Okay, also there is the fun of owning and collecting something physical, the DJing is more challanging and fun, music selection becomes more curated, lots of music that I like is vinyl exclusive (giegling for example), and finally - just putting on a record at night while with my girlfriend gives soo much vibes.

What about you?

Too lazy to download?   Heck you're too lazy to post in your own threads.   How about a response or two, otherwise no one knows if you give a damn and then what's the point.

Anyway, I like CDs for the availability of obscure and out-of-print titles as compared to other physical media.   Convenient carry, storage, fidelity, notes, and extra tracks are also a plus.

I F*ing love all the damn pops, clicks, hiss and skipping of records. The crazy low fidelity makes me smile from ear to ear. There is no resolution, dynamics or emotion from records and I simply adore that when I listen to my fav music.

 

I used to collect vinyl avidly. But like so many people changed over gradually to CD's when my record player stopped working back in the 90's.The great pull to collecting CD's was the re-issue of obscure and rare albums at the time and the extra bonus tracks we got. Space and storage was also less of an issue. I do miss collecting vinyl but really have invested too much money and time into CD's to turn back . I could never replace all those albums I have now and splitting the collection between CD's and vinyl does not seem right to me as I would have to store the media in separate places. It's one or the other not both.

 

Went into a well known media chain the other week and the amount of new vinyl for sale was quite shocking. I have not seen so much since the 80's on the shelf of any music shop. tempting it was but also very expensive compared to CD's which in many cases seem to have come down drastically in price.

 

 

CDs develop faults... my gold CD of Tubular Bells has developed a little hole where should not be one. I am naturally delighted.

It's odd... people say records sound better when what they mean is they like to put a needle int a groove and hear what they are used to hearing; a lot of personal associative reassurance which translates into "records sound better" as these guys cannot confess to emotional atrophy. ;)

A great remaster, and mastering now is done very well means the torture of LPs is either a novelty to hipster culture or clinging to the past for the non hipster culture.

Hi res sounds great even on my mediocre stereo. Records built on tapes of several generations down from the master have created hearing that struggles to get to 4 kHz. CDs are all generated from the same first gen and are only limited by their playback.

But with a bad side there is also a worse side.

I do like some album art but this led into a blind spot as I bought loads of CDs that sound atrocious compared to new masters - I hadn't fully taken on board the greed and nefarious intent of the industry to merely dump audio to disc, put it in the convincing Brain Salad gatefold art - and now it sounds awful as the thing was mastered for LP (8 bit equivalent to CDs 16...) the multiple versions with  varying extra material did not help matters.

But a well researched release, recent master (the past 18 years) beats all that came before - rubbish CDs and rubbish LPs.

So nothing sells much. They forgot that maxim, give the people what they want - especially the crowd who know what they are buying - again.

Note well how the classical world use hi res and high quality digital mastering. Rock is still in the stone age audio wise... (must be a pun in there somewhere...). High res should be the standard - not a luxury.

Vinyl buffs are certainly NOT lazy persons, IMHO

You have to like useless efforts (both financially, physically and time-wise) prefer vinyls:

1- because vinyls are those most expensive way to go around music (both the albums and the hi-fi equipment) and can only listen to them in the living room

2- Getting up every 15 to 20 minutes to change sides and put everything back in place (can't leave discs lying around like for CDs) is anything but lazy... not to mention the record bin chases

3- downloads require not only zero physical efforts, but it's the quickest way to get the music you're after

After those considerations, vinyl buffs are also probably the most anal music collectors because of what written above and their adoration of those black slices of evironmetal-unfriendly petrol gunk.

I laughed 

Same for me....I like the artwork and finding old original obscure vinyl(I grew up with vinyl and 45's since I'm an old fart...)...it's fun to hunt...but I play cd's most of the time plus I drive to work and back 5 days a week

... and you can't play vinyl in the car.

I grew up on records and the gear back in the 70s to listen to records was terrible compared to the electronics of today. Speakers, amplification, power supply, turntables/tonearms, cartridges and phono preamps are all leaps and bounds better today. The people in the nostalgia world are the ones still using 70's gear to play records or even their precious CDs....How much would it cost to keep your 1975 car running today??

All my 60/70/80s records sound beyond better than they did back then, those records did not change but the gear I have did. Has nothing to do with nostalgia for me, it has everything to do with hearing music in the best way possible....period. 

