why do people pretend that listening on vinyl is better than CD's? seriously the quality on a CD is much better than on vinyl. also it's just all around easier and more efficient to use. this coming from a guy with a pretty big collection of records.
the best way to listen to an album is on CD, no break between the songs, no need to switch sides, and most importantly, it just sounds better. much clearer and sharper.
Why would I buy a cd when I can download an exact copy of it's contents and then if I want, purchase a physical analogue copy of it
Go back
this ain't bait. tell me why people think vinyl is better?
yeah fair enough. but this thread isn't about listening to music online. it's about CD vs vinyl. and vinyl isn't as good.
> why is this faggot still all buttmad about something that other people do that doesn’t affect him in any way
Sure if we're doing a straight convenience and sound comparison, cd's will win out. That is unless you've got some fantastic equipment and quality analogue sourced pressings, but even then you get into "Oh can you even hear the difference" and you've still got flipping to do.
I'm not you retard. I'm asking why people think vinyl is better? and so far 4 people have replied to this and not a single one has told me. GOD-FUCKING-DAMMIT!
Alright cool yeah jets buddy. Vinyl has bigger artwork, more likely to come with extras (posters and what not), may be albums that only have vinyl releases. Personally I also find the actual act of having to be attentive to this disc spinning makes me focus on the music more than just popping in a cd.
Now I still prefer CD box sets and have gotten albums that only have CD releases but typically I'll snag a digital copy.
vinyl is a bigger meme but they are both useless memes in the face of digital
and vinyl is at least a more unique experience compared to digital with the "analogue" meme and the fun of the little ritual of using records and watching it spin around
Is it "better" than digital or cd? No but
cd just feels like and sound wise is just digital but less convenient
vinyl is kitschy fun
though the sound is almost always worse
>this coming from a guy with a pretty big collection of records
Its not about size. It's about how you use it. I bet all 30 of your Yea Forumscore records sound like shit on your $70 Crosley turntable.
>I'm asking why people think vinyl is better?
Technically, it's not. But if you consider yourself any level of music fan, LPs are worth collecting because there's a lot of music that on LP that never saw a proper CD/Digital release and a lot of albums where the best master is still the LP version. The description of the Phil Collins album fits most LP/CD comparisons of records released from the 60s-90s.
audioholics.com
well your bet is completely wrong. I have a £300 turntable my mother bought in the 70's (now left to me). I have 500+ records and none of them are Yea Forumscore you arrogant twat. worst thing you can say about my collection is it's nearly all 'boomer music'.
THANK YOU! that's all I wanted to hear. reason I made this post is cos my friend has started collecting vinyl and he's all like "ooooh it's got such a great sound. yeah you've heard Led Zeppelin on CD, now listen to it on record it's soooooo much better. I'll never go back to using CD's." imagine that except spoken in a gay voice.
Vinyl is just fun to collect. Nobody really buys it for the sound quality, nothing will beat digital.
I’ve just used YouTube to mp3 for liek five years now
>I have a £300 turntable my mother bought in the 70's
Have you replaced the cartridge and stylus? And with what? Unless those records are in poor condition, most them should sound better than the shitty digital remasters a lot albums from that era saw.
and the faggot just ignored your answers cause it wasnt what he wanted to hear.
what a butthurt retard
Vinyl is a more collectable medium. It's bigger so you can appreciate the cover and linear art, they often come with extra posters or whatever with them as well. One of the biggest selling points of CD is in the name itself, compact, it was supposed to be a revolutionary new portable format. It was at the time relatively more convenient to carry around a CD wallet in your bag or in your car than to have a giant cluster of casette tapes. But that aspect was made obsolete with mp3 players and ipods and smart phones.
>that's all I wanted to hear.
im glad you found your echo chamber. no go back to redddit
Imagine being so poor in the current year you are scrambling for any excuse to say CD is better than vinyl lol
>THANK YOU! that's all I wanted to hear.
What a fucking twat. I literally mentioned twice how it would be rare for vinyl to sound better but you just want some other lame-ass user to jerk you off about how vinyl is dumb.
Isn’t it funny how the only defence vinylfags have for their hobby is “lel you’re POOR”
You got me bro, I don’t like wasting money so I’m living off welfare
>Isn’t it funny how the only defense butthurt retards have is to ignore any post that doesn’t support his mad
It’s really not, go back to redddit
Not just vinylfags. Any hipster who wastes their money on evidently useless shit will do that. CRTfags, old car fags, shit collectors or whatever.
In reality I spend my money on drugs and bitches to do while playing my digital musics, and this will always be better than bs old tech.
Vinyls are worn after a few uses, the equipment alone needs a laughable amount of money not to be shit, and there's absolutely no benefit.
If you like how vinyls sound you can just listen to 24bit FLAC vinyl rips, though high quality MP3s are the exact same listening experience minus the placebo effect.
