"Do Vinyl Records Actually Sound Better Than CDs? We Take A Closer Look" in Slashgear

I'm less familiar with jazz collecting, but I had the impression that jazz heads were quite hotted up over all the BlueNote reissues.

I will add one thing, which is specific to older recordings (especially from the 1950s and 1960s). Someone mentioned Gene Ammons' album "Boss Tenor" today. It was recorded in 1960. I listened to and "analyzed" (with software) some of the digital releases that are available today and that I could get my hands on: Original Jazz Classics, XRCD, Audiophile Productions, Prestige RVG remasters...

The way the tracks are mixed between the left and right channels is vastly different between all these versions, resulting in very different sound. On some of them, it even seems that one channel is the mono version, but the other channel is from the stereo version (it is easy to tell because there are only 5 instruments). WTF?

You could argue that some of these releases are simply messing around too much with the source material, and I can understand that some would prefer the "unadulterated" original LP (stereo or mono versions - which in this case I have not heard) or tape transfers with minimal human intervention!
 
Last edited:
The way the tracks are mixed between the left and right channels is vastly different between all these versions, resulting in very different sound. On some of them, it even seems that one channel is the mono version, but the other channel is from the stereo version (it is easy to tell because there are only 5 instruments). WTF?

Thanks for your comments on jazz reissues. I don't have many jazz LPs but I do love Ella and Ellington. All of those are reissues -- copies I likely would not have if it were not for reissues, so I am thankful they are available.
 
Simple question. Why would you take a recordings original format, run it through RIAA compensation, mastering required for the new media and put it on physical media that is prone to noise or physical damage?

We are no longer using tape so analog to analog doesn't exist however with the same conversion to Vinyl required.

Why not stay in the original format?

Rob :)
 
The original linked article seems to be a good example of coming to a conclusion and then finding arguments to support it. And how much shall I trust someone who writes that dirt and dust must be brushed or blown off the record? Has he never heard of washing vinyl records? The biggest single upgrade for me was cleaning my collection properly, even when I used a humble VPI 16.5. It's only got better since then with a Loricraft and a Degritter.
 
Here's another interesting example - in the realm of jazz. The Mack Avenue reissues of Errol Garner recordings. Most of them were issued on CD, and have very good sound, but they also issued a 3-LP set of his 1959 Symphony Hall concert, which was previously unreleased, along with an abridged 1 CD version. So if you want to hear the complete concert, the only possibility is to purchase the pricey LP set.


Did they do this because they feel vinyl offers superior sound to CD ? Highly unlikely, as the rest of their releases were on CD...
 
Boy there is so much fooeyness in that article, kinda hard where to begin. Sure some of it might be correct regarding how new music is recorded today, I agree that all new music (pop, rock, hip-hop/rap, country) is all digital. But that does not mean that the best media should be the CD, we all know the CD as well is a lossy format as compared to the original recording if its done as DSD or 24-32 bit. So quite possibly the best end format would be 24 bit hi-rez or DSD, to replicate the original recording.
Now throw in mastering/mixing and for the most part that changes everything. I would say that nothing we play (CD, LP, Digital) is what the band recorded originally, what we as consumers hear is different.

I am not sure that a majority of my CDs have a better soundstage than the same LP in comparison, for me my LPs win that battle easily. Now that win % probably drops if I compare DSD or Hi-Rez 24bit, but I still have LPs that win.

My perspective is I grew up with LPs and analog, the CD came along and my impression back in 1984 when I bought my first CD player (Sony CDP-302) was super clean and thin sounding. For me the CD never commanded my listening enjoyment, I did not know it back then as much as today but there was something missing with the CD as a playback media. It may not be explainable or quantifiable but I don't need that techno babble for my ears to tell me what I prefer or like. For a media to have a super high DR is rather un-natural, as humans we don't hear that way, meaning having a DR of super quiet to jet engine noise is not how we hear. So I prefer to have a more realistic DR, the LP probably can be higher than the stated 70dB, not sure how much more.

Since 1984, I have been waiting for digital to 100% take over how I listen to music....I just don't think that will happen. Some of the new all analog recordings like what Kevin Gray is doing in his new all analog tube studio is simply amazing, the all analog BlueNote reissues are also amazing. So the argument will continue to rage, but for me it seems to be only coming from the digital side of the audio world....not too sure what they are trying to prove :cool: .

