Any reason at all to buy 80s vinyl?

[Roman Empire]

Thanks all, these are alot of interesting points.
Especially the parts about vinyl artifacts with certain sounds and the quality reducing towards the records centre.

I wouldn't buy much vinyl from the 80s except for if it's rare and I get a good deal with it. I do have way too much 80s vinyl already Also, my turntable is just an AKAI USB one which cannot convert at a higher rate than 16/48, so if there'd be any higher resolution on vinyls that I have, I wouldn't benefit from it.

So the question is not about what I'm buying and how I play it, but purely out of technical curiousity and to find out which of the two formats that reproduce the music in the most authentic way. So obviously, you'd need to consider an analysis done on the finest equipment available.

If we're talking about pre-80s, I'm wondering how the comparison results would be if the vinyl was played back on a device like the ones described here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_turntable

Would the noise floor then still be -60 db - is it simply born with that?

There's btw a cool laser pickup grammophone used in a scene in the Spanish sci-fi "Eva" which takes place around 2050. They're using it at a party where it's playing Space Oddity by Mr Bowie. Would be great if that's what to expect of the future.. not least the part about that party ppl listen to retro-notverypartyish music

[GaryG]

- often early cds were not that good, so the vynil version was likely to sound better

A good point, this one.

My understanding is that mastering for CD was not something a lot of record companies considered so just used one master for both vinyl and CD. Unfortunately what sounds good when transferred to vinyl can sound brittle on CD (specific example I cite is Husker Dus 'Warehouse: Songs and Stories', bright and bristling on vinyl, horribly brash on CD).

[Roman Empire]

- often early cds were not that good, so the vynil version was likely to sound better

A good point, this one.

My understanding is that mastering for CD was not something a lot of record companies considered so just used one master for both vinyl and CD. Unfortunately what sounds good when transferred to vinyl can sound brittle on CD (specific example I cite is Husker Dus 'Warehouse: Songs and Stories', bright and bristling on vinyl, horribly brash on CD).

That indeed is some true expert knowledge you have there Sir!

Best Regards

Roman Empire

[kbaccki]

For that matter, you could make the same argument about cassette... high quality transfers onto high quality media = high quality. Assuming the tape hadn't been played a billion times on a cheap deck. Whichever way you go you'll want good quality playback components... don't know either way, but I'd think a decent quality turntable would be much more expensive than a comparable quality tape deck...

[Wormhelmet]

If you are looking for fidelity as the reasoning for buying vinyl, then no. If you want to spin records on the turntable or make melty vinyl art, then yes, purchase some. Or if you like that needle on the record sound.

A lot of debunked hype concerning dynamics of vinyl recordings vs digital media. That's another argument that just draws out pages of he said/she said info as you see it already happening here.

[Acid Mitch]

That's another argument that just draws out pages of he said/she said info as you see it already happening here.

There's a lot of testable info. No need to rely on hearsay.

@ Roman Empire - It really doesn't matter what format you buy.
Digital technologies can reproduce recordings more accurately than vinyl. That says nothing about which will sound best for a given piece of music.

By the time something has been pressed to cd or vinyl it will have been mastered , meaning your no longer dealing with an accurate recording but something that has been made to sound good within a certain format.

The very fact you have to squeeze things to make them fit on a record (compression,eq,etc) means the recording on vinyl is no longer accurate but it is this very process that can make things sound better than real life.
And then your going to prees it on a format that adds distortions making it even less accurate.

No matter which format you buy you will have no way of knowing what happened to the recording before it was pressed to cd or record.
You wont know if it was recorded to analogue tape, adat,dat a DAW or whatever, or if it was recorded in one medium and transferred to another and you wont know what processing has happened.
The point being , by the time it's getting pressed to vinyl or cd you no longer have something that is an accurate recording but something that is made to sound good.

[Acid Mitch]

Would the noise floor then still be -60 db - is it simply born with that?

Yes, the actual vinyl - not the turntable, will have a high noise floor.
Higher than digital formats anyway.

[ericj23]

One of the reasons early cd's sounded bad is recording were not being made for that media.If you know that the medium has lots of cross talk, fuzzy bass, he frequency roll off etc you mix with that in mind.

If you then just sample that mix and call it your CD master it will have a hole in the middle of the mix and sound tinny and horrible.

I love my vinyl set-up and it's sound, but it is not hifi. Vinyl had 100 years as a medium to learn how to minimise the distortion and/or make it sound pleasant.CD is only know really starting to sound great - even cheap components have jitter supression, better filters etc

[tapper mike]

I like the pictures.


Much of the vinyl buying experience has to do with having something tangible. You can hold it in your hand. It's big and the imagery supports the content. Albums and their covers have a smell and a feel you can't get from the digital medium.

[KungKrille]

I'm a vinyl lover but I like pottery too:

[dusted william]

I'm a vinyl lover but I like pottery too:

loved that!

[JoeCat]

I think the noise of vinyl is an important consideration, especially if you are looking for that "dusty" sound (and quite literally). Even a very slightly dusty record has just enough of that random crackly/fizzy goodness that - especially when the sample is compressed - imparts of tone of air.

Police + Vinyl = Sonic Heaven

[SODDI]

One of the reasons early cd's sounded bad is recording were not being made for that media.If you know that the medium has lots of cross talk, fuzzy bass, he frequency roll off etc you mix with that in mind.

If you then just sample that mix and call it your CD master it will have a hole in the middle of the mix and sound tinny and horrible.

I love my vinyl set-up and it's sound, but it is not hifi. Vinyl had 100 years as a medium to learn how to minimise the distortion and/or make it sound pleasant.CD is only know really starting to sound great - even cheap components have jitter supression, better filters etc

A lot of them were just bad remixes/remasters. Engineers did things badly with the new medium just because they could (or because there was enormous pressure from the label to get it done and get it out).

The first CD reissues of the whole Led Zeppelin catalogue. They just sounded BAD. Or the live disc of Cream's "Wheels of Fire" - remixed from the original tasteful mix to a "super-stereo" mix. Horribler than awful.

The real analog hi-fi standard was reel-to-reel tape. Or even quad 8-track.

[vurt]

killing zombies.

[Gamma-UT]

killing zombies.

Is it only 80s vinyl that works? It's important survival information and I wouldn't want to be stuck behind a door with arms breaking through it to find all I've got to hand are a couple of Amon Düül II albums that won't do the job.