Quote:
But on a purely factual basis - pops and ticks always exist.

This has not been true for me.

Several times I have sat in awe of beautiful music played back in a perfectly silent manner -- on vinyl. The only damned thing to snap me out of my bliss was the constant ranting of some audiophiles who insist that surface noise ruins the experience.

In those moments, while the record spun in total silence (even between tracks!), I wished those audiophile were with me to hear it. Then again, I was happy that they weren't.

Quote:
To be sure, I don't think many people actually care that much about pops/ticks. I, for all my bellyaching on the subject, certainly accept them gladly with the used classical vinyl I listen to. The "frigid listener" (heh) might be more of a rhetorical tool than an actual demographic.

Have any of us actually met people who a) have listened to vinyl as a format and b) didn't like it because of the noise?

Again, what's getting my goat is the equivocation between "there aren't any pops and ticks if you're doing it right" and "the pops and ticks are not important". And the subtle smear that if you do hear pops and ticks, that something is wrong with you, or the vinyl, or your system. Frankly, that just seems to suggest that such defense of vinyl comes from people who are either distorting the truth to protect the reputation of the format, or do not have adequately high-quality playback systems to detect them. It's a little demeaning.

Subtle smear? Look, to be clear, I got into this conversation because DUP suggested that if you don't "baby" vinyl, it will be full of "snap, crackly pop."

That is total bullshit. I can't be any clearer than that.

To answer your question: Yes, I have met people who listen to vinyl and say they don't like it because of the noise. These are the people that make me shake my head and wonder what it is they're hearing / listening to.

Quote:
I've ran into real situations where I've wanted to crank up the volume as high as it will go to listen to some background detail, and - surprise, surprise - it was completely drowned out on the virgin, brand-spanking-new vinyl by the record hiss, and the pops and ticks, while on the CD it was clearly audible.

That is surprising. Seriously.

Quote:
All vinyl has pops and ticks, no matter what the pressing quality or the playback system. If you try hard enough, you will find them on any record out there.

First of all, I disagree. Second, why would you want to try so hard to find flaws?

Quote:
I just wanted to make it clear that one doesn't have to have something wrong to hear pops and ticks all the time.

If one hears pops and clicks all the time something is definitely wrong.

I have had especially good luck with Sub Pop's releases of Iron & Wine material. These albums have been dead-quiet, even between tracks. And, like I mentioned earlier, used albums as old as my copy of Oscar Brown Jr's Between Heaven and Hell (1961), have been equally quiet. It's a beautiful thing.

My experience has been that only the least capable playback equipment exhibits appreciable groove noise, pops, etc. Oce a certain quality is reached there is little noise. This doesn't take lots of money as many turntable/arm/cartridge combos under $1,000 qualify.

Actual pops or particularly noticeable clicks are rare. I haven't experienced a skip in years. I can't even identify an LP that I have that skips.

I like both digital and analog, and find that both do a great job in reproducing music.

Ditto everything Stephen said. I have to say MOST of the records I play, and 99% of the new ones, have NO pops or ticks at all--really, at ALL! I have friends over all the time that look up and say Oh, this was a record?" when I get up to change it because it was dead silent all the way through (silent under the music and between, hahah). If I set the needle down gently enough I don't even hear anything until the music actually starts- just like our dear friend the Compact Disc.

So I wonder is there really is an issue with your setup? Maybe the weight is set wrong, or the cartridge has issues? No idea, but seriously, on a new record that's been moderately brushed you should hear nothing but the music.

Quote:
Ditto everything Stephen said. I have to say MOST of the records I play, and 99% of the new ones, have NO pops or ticks at all--really, at ALL! I have friends over all the time that look up and say Oh, this was a record?" when I get up to change it because it was dead silent all the way through (silent under the music and between, hahah). If I set the needle down gently enough I don't even hear anything until the music actually starts- just like our dear friend the Compact Disc.

So I wonder is there really is an issue with your setup? Maybe the weight is set wrong, or the cartridge has issues? No idea, but seriously, on a new record that's been moderately brushed you should hear nothing but the music.