Enjoy your music!!
 
Oh and by the way, I have heard most of the state of the art vinyl playback systems personally. If you ever make it to Shanghai, China, Oslo, Norway, London, Amsterdam, Munich, Vienna, New York, Zurich, Frankfurt, Singapore and the many other places that I have been to, you can listening to all of the most opulent vinyl playback systems and come away with the same impression.

you need to bring yourself back to singapore

i will show you what is "memory retention"

how it adversely affect all forms of digital playback,

and why, if this issue is not resolved, digital can never sound as good as originally envisioned.
 
you need to bring yourself back to singapore

i will show you what is "memory retention"

how it adversely affect all forms of digital playback,

and why, if this issue is not resolved, digital can never sound as good as originally envisioned.

Have you listened to and played with the original version of the PS Audio Memory Player? It caches the entire disc to RAM before playback. I have one of these original PS Audio Memory Player, which I use as a transport. Any type of “Memory Retention” should be easy to address by simply clearing all stored data each time playback commences. Keep in mind that the biggest “Memory Retention” effect takes place in our brain, and I’m not sure how you overcome that or why anyone would risk experimenting with clearing that memory bank.
 
Since 1984, I have been waiting for digital to 100% take over how I listen to music....I just don't think that will happen. Some of the new all analog recordings like what Kevin Gray is doing in his new all analog tube studio is simply amazing,

Maybe he will meet your expectation - per Gray's Coherent website - "Our famous, all discrete Class-A, transformerless, all analog disk mastering system is matched with the very best digital gear for CDs, SACDs and the latest High Resolution Digital formats; a fine blend of old and new."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Catcher10
This article is the least informed and most misleading article on this subject I've ever read.
As you have read so many articles on this topic, perhaps you could post a link to the best informed and accurate article?

I don't see any descriptions of the vinyl pressing and playback limitations that have not been said elsewhere including by Bernie Grundman in a talk he gave at The Audio Salon that is on YT. Mr. Grundman said digital has none of the limitations of vinyl yet expressed a preference for vinyl that he said he could not explain. I prefer digital playback for most of the music I listen to and it seems that is due to the fact that digital's advantages I find to be particularly noticeable on complex classical music. Mr. Grundman obviously is far more knowledgeable so I expect that I am wrong, but so be it.
 
Since 1984, I have been waiting for digital to 100% take over how I listen to music....I just don't think that will happen.

I believe it was Ralph Karsten who proffered the view that in the case of successful technology succession the new technology replaces the prior technology. For example, the vinyl LP replaced the shellac 78 in 1948 and that switch occured almost overnight.

The compact disc was introduced in ~1982. 42 years later there remains an active market for new LP vinyl records -- the LP has not been replaced. Streaming begins in the early 2000s (Pandora) but it wasn't until Youtube arrived ~2005 and in ~2008 Spotify launched with other streaming vendors arriving soon after. My understanding of streaming -- unlike the CD's intent --has it largely as a reponse to piracy (Napster, etc.) rather than as a superior listening experience. My sense of its appeal is largely one of convenience.
 
I have heard most of the state of the art vinyl playback systems personally. . . . Amsterdam . . . all of the most opulent vinyl playback systems and come away with the same impression.
Which system did you hear in Amsterdam?
 
As you have read so many articles on this topic, perhaps you could post a link to the best informed and accurate article?

That is a fair question, Chuck. When I wrote the post to which you are responding I did not have a particular contrasting article in mind.

This is the first article I have ever read on either side of the analog versus digital debate which had the arrogance to devolve into economic, medical and political advocacy.

My favorite article on this topic generally is The Quest For Perfect Sound: The Myth of the CD and the Miracle of the LP by Edward Rothstein of The New Republic (December 30, 1985) explaining the passion for high-end audio. In the article there is a quote that analog seeks to approximate perfection, but digital perfects an approximation.

Of course this article, from 1985, does not chronicle or acknowledge the enormous improvements in believability which digital playback has experienced in the last 39 years.

