of print but popping up here and there for sale at legitimate outlets on the Web. And yeah, I’m not going to drop four figures (or more) on speakers if I am using MP3s for source. My Neanderthal ears have a hard time telling ripped MP3s from source CDs in blind tests most of the time, anyway.

Don’t get me wrong: If you’ve got some out-of-print vinyl and can’t find digital equivalents, play those puppies and enjoy them. I have no beef with you. Hell, for a time there was this live Supertramp record I loved but could only find on 8-track. That doesn’t mean I was lording the media over all the cassette people, saying they sucked because their format was so much inferior to 8-track. Like the vinyl people do to everyone else.

(Pssst–on those old records, $80 and a twitchy bid finger will get you a USB turntable on eBay, and the lovely freeware program Audacity will help make even worn vinyl sound pretty clean when converted to MP3, if you’re patient and are willing to, uh, RTFM.)

Furthermore, everyone who saved a record or two because the cover graphics were so great–and perhaps went the extra mile to get a frame and hang them on your wall–that’s awesome. Because in 2008, that’s what lost beauty the vinyl format holds: Graphic design and commercial art at its best, at least in rock-n-roll terms. Except when it forced us to admire David Lee Roth’s chest hair.

Don’t try to tell me, like a former college roommate of mine did, that the new Mudcrutch is better on vinyl. It isn’t. If it is to you, I think you’re trying to justify your investment in some well-marketed hi-fi gear. Digital is better. Digital is closer to the original sound the performers made in the studio. And when it’s piped though something like those silly $20,000-a-pair B&W Nautilus speakers in a room tuned for proper acoustics, audiophile-grade digital recordings of acoustic jazz will make me weep, it sounds so good. Rolls-Royces ride better on the road, too. Doesn’t mean I’ll ever own either.

Vinyl is an unfaithful medium that degrades almost from the first play. There is no magic in the grooves. It’s a sentimental nostalgia trip, and for anyone who tells me otherwise, you can have my audiophile pressing of Journey’s Dream After Dream I was suckered into buying back when I was in middle school. I think the clerk didn’t even blink when I paid twice as much for this collection of B-sides and other crap pressed on extra-thick vinyl…for gosh sakes, I was just a naive little paperboy, and she knew the truth. It set me on a two-decade romp that ended up in a lot of bad buys–thankfully, eBay was there for me to launder the ill-conceived purchases I made and at least recoup some of those lost Benjamins.

I stand before you not to mourn vinyl, but to bury it. The only fly in the ointment is all that great music still marooned out there on vinyl, never released digitally. Hopefully, it will all get rescued before it’s too late. That’s where our pals at MP3-sharing blogs come in. Don’t download those files, ever. Just play them at the sites. Never, ever download. That would be illegal. I’m serious. Plus, the vinylphiles will poo-poo your subjecting your ears to those bastard MP3s. Tsk, tsk.

Tags: ,

  • I can't tell which part here is just humor and which part is serious. A USB turntable? Unless there's a product out there I haven't seen, those things are junk, judged by the rips I've been downloading from the internets. Vinyl rips from USB turntables will convince people that vinyl is complete hype, because they sound poor.

    I would much prefer high definition digital to vinyl. But those formats just haven't caught on. MP3? It's a non-serious listening medium. Sample quality. And as more people embrace this format, it ruins sound quality for people who appreciate it, as producers mix albums to sound good in the compromised format.

    Ah well, if you just want slam and bam and roar and sizzle, you're welcome to it. (Though frankly, MP3s don't even sizzle very well -- there is an inevitable softening and smearing of the high frequencies.) Vinyl has many problems, and I hardly buy it or play it anymore. But whenever I get out some of my old direct-to-disc or MFSL records and play them, or even the WAV files I've made from ripping them, my jaw just sort of drops, after months of listening to CDs and MP3s. There's no explanation for how a hard rock sliding down a plastic groove can sound that clean. But it does.

    The biggest problem with vinyl is that it was hardly ever done right. The pressings were often poor, unless you bought imports, and even then the cutting engineers would cut too close to the center grooves.

    But honestly, play the current CD release of Abbey Road, then play the Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab vinyl, and then tell me there are no virtues in vinyl.
  • Ted
    Eric: You're so right on the money about USB turntables. I bought one, and I can't EQ the songs correctly to even come close to warming the sound up -- and I'm using ProTools and Peak LE, and not Audacity.

    I'm sure there's an interface I can buy so I can use my Technics SL 1200, and I should probably look into it, 'cause every time I make a digital copy of a vinyl recording on the USB turntable, I'm wincing at the sound.
  • mojo
    Griffin iMic? Or does that mess up the quality?
  • Ted
    I just looked at that online, and it seems like it would work. The needle on my USB turntable is crap, so I think that's part of the problem, too.
  • There is no doubt that there is a difference in fidelity between the open sounds of vinyl, the cruddy hiss of cassette and the compressed sound of digital.
    None of that matters, though. The public has spoken. Convenience over quality.
    I would direct you to a Sound Opinions episode, two actually, one is all about the fidelity war but, more recently, DeRogatis and Kot had some record exec from Warners talk about the renewed dedication to Vinyl issue and reissue. Basically it came out of a listening/lecture from Neil Young but due to that corporate interest, vinyl sales are up something lik e77%. There are THAT many buying it but, for the time being, those that are are being served.
  • Darren
    This article makes me wanna go back and record my favorite vinyl cuts over an old Foghat eight-track tape so I can play it in my '79 Chevy Blazer's stock stereo system while that beautiful ol' rust bucket wobbles down the freeway, memorizing every KER-CHUNK as the track changes between songs.