I once was worried about if transient noise was a particular issue with my system, so I made a needledrop (with the same all-analog record I mentioned to Stephen) and uploaded it and let people listen to it. The general response (from people who generally have considerably better setups than me) was something to the effect of: "Dude, shut up. Are you trolling? That's some of the quiestest vinyl I've ever listened to. I can barely hear/can't hear any pops or ticks." That was with an RCM-cleaned and brushed record, too.

So ever since then I've been more than a little skeptical about the whole business of noise-free vinyl listening.

Quote:

Quote:
I just wanted to make it clear that one doesn't have to have something wrong to hear pops and ticks all the time.

If one hears pops and clicks all the time something is definitely wrong.

OK, you got me. I'll restate that: by "all the time" I meant "on every side of every record, not including leadin and leadout grooves." One doesn't have to have something wrong to hear pops and ticks on quiet passages. Transient noise in the loud passages of music is quite rare with new vinyl (or good used vinyl for that matter). When it does happen, it is often indicative of poorly handled vinyl and/or pressing defects. None of the new vinyl I've purchased, and the majority of used vinyl, have audible pops in those situations.

Quote:

Quote:
But on a purely factual basis - pops and ticks always exist.

This has not been true for me.

Several times I have sat in awe of beautiful music played back in a perfectly silent manner -- on vinyl. The only damned thing to snap me out of my bliss was the constant ranting of some audiophiles who insist that surface noise ruins the experience.

In those moments, while the record spun in total silence (even between tracks!), I wished those audiophile were with me to hear it. Then again, I was happy that they weren't.

Why don't you post some needledrops of those records to share with us? Fair use should cover them if under 20 seconds. That should be more than enough to convince people/me/etc of your position.

I could also repost a sample that I consider to have significant (if quiet) transient noise on it.

Quote:
Subtle smear? Look, to be clear, I got into this conversation because DUP suggested that if you don't "baby" vinyl, it will be full of "snap, crackly pop."

That is total bullshit. I can't be any clearer than that.

And I will wholeheartedly agree with you on that. I've heard those records that sound like rice crispies. They are heavily abused. They are in the far minority of records bought on the used market, at anything above a fire-sale price.

Quote:
To answer your question: Yes, I have met people who listen to vinyl and say they don't like it because of the noise. These are the people that make me shake my head and wonder what it is they're hearing / listening to.

Then I stand corrected. Although I do like the term "frigid listener" for people like that.

Quote:

Quote:
I've ran into real situations where I've wanted to crank up the volume as high as it will go to listen to some background detail, and - surprise, surprise - it was completely drowned out on the virgin, brand-spanking-new vinyl by the record hiss, and the pops and ticks, while on the CD it was clearly audible.

That is surprising. Seriously.

I'll give you some more info on this in case you want to look it up yourself - or prove me wrong, which is possible, although I would really appreciate a needledrop if you do.

The album is Shellac's Excellent Italian Greyhound. The LP version comes with a copy of the CD tucked away inside. Steve Albini being, well, Steve Albini, I am 100% certain that the album was produced entirely in analog. CD and LP mastering was done at Abbey Road with their DMM setup. All subjective and numeric indications I have available to me point to both the CD and the LP master being exactly the same thing.

Listen to Steve's monologue on Genuine Lullabelle on the CD. "Close the lights... pour the wine..." You'll need to listen to it very loudly (but not dangerously) and in a quiet listening environment, but you should be able to very clearly hear the tape print-through of Steve's voice.

Now do the same thing on the LP. The print-through, at least on my system, is just barely, barely audible. The surface noise of the vinyl drowns it out. The transient noise doesn't help either, but again, it's a great pressing, so while it's audible, it's not distracting from this rather interesting effect of the music, like the surface noise is.

Quote:

Quote:
All vinyl has pops and ticks, no matter what the pressing quality or the playback system. If you try hard enough, you will find them on any record out there.

First of all, I disagree. Second, why would you want to try so hard to find flaws?

Because people have told me that I shouldn't be hearing it, so that when I did hear it, I thought something was wrong, so I wanted to learn everything I could about it. That whole experience increased my sensitivity tremendously

Let me repeat: I enjoy my vinyl just fine. I can hear transient noise on all of it. It doesn't detract from the music. I am extremely confident that nothing is wrong with my system - or, alternatively, that anything wrong with it cannot be fixed.

Beyond that, we're obviously going to disagree indefinitely on the larger question of if all vinyl has noise like this, so I'll let it rest.