The CD format is objectively better, but some CD versions are sabotaged by loudness war mastering, leaving the vinyl version sounding better. This doesn't mean you should actually listen to the vinyl though, because a good digital rip will sound exactly the same without all the inconvenience. And note that many vinyl releases have identical mastering to the digital version. Don't be fooled by measurement artifacts:
wiki.hydrogenaud.io
>I’m mad and stupid
>fantastic equipment and quality analogue sourced pressings
Are you a dog? The only "advantage" of vinyl is that it can (poorly) reproduce ultrasonics inaudible to humans. The actually important factor of dynamic range is significantly worse even with "audiophile" quality equipment, being roughly equivalent to 12bit digital audio.
Vinyl's trendier and a lot of current releases come with download codes for official rips in usually whatever format/quality you want.
CD's degrade over time, your CD collection will rot away to nothing in 50 years but Vinyl records will still be the same.
>CD's degrade over time
CDs can be ripped bit-perfectly, and preserved like any other digital data. And even if you're too lazy to do that, they are highly robust when stored correctly (most "disk rot" problems are with Laserdiscs, dual-layer DVDs, and CDRs, not pressed CDs). Even obvious damage won't necessarily cause any data loss, because CDs have error correction that can reconstruct damaged bits from other redundant bits.
this
None of my collection has any detectable degradation. Vinyl on the other hand degrades every time you play it.
My boomer dad grew up with vinyls and 8tracks, even he claims that CD has the best quality. I agree, it's always down to the mastering.
Vinyl + digital idort Master race
CD plebs step aside
Cassette tapes.
Cheaper to mail and easier to stack. Looks better than both CD and records. You listened to digital through phones and computers anyways so tape is the ultimate media for collecting physical.
Music that was recorded during the times of vinyl sound awful when its compressed and clipped and put onto CDs. Modern music when its put on vinyl is gay because its recorded with modern technology and then put on an inferior medium. 60s and 70s music sounds way better on vinyl than CD because it was recorded with the intention of it going (obviously) onto vinyl. Some music sounds cool with a "lower quality". Nobody wants to hear The Doors or some shit like that all digital and crystal clear and perfect.
So the whole point of starting this thread was to find a way to harass your friend about his new hobby? Pathetic.
OP is gone likely, he got one post agreeing with him which is all he wanted.
>60s and 70s music sounds way better on vinyl than CD because it was recorded with the intention of it going (obviously) onto vinyl.
I grew up with tapes and they're also the most fucking brittle
digital music is superior but I'm still gunna buy 10-30 of my fav records and a table at some point so I have them as a nice display and a fun way to listen to music in a social setting, or just a change of pace
Rewinding's a pain in the ass and tape is way too fragile. I also like having the big album art and liner notes and stuff. I do like cassettes but I never really looked back when I got my first CD drive. Recording onto tape is fun though.
>Rewinding's a pain in the ass
oh god you bring back awful memories of me trying to find a speific track or wanting to just skip a track and being hours of fast forward stop play fast forward stop play rewind stop play rewind stop play fast forward stop play, etc.
with CD you just press a button and with record you can at least eyeball and get a sense of where to drop the needle.
Yes the world of music changed infinitely for the better with the arrival of digital. I hated tapes and the only thing they were still good for was taking in the car or on the go for skipless playback.
whats the tape counter for
That's what's your mp3s, streams, outube, iPhones and bandcamps are for.
The only reasonable argument is that vinyl artwork can't be beat. So if you are not using your record covers as well decoration then tapes are the preferred medium if you still want to hold it in your hand or stack as a collection. Cds audio quality ain't an argument becouse of the machine you are using right now.
This. Early CD walkmans would suck the life out of batteries in like a day and a half if you used their anti-skip capabilities. CDs came out in the early 90s but I was still listening to tapes on my walkman up until the end of the decade.
I did also like how listening to tape on a walkman with low batteries slowed everything down. That was funny.
yes. thats exactly what I said. congrats, you greentexted it. is there a point?
>tapes are the preferred medium if you still want to hold it in your hand or stack as a collection.
Nah, it's more satisfying to me to hold a big old record with two hands rather than palm-sized cassette. There's also something charming about how every old record covers have chipped corners and have that "old book" smell. Same reason why I collect old worthless comic books.
>whats the tape counter for
Household electronics at the time typically didn't have tape counters, especially not walkmans.
I am not angry with your opinion. I think that's a rather reasonable way of thinking. I got a few records myself. Even released a few recently but I myself still prefers tape.
Maybe not Walkman, but by the 80's pretty much every hi-fi deck had one
But I understand in your case anyway
Not the same guy and not trying to argue but where did you get that "roughly equivalent to 12 bit audio" piece of information from
6dB per bit, 70dB dynamic range for good vinyl, round it up a bit because it's "audiophile".
hello /ds/ friend