    Sadly, I'm stuck listening to digital discs in a Rav4 that doesn't even know the meaning of the word "rust", and an iPod full of megabyte after megabyte of shit I can't believe I honestly thought I'd ever willingly listen to again.
  • "Digital is closer to the original sound the performers made in the studio."

    Um, how do you figure that, especially for music recorded to tape?
  • Ted
    I was trying to find the actual quote, but Paul McCartney was commenting on Let It Be...Naked saying that what the engineers did with ProTools came close to what they (the Beatles) were hearing when recording the music. I'm not talking about the playback, but what they were hearing in the headphones as they were laying down the tracks.

    Matt Johnson (i.e., The The) said in the mid '80s that CDs were like having really good copies of the master recordings. CDs were certainly had a cleaner sound, but to me CDs basically made mediocre speakers sound better. Setting your EQ so CDs and vinyl would have a similar sound was pretty tough when doing a DJ gig. I had some presets to punch in when going from one format to the other, but if I forgot to punch the preset when going to a CD, the crowd would cover their ears because it was so skewed toward the high end. Once the EQ was adjusted, however, people calmed down and stopped asking for my head on a platter.
  • Judging by the sound quality of McCartney's recent album, I wouldn't trust any statements he made about ProTools. I think John Vanderslice's article Pro Tools Mix Plus 24: Work of The Devil? (http://tinytelephone.com/html/tapeop.html) gives a balanced view from someone who works with tape and vinyl every day in his recording studio.

    Michael Fremer is more biased -- definitely biased in favor of analog and vinyl -- but I have to say I have some sympathy for what he said about ProTools in his review of the latest Kathleen Edwards album:

    "If this isn’t a ProTools recording I’ll eat a reel of Ampex 456 (that’s a cop-out because no one in their right mind would allow one to be destroyed). It has all of the dark, congealed, airless ProTools sonic fingerprints. ProTools sucks. It is an abomination. It is the musical equivalent of the burnt beans Starbucks passes off as gourmet coffee. It is the music business’s poison pill. It repels people who don’t even know they are being repelled. It is why people hardly listen to music anymore. They hear it but they don’t really listen. ProTools is literally unlistenable."
  • mojo
    The vinylphiles have spoken. Which of you want Dream After Dream, again? Heh

    Seriously, however, keep the comments coming. I don't have to be right, you don't have to be wrong. I like the debate.

    Two comments below, I think, shed light on my arguments:
    "The biggest problem with vinyl is that it was hardly ever done right. The pressings were often poor, unless you bought imports, and even then the cutting engineers would cut too close to the center grooves."

    So, I think we're pushing the debate away from vinyl v digital to audiophile vinyl v everything else? So most records could be ripped from USB turntables to MP3 without hearing much difference?

    and:
    "MP3? It's a non-serious listening medium. Sample quality."

    I would submit that too-low-sampled MP3s are worse than AM radio not quite tuned in. Bigger files = Better music.

    Mojo has spoken. Feel free to pound on me some more, that's what I'm here for.
  • Ted
    I agree about the sample rate. 192 is cutting it close in terms of good audio quality, but 256 or 320 is pretty much my standard for mp3s.

    Like I said, my USB turntable has a shitty needle, so the digital conversion is somewhat worse than vinyl copy. If I play the same record on my old skool turntable (i.e., the Technics sl 1200), it sounds great - which is why I want to get a digital interface that works with it.
  • For once, I totally agree w/ Mojo! Way to go...I can't stand all these "vinyl's making a comeback" articles...yeesh.
  • Tom
    Hear hear! I heartily agree, and I think I'd file myself right alongside you in terms of "audiophileness." Vinyl is not worth the effort and worry for me. I appreciate the masterings that made them so great, many of which wound up on early CDs, but I don't want to deal with the ritual.

    As for that Mudcrutch album, you'd better give the audiophile CD that comes with the vinyl a listen. It blows away the standard CD. Like I mentioned above - same mastering as the vinyl. It is lovely sounding.
  • I buy the new releases on vinyl and play them on an entry-level Project 1.2.
    I also have a Bellari phono preamp (w/ headphone jack) so that I can play
    the records thru any tape/cd/dvd/aux jack on my cheap Onkyo reciever.

    If you can't hear that a lot of new releases these days are mastered
    one way for the vinyl and a different way for the cd, then you truly
    do need more than pricey equipment. If they hadn't started squashing dynamic range out of existence on new release cds I might not have resorted to the change. But they did, and I had to dodge the problem
    or listen to nothing new.

    (owner of 5500 lps and 400 cds)
  • rockrdude
    Some CDs sound better than vinyl. Some vinyl sounds better than CD. A lot depends on the mix, the quality of the vinyl, the audio system the music is being played through, yada yada.

    I prefer both, but I admittedly have a fondness for vinyl. I admit the degradation of quality is a concern, but I'd still take vinyl over a poorly mastered CD anyday.

    And heck.. I'd actually enjoy owning "Dream After Dream" on vinyl again. I'd even play it and smile. :)

    (But.. I also might compare it with the Japanese remastered CD to see which sounds better.)
blog comments powered by Disqus