I've never really been sceptical about this comparison before, but physics does get the better of you sometimes... I have yet to see many flaws in digital technology when it comes to listening to music. All I have to do is pop up itunes, double click on a tune and we're booming and relaxing in seconds, vinyl technology on the other hand is less casual compared to CD or MP3 listening. You have to wipe of excess dust and check all the parts are set and working, its all a bit of effort to store vinyls too..
But what I was astounded by, is that CD copies of certain classics, are washed out digitally and just do not have the same deep tones that vinyl delivered. Digital is clean and simple, vinyl on the other hand uses old technology, is seen nowadays as a dead forgotten memory by most... without realising that when you put the effort into listening to vinyls, you get a HELL of a lot more in the music than digital versions, the rock genre has severely deteriorated due to vinyl technology being faded out in my opinion.
Heres a short example, which doesn't do much unless you have proper headphones or speakers,.. but even the example only gives a fraction of the experience you get with a vinyl
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7miz3PH8Qs[/media]
heres another example, which still doesn't show off vinyl as good as actually listening to it being played
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2EceQL8wDE[/media]
I have nothing against Digital technology, obviously thats ridiculous, but I just feel that Digital wasn't meant for music as it was for video and movies
BTW: The examples are clearly a LOT inferior due to youtube raping the audio as you know :]
Still you get an ok-ish idea of what I described
Short and simple - mp3's kill music quality.
I never "hear" this stuff - LAME versus quality mp3s, whatever.
I always wonder if I have shit ears or something.
Records aren't practical, CD's are.
CD's are fucking garbage and I wish they would switch to something else already. MP3s are no better.
The bass seems heavier on those vinyls.
[QUOTE=PariahKing;20977354]I never "hear" this stuff - LAME versus quality mp3s, whatever.
I always wonder if I have shit ears or something.[/QUOTE]
keep in mind that youtube videos are still digital........ so the examples will still be different to those of vinyl
Vinyls make speakers respond to those REALLY low frequencies in music, which is basically the bass that gives that thrill
MP3s just don't have the bass.....
People still buy CDs?
A DJ once told me vinyl will _Always_ be superior to CD quality or any kind of digital format... I guess he's right
Over compressed Mp3s sound like shit, but FLACs are the real deal.
Most of my music is 320 kb/s or FLAC.
Don't use youtube as a method of comparing sound quality you fool.
Also, Vinyl will always sound 'better' as it's an analogue recording. People don't bother with them because the increase in audio quality is negligible in comparison to the amount of additional effort and expense that entail owning a record collection.
Store music in FLAC if you're paranoid, but 99% of the time you'll be fine with an MP3 that is a fraction of the size.
[QUOTE=sloppy_joes;20977442]Over compressed Mp3s sound like shit, but FLACs are the real deal.
Most of my music is 320 kb/s or FLAC.[/QUOTE]
Aren't FLAC files fucking huge though?
[QUOTE=smurfy;20977473]Aren't FLAC files fucking huge though?[/QUOTE]
An MP3 album would be like 100MB and a FLAC album would be like 400MB
That youtube test is flawed, youtube will always rape the audio quality, but the vinyl does sound better on the test.
I have an Asus Xonar STX Essence and grado SR125i headphones, and the difference between good flacs and a 320kbps mp3 is huge.
[QUOTE=sloppy_joes;20977442]but FLACs are the real deal.
[/QUOTE]
Lossless format just "tries" to make digital sound a bit better, to be completely honest... it doesn't make a difference
and I've seen lossless format (FLAC) albums which was 40 minutes long... which was around 700Megabytes
[QUOTE=Akayz;20977404]keep in mind that youtube videos are still digital........ so the examples will still be different to those of vinyl
Vinyls make speakers respond to those REALLY low frequencies in music, which is basically the bass that gives that thrill
MP3s just don't have the bass.....[/QUOTE]
DJs prize vinyl because you can reach the 5-10Hz frequency zone, which covers most of the natural frequencies for body cavities. While this frequency is inaudible to the human ear, it does have a subconscious effect that makes people get up and dance (apparently).
[editline]07:54PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=Akayz;20977497]Lossless format just "tries" to make digital sound a bit better, to be completely honest... it doesn't make a difference[/QUOTE]
The $200 bags of quartz tied to your cables are showing.
I prefer Mp3 its more portable :D
but vinyl sounds better.
You can buy a TB hard drive for like 80 bucks.
If FLACs are too big, just go out and buy one of those.
[editline]04:01PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=Akayz;20977497]Lossless format just "tries" to make digital sound a bit better, to be completely honest... it doesn't make a difference
and I've seen lossless format (FLAC) albums which was 40 minutes long... which was around 700Megabytes[/QUOTE]
That's because there's minimal compression on FLACs.
[QUOTE=sloppy_joes;20977636]
If FLACs are too big, just go out and buy one of those.
[/QUOTE]
more hard drive memory than sense
when it comes to digital..... I would stick with Itunes... there is nothing wrong with the quality of itunes music, nothing amazing about lossless
[QUOTE=Akayz;20977697]more hard drive memory than sense
when it comes to digital..... I would stick with Itunes... there is nothing wrong with the quality of itunes music, nothing amazing about lossless[/QUOTE]
Except 8 years ago 40 GB was a huge amount of hard drive, and now you can barely install world of warcraft and windows 7 on a 40 GB partition.
Face it, in the future you will need larger hard drives, if you are running out, it is only logical to buy more.
flac is dumb
[B][INDENT][LIST]
[*]it sucks + takes up too much space
[/LIST][/INDENT][/B]
[QUOTE=Soviet Beef;20977759]flac is dumb
<b>[INDENT][INDENT][INDENT]
[LIST]
[*]it sucks + takes up too much space
[/LIST]
[/INDENT][/INDENT][/INDENT]</b>[/QUOTE]
Good reasoning.
Impeccable logic.
I'll take my FLAC quality music over MP3's anyday.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;20977825]I'll take my FLAC quality music over MP3's anyday.[/QUOTE]
a higher bitrate isnt going to make the trash that you listen to any better on the ears.
[QUOTE=sloppy_joes;20977744]Except 8 years ago 40 GB was a huge amount of hard drive, and now you can barely install world of warcraft[/QUOTE]
gaming storage......movies storage..... and mp3 collection storage..... are the only reasons to needing more memory.......
so far you have not commented on vinyl technology, you seem obsessed with Lossless format XD
1400kbps doesn't fill in the gaps for 320kbps Mp3s it just makes you think they do
[QUOTE=Soviet Beef;20977854]a higher bitrate isnt going to make the trash that you listen to any better on the ears.[/QUOTE]
lol
vinyl sounds better..?
[QUOTE=BimBamBape;20977377]Records aren't practical, CD's are.[/QUOTE]
Practicality is a REALLY small price to pay for the sheer experience of vinyl
MP3s are a lot more practical than CDs anyway....
[QUOTE=Soviet Beef;20977854]a higher bitrate isnt going to make the trash that you listen to any better on the ears.[/QUOTE]
owned
Vinyl sounds a lot better in my opinion than any mp3 or cd, It is because the music is in it's raw analog form and completely uncompressed.
About Bitrate, I recorded Van Halen 1984 from Vinyl to my PC, the bitrate came out at 6144 kbps (It was a WAV btw...) Sounds epic :byodood:
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