Quote:
I have had especially good luck with Sub Pop's releases of Iron & Wine material. These albums have been dead-quiet, even between tracks. And, like I mentioned earlier, used albums as old as my copy of Oscar Brown Jr's Between Heaven and Hell (1961), have been equally quiet. It's a beautiful thing.

Indeed. Alas I haven't purchased any Sub Pop on vinyl, although Warp pressings tend to be extremely solid (if matching the CD a bit too closely). I have several classical albums from the early stereo days in the early 60s, particularly Ansermet's stuff on London, that are surprisingly quiet.

Thoughtfully presented.

I, for one, would be interested in a sample of what you are referring to. I don't get a sense of constant noise - I probably just listen past it. Thus, a sample of what you are referring to would be helpful as a benchmark.

Quote:
It's difficult for me to understand why these "pops and ticks" are so troublesome for some listeners.

Perhaps vinyl folk like to pretend their media is more like a real concert experience and most of us do not hear pops, clicks and hiss at such events.

Quote:

Quote:
It's difficult for me to understand why these "pops and ticks" are so troublesome for some listeners.

Perhaps vinyl folk like to pretend their media is more like a real concert experience and most of us do not hear pops, clicks and hiss at such events.

True, but then you must be ignoring the farts, coughs, grunts, and candy wrapper openings!

DUP

Just for our education, would you list the digital music sources used by any famous composer, you know Beethoven, Mozart people like that ???

Im fairly certian that on planet earth music was created in the analog domain, hence why analog records sound better !!!

If your convinced that digital is better how about we chop a DUP into 24 bits and see if he can be reconstructed at a 96 khz sample rate ??

Alan

Quote:
DUP

Just for our education, would you list the digital music sources used by any famous composer, you know Beethoven, Mozart people like that ???

Im fairly certian that on planet earth music was created in the analog domain, hence why analog records sound better !!!

If your convinced that digital is better how about we chop a DUP into 24 bits and see if he can be reconstructed at a 96 khz sample rate ??

Alan

Pierre Boulez used DSP techniques and DAC/ADC technology extensively on R

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
It's difficult for me to understand why these "pops and ticks" are so troublesome for some listeners.

Perhaps vinyl folk like to pretend their media is more like a real concert experience and most of us do not hear pops, clicks and hiss at such events.

True, but then you must be ignoring the farts, coughs, grunts, and candy wrapper openings!

As I've stated before, I go to a live event for the event. I buy a studio recording for the music...I don't like pops, clicks, audience noise, bad acoustics and poorly recorded racket. I like music and the best of that, on CD's, comes from a recording studio, not a live cut.

I have been to maybe two live performances where the music overcame the noise...Joan Baez at the Beacon Theater in NYC, Lorenna McKenna at the state theater in Portland Maine. The other scores of performances I've been to live have been more memorable for the attending experience than the music. I make an exception for musical theater or Opera as they seem to attract folk who behave like they are at a musical event and not a bong party and the wasted roadie trying to set up a well engineered system in a venue noted for selling booze, not music, or a hocky show or football game.

Quote:
DUP

Just for our education, would you list the digital music sources used by any famous composer, you know Beethoven, Mozart people like that ???

Im fairly certian that on planet earth music was created in the analog domain, hence why analog records sound better !!!

If your convinced that digital is better how about we chop a DUP into 24 bits and see if he can be reconstructed at a 96 khz sample rate ??

Alan

We can put it a different way:

Noise does not equal hi-fi
LP's are inherently noisy
LPs are not hi-fi

Having said that, I also realize that some people enjoy the noise, just as some enjoy their Bose. To each his own.

LP's are not hifi ?

So therefore Alex you would state that hifi was invented in 1983 by Phillips ?

Hi Axon,

For me, your quote sums things up:

Quote:
It doesn't detract from the music.

The rest of this topic seems beside the point. Of course, we could debate whether or not 'transient noise' is persistent or occasional (it

Quote:
LP's are not hifi ?

So therefore Alex you would state that hifi was invented in 1983 by Phillips ?

Prior to that, hi-fi was done on reel to reel.

Quote:
Hot air balloons used to be modern air travel, shall we go back to that too? Maybe, less crowed seating...