In my house records sound leaps and bounds better than CDs, I have gobs of examples that show me this.....SACD and 24bit, even a couple DSD files I have, are all on par with my analog rig.

I chose vinyl because it connects me emotionally with what the artist has recorded, digital still fails in that department. As I have said a 1000 times, digital should be better........

I think it's all good. There are clearly cases where vinyl sounds better and others where CDs are the superior product.

Personally i tend to prefer CDs for many reasons. Firstly, they take up less space and as my collection races towards the 15,000 album mark (still not sure, too scared to count but was over 10,000 a fe years back) i'm running out of space!

Secondly CDs of classic vinyl era albums in remastered form are often far superior in not only that they improved all the production flaws of the original era but they offer bonus material, extensive back stories and liner notes and other benefits such as easy ripping onto my hard drive.

Vinyl is of course FAR superior when it comes to artistic presentation and overall integration of the visual arts into the musical experience. Therefore i have many vinyl editions of albums that are absolutely essential to have the exquisite art work of the packaging. Of coure this includes many prog gems ranging from Yes and Tull to more mainstream bands such as Zeppelin. Likewise i have many vinyl albums that are so obscure that they still haven't found a re-release on other formats.

So, basically both vinyl and CD formats are top dogs in my world for various reasons. Now 8-tracks, cassettes and reel-to-reel haven't quite found their way into the hearts of music lovers. They may have been necesssary at one time but now seem woefully outdated despite some black metal bands clinging onto the lo-fi quirks of cassette technology.

Downloads are ok for bands that have no other means of releasing their product but pesonally i always prefer a physical product to a virtual one. It is handy that one can go to YouTube or BandCamp and other related internet sites to listen to music for free. Of all the music i've heard and reviewed, i probably actually own half of it. I would love to own more but unfortunately no one has left me that small fortune that i desparately need to make my collection complete! LOL

What happens is all the digital diehard lovers always krapp on a thread someone started about vinyl.....Start your own digital only thread, I promise you very few if any analog folks will care enough to participate in one of those.

Remember that the CD is a truncated (to save space) version of the original recording which today are all mastered in 24bit audio, something the CD cannot handle, this is plain fact. Any information below 20Hz and above about 21KHz is cut off on the CD, again plain fact.

Records can handle frequency well above 30KHz and below 20Hz, you may never "hear" these sounds but for sure your body and mind can sense they exist which only adds to the whole music listening experience. 

New record lacquers are cut using the hi-rez 24bit master file, the CD is pressed from 16bit redbook files, so already a lower quality sound master.

Just understand all this before making grandiose claims, then chose your media and enjoy the music!

 

Not that engrained - Can't Get Enough is not on Straight Shooter.

When I release an album on vinyl, I'm going to put a bunch of random nonsense in the ultrasonic range, randomly apply lowpass filters to give it the same bandwidth as a CD, etc. I'd love to see if anybody could actually tell the difference.

I can understand keeping infrasound frequencies - especially at higher levels you can clearly feel those vibrations.

There's obviously no physical restrictions from CDs having higher sample rates to allow for higher frequencies (aside from compatibility issues), but I feel like there must be some reason why very few people are pushing to bump that up, maybe have 96KHz DVD audio be the new standard and ditch CDs - because if high frequencies were the problem, that would be the death of vinyl, right?

It's great that you have an emotional connection with listening to vinyl... but I don't think you need to bring in science to justify that.

Instead of saying "CD" I should say "redbook". The CD itself is fine but 16bit redbook is the issue, and yea why they did this and have not changed it is beyond me. Clearly it is a compatibility issue with all CD players, it would not be feasible money wise. A CD player cannot decode hi-rez discs like DVD-A or SACD, so then all the redbook CDs in the world would really go away, more useless than they are now.

Hi Rez digital files and SACD are just as expensive as a new record issue, sometimes more expensive. Plus the gear needed to achieve the high end results to make it worth while is very expensive.....A very high end DAC can run you $2500 to $5000. If I were just starting out in audio yea that would be my choice probably, especially if I was young and knew no better.

It's all a choice... 

Both good tunes anyway.

 

I know what you mean though, I still listen to songs that used to skip on my vinyl versions and find myself expecting it to skip again on the CD.