Alfred

I imagine I will have a similar experience, haha.

The biggest downside of buying your music on vinyl is definitely the cost. I picked up my turntable + preamp used for about $100 at a used electronics store, but I'm probably coming close to having spent $500 on records themselves (damn shipping, for the most part). I definitely need to cut back and put more money away for post-secondary. :P

__________________

RVCA

Well screw me sideways, I think I'm going to get the Blue Album on vinyl then. Where should I order it?

s_k

Well... my answer would be... Yes, obviously.
As I think most vinyl records sound way better than CD's.
CD, in my opinion, is a very limited medium. Especially with subtle music like jazz the difference is sometimes painful. CD's lack subtlety, in my opinion.
Also, a CD mix often isn't suitable to be put directly onto a record. So they'll have to take it easy on the limiting to get the record to sound right. So when you, like, I do, hate the loudness warr productions, a record is often the better option.

So for me, yes a vinyl release is definitely worth it. I rarely buy CD's since I don't think they're worth anything, both aesthetically and when it comes to sound quality.

__________________
Click here to see my collection

Chives

To be fair, even if a vinyl album is a digital remaster it can still sound "better" than the equivalent CD if it is at higher-than-CD digital quality. Don't know if that's what happens or not, but I'd hope so.

Personally, if it was released past 1990 I will usually just pick up the CD of whatever album I want. CD quality really isn't that bad, at least on my sound system, and CDs are so much more low maintenance than records that it's pretty crazy. Vinyl is cool, and modern day pressings sound pretty damn great but for me it is a novelty with new releases.

My vinyl collection is much, MUCH bigger than my CD collection. Just most of them aren't new.

__________________
[My last.fm] [My Tumblr]

Zer0

My vinyl collection is still pretty small at the moment but I have a few pre-1990 releases and they all sound amazing. I've always wondered what bit-rates studio-quality digital recordings are, but I can't really imagine them being much greater than CD bit rates. I guess there is a little bit of a difference between the sound of a modern record and a CD but not as much as there is with pre-90's records.

__________________

Alfred

I grabbed mine from this website, it's on sale right now for 18 bucks and you can save an additional 10% on all non-sale items by using the promotional code "blackfriday". I don't have any previous experience with them, but I've heard good things.

God, I sound like I'm advertising.

__________________

s_k

This! Exactly!
Without wanting to get overly technical, a CD consists of 44.100 'pieces' of sound every second. And altough that seems a lot, you can get the feeling that some tones miss bits. Vinyl hasn't got, as it's called, a 'bitrate'. It's one continuous flow of music. And altough I realize not everyone is equally sensitive for this, it can ruin someones listening experience.
Digital music can sound absolutely epic. Just the CD is a bit too limited.

I should add that when you play your vinyl on an affordable record player that hasn't been set up using a water level, oscilloscope and test record, you probably might as well buy the CD.
I can't deny that a CD is so much more practical. But if you do it right, a record can (and, in my opinion, will most of the time) win the battle.

It's 1200 LP's VS 350 CD's here.
I buy most of my CD's second hand as a 'backup' or for when I'm lazy (don't want to get up every 22 minutes ).

Playing records definitely takes a bit more attention to detail if you want to get it right. But my CD player is used rarely. It is now, as I'm playing Tool now. And it has to be said, these Tool vinyls aren't brilliant whereas the CD'sare

__________________
Click here to see my collection

s_k

Most modern day digital studio's record in 192khz 24 bit. Which is an awful lot more than CD, obviously.
But, as I mentioned before, often they have to make an entirely different mix for the vinyl, less compressed and limited because the vinyl cutter can't cope with those limited recordings. That's a reason why some vinyls sound way better even though they may be from a not-so-high-bit rate master.
Obviously an analog recording directly cut onto a record wins from a digital master, when it comes to the vinyl version of the recording .

I've got some recordings from the 50's here that still sound as good as today's recordings, probably even better with no compressors, gates and limiters.
And even the recordings that sound 'dated', aren't immediately bad. If you listen to Dave Brubecks "Take five". Still sounds perfect, even though you can hear it's an older recording. One of the best recordings I've ever heard is called "jazz at the pawnshop". It's from 1976 and it sounds so incredibly natural, so realistic. It's incredible

__________________
Click here to see my collection

RVCA

Thanks dude. I was looking at the merch site Baroness links to their official website, which is something like 22 bucks and theyre currently out of stock. So you just saved me time and money.

Alfred

No problem. These guys got this shipped out to me fast too, should arrive at the end of next week if all goes well.

__________________