Just yesterday I saw three hot air balloons (no joke). I'd imagine people still enjoy them for among other reasons - the view and the experience. It does offer a unique perspective which you can't get from 30,000 feet traveling 500mph.

Quote:
The rest of this topic seems beside the point. Of course, we could debate whether or not 'transient noise' is persistent or occasional (it

Quote:
If it were completely unobjectionable, I wouldn't be going through a full cleaning regimen with every used record I play.

Quote:
I agree that, for all the music I've listened to on vinyl, when it hasn't been treated poorly, it is not objectionable.

I was focusing on the sentiment expressed in your second quote that while LPs can exhibit noise, it does not detract from the music. Here I think we still agree. I also agree that some records can be noisier than others, especially poorly treated used vinyl. As you suggest, a thorough cleaning helps as does a careful selection process.

My main point is I think it

Quote:
Why don't you post some needledrops of those records to share with us? Fair use should cover them if under 20 seconds. That should be more than enough to convince people/me/etc of your position.

Sorry, Axon, I don't know how to post a needledrop, and I'm not interested in learning. (Sounds like something illegal!)

And I'm not trying to convince you or anyone else about anything. Because this issue is important to me and because I feel I am qualified to speak about it, I have simply wanted to present my point of view, hoping that interested readers will judge for themselves.

Quote:
The album is Shellac's Excellent Italian Greyhound. The LP version comes with a copy of the CD tucked away inside. Steve Albini being, well, Steve Albini, I am 100% certain that the album was produced entirely in analog. CD and LP mastering was done at Abbey Road with their DMM setup. All subjective and numeric indications I have available to me point to both the CD and the LP master being exactly the same thing.

Listen to Steve's monologue on Genuine Lullabelle on the CD. "Close the lights... pour the wine..." You'll need to listen to it very loudly (but not dangerously) and in a quiet listening environment, but you should be able to very clearly hear the tape print-through of Steve's voice.

The tape print-through? What about the music?

"I like the high-resolution DSD/SACD consumer format, although SACD is now defunct as I understand it. I also think that from a convenience point of view, for people who want to play music in a boombox or in the car, or at work or something, CDs are great. The iPod is the same. It doesn't sound great, but it's wonderful for providing background music for people while they do other things. But for critical listening, or for music that means a lot to me, these formats aren't good enough. A well-made vinyl record still sounds infinitely better than anything else."
---Steve Albini

Quote:
Now do the same thing on the LP. The print-through, at least on my system, is just barely, barely audible. The surface noise of the vinyl drowns it out.

I don't think I'd have this problem, but again, with respect, I'm not interested in testing it out.

Quote:
Indeed. Alas I haven't purchased any Sub Pop on vinyl, although Warp pressings tend to be extremely solid (if matching the CD a bit too closely).

I love Warp. I picked up a couple of their releases last night -- Nightmare on Wax's Thought So... and Flying Lotus' Los Angeles -- and both sound excellent. I think I like the Flying Lotus album more. Leila's Blood, Looms, and Blooms is a favorite of mine. Can't wait to get the Pivot album.

Here's a perfect example of what I call "Amanda McBroom Syndrome," listening to crap in such a way as to render music playback some sort of fetish rather than an act of listening to music:

"Listen to Steve's monologue on Genuine Lullabelle on the CD. "Close the lights... pour the wine..." You'll need to listen to it very loudly (but not dangerously) and in a quiet listening environment, but you should be able to very clearly hear the tape print-through of Steve's voice."

Listening to a monologue played back "very loudly?"

Wow, sounds like fun.

Truth be told, I wouldn't even do that if I had the master tape.

So, let me get this straight. "If you take a recording of a monologue and play it back very loudly, you can hear the defect in the recording better with the CD than with vinyl?"

Wouldn't you just as viably be able to make a claim that the LP actually did a better job of reproducing this "event" than the CD did?

This sounds more like audio gynecology than it does romance, if ya know what I mean.

I am thankful that you didn't include what we would be required to wear while doing this.

"Don't pop and tick at me. Don't you pop and tick at me!"

No, thanks, I'm trying to cut down.

Hey, aren't you the guy with the crazy equalizer fetish - all bass, all the time?

Same guy who AlexO had to get to take the equalizer out of the system so he could hear the speakers properly?

You can't hear the crap your equalizer was adding, yet you get a semi taking trash about vinyl noise?