I don't see any descriptions of the vinyl pressing and playback limitations that have not been said elsewhere including by Bernie Grundman in a talk he gave at The Audio Salon that is on YT. Mr. Grundman said digital has none of the limitations of vinyl yet expressed a preference for vinyl that he said he could not explain. I prefer digital playback for most of the music I listen to and it seems that is due to the fact that digital's advantages I find to be particularly noticeable on complex classical music. Mr. Grundman obviously is far more knowledgeable so I expect that I am wrong, but so be it.
In my post I did not suggest that every single thing in the article is incorrect.

This is a subjective hobby, so if you prefer digital particularly on complex classical music no one -- not even Bernie -- can tell you you are wrong.
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: Rexp
Have you listened to and played with the original version of the PS Audio Memory Player? It caches the entire disc to RAM before playback. I have one of these original PS Audio Memory Player, which I use as a transport. Any type of “Memory Retention” should be easy to address by simply clearing all stored data each time playback commences. Keep in mind that the biggest “Memory Retention” effect takes place in our brain, and I’m not sure how you overcome that or why anyone would risk experimenting with clearing that memory bank.

i'm not referring to memory of the data stream.

i'm talking about playback memory, something that nobody has thought of addressing yet.

but, over the years, some people writing for UK magazines (What Hifi and Hifi Choice) have noted audible improvements when shutting down/refreshing the player prior to play a CD. some people in the USA (like Jim Smith of Get Better Sound) have noted audible differences when shutting down the DAC prior to playing the next CD (but Jim Smith was only getting half the problem diagnosed and resolved)

because JIM Smith hasn't realised it yet, but the memory retention problem happens mainly at the optical transport (the same thing also with software/media players and streamers).

the issue with DACs is that they often react adversely when, after it was already been sync'd to a data stream, it then got disrupted temporarily and then got presented with a second data stream. this always happen when the disc has stopped playing and then got started to play again without any power shutdown (refreshing). or, it can also happen when the digital input got switched to something else while the music was playing and then the original input was switched back again. listeners with a neutral, and well balanced system can often hear some changes in soundstaging when this happens. i think Jim Smith must have noticed this and thus have been recommending people to shut down and re-power up their dacs just prior to playing the disc again. but again, as i've said, this is only solving half the problem.

if the user have an integrated player (with an onboard DAC) both components within that one single chassis get to be refreshed at the same time and the playback memory cleared from the transport as well.

if the user have a transport and dac combo, after shutting down, the transport need to be powered up first, loaded with a disc so that it output a stream into the DAC that herald it's arrival and tells the DAC what format/bit resolution/sampling rate it is. then only after that should the DAC be powered up. this way the DAC will "see" the stream freshly for the first time. the whole system will sound better this way.

but the problem is - playback memory accumulate with every single track that has just been played.
we aren't ever going to be powering down after every single track.

there's also the issue of how to directly access to that desired track that is higher than the numerical one and playing it without leaving a memory imprint.

so there's got to be some ways to get around this problem.

or otherwise, digital playback will never reach the same quality level that vinyl playback can achieve.




sony's bluray and dvd players traditionally have a drop down menu of the track-list that users can use the cursor to select and play the desired track without leaving a playback memory imprint. the problem is users will need a TV screen to navigate the menu.

i see that the shanling new SACD player has a touch screen control on its front panel.

i'm going to try experiment with it to see if it can allow users to call up the track list and directly play the desired track without first leaving a playback memory imprint....


Oh, BTW, I did try the vaunted memory player years ago. Alfred Bay, the very person who introduced me to vinyl, was the same person trying to get me buying into digital playback from buffer rams. It was a no-go. Because we could hear visceral sonic differences each times we shut down the player prior to playing any tracks vs not doing so. An optical player was much easier when we had to do the memory erase/power refresh procedure.
 
Last edited:
Can't say that I have experienced the above mentioned playback issues with any CD player - presently a Neodio Origine S2, or with a separate CD transport and DAC, , presently a SimAudio 260DT and Modwright Elysee (2nd system) - whether replaying tracks, skipping tracks, swapping out disks. The sound doesn't change for the worse requiring turn on turn off to refresh.
 
. My understanding of streaming -- unlike the CD's intent --has it largely as a reponse to piracy (Napster, etc.) rather than as a superior listening experience. My sense of its appeal is largely one of convenience.
Regarding the dismissive “convenience” comment regarding streaming, I’m guessing you’ve never heard a well put together system using streaming. My lengthy first hand experience is far different. Take a look at Al M’s recent write ups of Steve Williams system as well as JimFord’s system.