What, the sound of rattling tea cups doesn't bother you, but vinyl does?

I've seen the pics of your room - shake, rattle, tinkle.

I still don't get all the phoney bass boost. After AlexO set you straight, did you put that crap back in?

Sometimes wire can make a difference. Here's one scenario:

"I also wondered if the difference was partly due to the relatively long run of 12-gauge speaker cable Carl was using with his Hafler DH-500 amps (bridged for mono, which doubles their output impedances) interacting with the low impedance of the Whispers in the mid- and upper treble."

from JAs Measurement section of the Legacy Whisper review

Quote:
Listening to a monologue played back "very loudly?" Wow, sounds like fun. Truth be told, I wouldn't even do that if I had the master tape.

So, let me get this straight. "If you take a recording of a monologue and play it back very loudly, you can hear the defect in the recording better with the CD than with vinyl?"

Wouldn't you just as viably be able to make a claim that the LP actually did a better job of reproducing this "event" than the CD did?

This sounds more like audio gynecology than it does romance, if ya know what I mean.

I am thankful that you didn't include what we would be required to wear while doing this.

With all due respect, neither you nor Stephen have any idea what my "normal" listening levels are. I first heard this with an ER-4S connected to an unamplified iPod - with -4db of ReplayGain applied to the music. Suffice it to say that's not a combination that's particularly known for its high SPL. And it wasn't even a critical listening session, either. I daresay that the only thing "gynecological" about all this is that my system may be more resolving than yours, by simple virtue of its low noise floor.

Moreover, why are you so convinced that what I heard is not "music"? Maybe it was a deliberate effect. I certainly thought it was some weird distortion effect before I realized what was going on. It sucked me in, I tell you!

It's fallacious to assume that just because something is that low in level automatically means it's not music. Or even further, that even if it's not a part of the music, it's not worth listening to. Or are you going to start arguing that studio talk isn't worth catching, either?

Wires have sound, some good, some bad. Records have noise, some offensive, some less but almost all real world systems produce noise. Simple fact.

Quote:

Quote:
Listening to a monologue played back "very loudly?" Wow, sounds like fun. Truth be told, I wouldn't even do that if I had the master tape.

So, let me get this straight. "If you take a recording of a monologue and play it back very loudly, you can hear the defect in the recording better with the CD than with vinyl?"

Wouldn't you just as viably be able to make a claim that the LP actually did a better job of reproducing this "event" than the CD did?

This sounds more like audio gynecology than it does romance, if ya know what I mean.

I am thankful that you didn't include what we would be required to wear while doing this.

With all due respect, neither you nor Stephen have any idea what my "normal" listening levels are. I first heard this with an ER-4S connected to an unamplified iPod - with -4db of ReplayGain applied to the music. Suffice it to say that's not a combination that's particularly known for its high SPL. And it wasn't even a critical listening session, either. I daresay that the only thing "gynecological" about all this is that my system may be more resolving than yours, by simple virtue of its low noise floor.

Moreover, why are you so convinced that what I heard is not "music"? Maybe it was a deliberate effect. I certainly thought it was some weird distortion effect before I realized what was going on. It sucked me in, I tell you!

It's fallacious to assume that just because something is that low in level automatically means it's not music. Or even further, that even if it's not a part of the music, it's not worth listening to. Or are you going to start arguing that studio talk isn't worth catching, either?

I would never try to talk trash about studio talk! I know how much it means to me, too!

I'm sure what you heard must be important to you to hear. No argument there.

I also wasn't commenting on your "normal listening levels," I was replying to your own statement about playing this monologue back "very loudly." It was you who mentioned the listening level. Then, I tried to imagine what that would be like.

"It's fallacious to assume that just because something is that low in level automatically means it's not music."

Dude, you told me it wasn't music. It's only not music when you say it isn't, which you did!

It's all kind of like looking at a beautiful woman, this Hi Fi stuff. If you look at her through a microscope, it doesn't mean you're seeing her better than when you were admiring her from across the bed!

No flaming was intended, sir!

Quote:
So if all you "critical" listeners can hear teh sound of a piece of wire, but somehow the snap crackle pop of the LP faults is not an issue, but teh sound of a piece of wire is? Hmmm, now i am told I should ignore the surface noise, ignore the pop or snap or two, and listen critically for the music? Sounds like it's a convoluted bunch of hypocrisy to me. Snap and pops are OK, surface noise is OK, but a wire interfers with teh music but not the plainly audible to even normal folk, but that's isn't wrong. And CD or SACD or DVD-A has no noises, and they somehow are not lifelike, but the highly distored LP, with it's surface noises, and sometimes pop and crack, are lifelike. I think the entire "auidophile" cliche is hitting it's wall of nonsense again. You can hear wall outlets, but you choose to ignore the very audible SNAP.

That's a really excellent point. I'm sure that if someone else had made it, someone other than DUP, it wouldn't have been dismissed so quickly.

How is it that when we look for systems we're looking for "blacker blacks", low noise floor, sound coming "out of nowhere", yet when it comes to vinyl playback, we are to ignore the various noises? What's the point of it all then? What's the point of worrying about amplifier and fan noises, etc as long as they're lower than vinyl's noise floor?

Let's decide what hi-fi really means. Are we willing to accept noisy, less than ideal media that may do certain things well and call it hi-fi or do we strive for the ultimate perfection in sound reproduction?

Vinyl may have its share of problems (ticks, pops, etc.) but I enjoy it far more than CD for its presence.

But to say that vinyl records are not going through a revival is, as many others have pointed out, clearly delusional.

The following anecdote should suffice:

Walking into my local HMV (large music retailer in Canada) the other day, a clerk was taking all the vinyl out of its usual space on the third floor and stacking it on a cart. Worried they were ceasing sales of vinyl, I asked the clerk what he was doing. His response?

"We're moving all the vinyl onto the first floor, into a bigger area."

If retail says there's a revival, there's a revival. Simple as that.

"Let's decide what hi-fi really means. Are we willing to accept noisy, less than ideal media that may do certain things well and call it hi-fi or do we strive for the ultimate perfection in sound reproduction? "

Yes- ultimate. Which for me is my vinyl which I can hear way farther "into" than my CDs, plus has more presence, ambiance and better tonality. The "noise" floor argument is just silly as is the all the pops and ticks which as I've said before is not an issue.

Just 'cause I had no heat in my 1974 Beetle doesn't mean a VW Beetle today wouldn't either. DUP will say anything to make him think he's right, but he rarely is...

Quote:
Let's decide what hi-fi really means.

Oh my. I mean - Yes! Let

Quote:

Not just regular old perfection, but Ultimate perfection! Hell yes! I

Quote:

Hey AlexO - Do we get a uniform and secret handshake? I call dibs on "Minister of Ultimate Audio Perfection and Secretary of War Against Anyone Who Doesn't Agree with Me"

I would very much prefer the "Minister of Secret Police and Tactics" rather than "Minister of War". War is so messy.

Getting back to audio, as I've stated earlier, there are those who enjoy vinyl and that's fine. If that's what you enjoy, more power to you. There are also those who enjoy Bose... To each his own.

Vinyl advocates used to say that they thought vinyl was better because the CD sampling rate wasn't high enough. -Ok... however, the advent of upsampling and high rez audio was supposed to solve that. Yet, vinyl advocates claimed that even SACDs did not sound as good as vinyl (for reasons never quite explained). So... Bose it is. Enjoy it, have fun with it and I hope it brings you years of pleasure.

However, I think it's rather disingenuous to call it "hi-fi"

Ah, yes.

Ultimate perfection of sound...

How about we call what we seek the Platonic Playback Paradigm?

Now, that which we seek...

Is it the illusion that we are transported back to the actual sonic event in its original performance space? (What if there never was an acutal performance that took place in any environment?)

Is it the sensation that the original sonic event is now taking place in our room?

Is it being able to hear each fuckin' tape splice on Dark Side of Moon in distracting detail?

Is it being able to enjoy tape print through when appreciating monologues?

Is it making you think every disc you play is actually being played back inside the House of Blues, Chicago?

I'm all in favor of the Paltonic Playback Paradigm. Just tell me what it is you seek and I'm all in favor of you finding it. For me, vinyl is closer than other media have yet achieved. That really seems to piss people off.

I wonder if vinyl haters are using their vitriol as some sort of daily affirmation to make digital seem better.

Technically, all playback sucks, eh?

To say that digital is uniformly better than vinyl is ignorant, just as it's similarly misguided to believe the converse. There are good records and bad ones, just as there are good and bad CDs.

To me, the surface noise argument is moot because a good pressing that's new - or recently wet-vacuumed - plays back without any ticks or pops at all (Disclaimer: on MY system).

And since when did absolute silence become the primary determinant of good sound? If I'm hearing more low-level background sounds, but often less music, I don't consider that a fair trade.

Here's an illustrative biographical note:

When I was growing up, both my parents practiced trombone in the house regularly, and I went to numerous concerts.

Before I was even considering a turntable, I bought Chicago II on vinyl for the hell of it. One day, I decided to go to the dealer and give it a spin. When it started playing, my reaction was "That's trombone" (not having heard live trombone in years). Digital has never hit that sweet spot for me.

From my perspective, it's irrelevant which medium is quieter, which has the greater dynamic range, and which is specification-this and number-that. I just want to hear music.

I think people spend too much time worrying about fidelity to the *recording* and can sometimes forget about fidelity to the instruments.

If some people prefer digital and find it more musically satisfying, that's great! Everyone has their own ears, brains, and gear.

But to put vinyl and Bose in the same sentence is just foolishness. I suspect some folks have to play their music loudly enough for it to reach the eardrums through the buttocks.

Quote:
I would very much prefer the "Minister of Secret Police and Tactics"

Sold.

I prefer listening to records and I'm ultimately after the enjoyment of listening to music on my hifi. You can call that whatever you like.

Quote:
Phoney bass boost, what are you talkin' bout' Willis, there is no stinkin bass boost. There is no boom there is no hump, only pristine clear lifelike SLAM, once you experience it, you understand...shall I reiterate, seems like some people liked it so much they bought them...and the amps to drive em.....there is actually a bass reduction in the upper regions....you know I'm right.

Yeah, and people like Bose so much they buy even more of them!

DUP, we saw your equalizer settings. Put that together with the high frequency hearing loss at your age and we're talking the Hi Fi equivalent of one of those boom cars you can hear coming two blocks away!

That was some hella bass boom you had dialed in there. Still using that, or did AlexO open up your ears?

Dup, That's not snap, crackle, pop you hear. It's the sound of you kissing your own ass!

Quote:
"That's trombone" (not having heard live trombone in years). Digital has never hit that sweet spot for me.

Hi Erik_B,

I find vinyl more musically engaging and the reason is very much related to what you're saying - it has the ability to capture and communicate the essence of the performance, the feel of instruments, the character of voice, the dramatic tension of timing.

When presented with the experience of listening to music on vinyl, non-musical sounds pale in comparison to the point of insignificance. The relevant point concerning my preference for LP playback has nothing to do with vinyls on paper differences from other media. It has everything to do with an emotionally engaging experience that is decidedly not an imperfect re-presentation of some other kind of event, but a musical event in and of itself. And this experience can be as powerful or lame as our musical imaginations allow.

The difficulty in terms of communicating this experience in this context is that the proof exists in the listening. What

Quote:

I find vinyl more musically engaging and the reason is very much related to what you're saying - it has the ability to capture and communicate the essence of the performance, the feel of instruments, the character of voice, the dramatic tension of timing.

When presented with the experience of listening to music on vinyl, non-musical sounds pale in comparison to the point of insignificance. The relevant point concerning my preference for LP playback has nothing to do with vinyls on paper differences from other media. It has everything to do with an emotionally engaging experience that is decidedly not an imperfect re-presentation of some other kind of event, but a musical event in and of itself. And this experience can be as powerful or lame as our musical imaginations allow.

"Old man, how is it that you hear the grasshopper?"

"Young man, how is it that you do not?" -Kung Fu

Quote:

The difficulty in terms of communicating this experience in this context is that the proof exists in the listening. What

Hey AlexO,

Quote:
I conclude that factors OTHER than pure musical enjoyment come into play when preferring LP playback. Factors such as tactile involvement, big cover art, mechanics, tinkering or just being different. All of these are legitimate reasons for enjoying LPs, but they have little to do with music.

I am very comfortable with the idea that you just don't want to get it.

But I do get it. You want to be different, you want to tinker under the guise of better music reproduction. I have no issue with it. It's all good.