I think it’s always a good idea to recognize you don’t know what you don’t know — or have experience with— before throwing out comments.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Argonaut
I believe it was Ralph Karsten who proffered the view that in the case of successful technology succession the new technology replaces the prior technology. For example, the vinyl LP replaced the shellac 78 in 1948 and that switch occured almost overnight.

The compact disc was introduced in ~1982. 42 years later there remains an active market for new LP vinyl records -- the LP has not been replaced. Streaming begins in the early 2000s (Pandora) but it wasn't until Youtube arrived ~2005 and in ~2008 Spotify launched with other streaming vendors arriving soon after. My understanding of streaming -- unlike the CD's intent --has it largely as a reponse to piracy (Napster, etc.) rather than as a superior listening experience. My sense of its appeal is largely one of convenience.
I'm not completely sure that the cases are comparable here: the LP is clearly (no offense intended to shellac addicts) better in sound quality than the 78. The CD very nearly won out over the LP, largely because of convenience, and the absence of surface noise. It took decades for the LP to start recovering from the blow, and even now it is a minority of listeners who prefer the LP, perhaps because to have it sound better than the noise-free digital it takes a certain level of equipment and the willingness to clean records properly. Even then, the difference is more subtle than that between a 78 and an LP. The fact that LPs outsell CDs now isn't really a victory for the LP: it is that streaming has eaten the CD's market.
All this was pre-internet, and I see streaming as starting mainly because the technology to permit it became commonplace, and people had become accustomed to paying a subscription to access things they would, at one time, have owned. I have never streamed and don't intend to, so I have no comment to make on sound quality. For the average subscriber, I'd say you are right, convenience is the most important thing. That's not to say it's true for everyone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tima
Maybe he will meet your expectation - per Gray's Coherent website - "Our famous, all discrete Class-A, transformerless, all analog disk mastering system is matched with the very best digital gear for CDs, SACDs and the latest High Resolution Digital formats; a fine blend of old and new."
My big issue with digital and especially SACDs and hi-rez files (24bit, DSD) is for me to fully jump in I'd have to rebuy my catalog, I have no interest in doing that. As well invest in a digital setup, again not interested in spending the cash to do that as well invest all that time to figure out what I want. I don't have a SACD player, I do have a smattering of 24bit and DSD64-256 files and they sound pretty nice, but again the price for a DSD album is not cheap.
I've been to audio shows and some brick and morter stores and heard really nice digital setups, so I have a decent sense of what I may be missing, SQ wise, but FOR ME, digital just does not engage me like my records do. Like I said, not even in 1984 it failed me.
But I would love to hear one of KG SACDs....
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dentdog
I believe it was Ralph Karsten who proffered the view that in the case of successful technology succession the new technology replaces the prior technology. For example, the vinyl LP replaced the shellac 78 in 1948 and that switch occured almost overnight.

The compact disc was introduced in ~1982. 42 years later there remains an active market for new LP vinyl records -- the LP has not been replaced. Streaming begins in the early 2000s (Pandora) but it wasn't until Youtube arrived ~2005 and in ~2008 Spotify launched with other streaming vendors arriving soon after. My understanding of streaming -- unlike the CD's intent --has it largely as a reponse to piracy (Napster, etc.) rather than as a superior listening experience. My sense of its appeal is largely one of convenience.

Regarding the dismissive “convenience” comment regarding streaming, I’m guessing you’ve never heard a well put together system using streaming. My lengthy first hand experience is far different. Take a look at Al M’s recent write ups of Steve Williams system as well as JimFord’s system.

I think it’s always a good idea to recognize you don’t know what you don’t know — or have experience with— before throwing out comments.

Like an old west gunslinger, do you file down your umbrage trigger?
You got set off by my saying that the appeal of streaming is convenience?

Why am I thinking of Tchaikovsky's 6th.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zerostargeneral
I'm not completely sure that the cases are comparable here: the LP is clearly (no offense intended to shellac addicts) better in sound quality than the 78. ...

If what you are saying is the view that the CD is not clearly better than LP makes the example less analogous because the LP is clearly better than shellac, okay I have no problem with that.

I was thinking more in terms of the signs or indicators of technology changeover rather than the reasons why.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dogberry

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu