237

CDs are in every way better than vinyl records. They are smaller, much higher quality audio, lower noise floor and don't wear out by being played. The fact that CD sales are behind vinyl is a sign that the world has gone mad. The fact you can rip and stream your own CD media is fantastic because generally remasters are not good and streaming services typically only have remastered versions, not originals. You have no control on streaming services about what version of an album you're served or whether it'll still be there tomorrow. Not an issue with physical media.

The vast majority of people listen to music using equipment that produces audio of poor quality, especially those that stream using ear buds. It makes me very sad when people don't care that what they're listening to could sound so much better, especially if played through a hifi from a CD player, or using half decent (not beats) headphones.

There's plenty of good sounding and well produced music out there, but it's typically played back through the equivalent of two cans and some string. I'm not sure people remember how good good music can sound when played back through good kit.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] wjrii@lemmy.world 112 points 1 month ago

The fact that CD sales are behind vinyl is a sign that the world has gone mad.

Not really. It's a sign that Vinyl has turned into a symbol of support for the creative ideals of musicians and romance for a bygone era, while CDs, superior as they are (except in the case of records in good repair being played on high quality turntables), are "just" things that hold digital music. They sold in insane numbers because they were the standard format until streaming truly took over. Sure, Vinyl sales are up to 40 million or so in the US, but the bigger thing is that the 37 million CD sales are down from almost a billion in each of 1999 and 2000.

[-] driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br 50 points 1 month ago

Vinils also have huge art that look good as decoration.

[-] AlexWIWA@lemmy.ml 18 points 1 month ago

I like vinyls because they're basically posters that I can listen to

[-] fadedmaster@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 month ago

This is why when I want to support an artist I purchase vinyl. I get better art than the CD and it looks better on a shelf than a CD. Vinyl isn't about audio quality. It's about collecting, supporting the artist, and the experience.

[-] teamevil@lemmy.world 18 points 1 month ago

As a vinyl dork who a huge music fan, it's definitely a way to support artists but let's not pretend that vinyl sound better, technically CDs will always be more clear, but I happen to enjoy the warmth of vinyl even if it's not as perfect as CD audio.

[-] SzethFriendOfNimi@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago

Like watching a recording of a play and the play itself.

The recording won’t ever miss a line, is clean, a known quantity.

A play is great but also potentially imperfect which is possibly part of the experience some people look for.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] 9point6@lemmy.world 40 points 1 month ago

You're mistakenly thinking people are buying vinyl records for sound quality, and there may be a few misguided people out there, but the vast majority aren't.

For many it's about simply supporting their favourite artists, and getting a cool item to enjoy. I'd say most vinyl record gatefolds often have a load of extra interesting stuff going on compared to a CD jewel case release. It also lends itself to forcing you to be more deliberate about listening, you need to pay attention to flip the record, you need to physically interact with the thing—I imagine the majority that still buy CDs end up just ripping them to another device and then basically never open the case again. Which I'd say encourages entirely different kinds of listening experience. Neither are invalid ways to engage with an album.

I guess that leads onto the other thing to point out, which is most of the modern records I buy come with a code to download FLACs of the album, sometimes even at higher quality (24-bit/96khz) than a CD release (16-bit/44.1khz). This is also more convenient for increasing numbers of people that simply don't have a way to play CDs at all any more, let alone on a hi-fi or something.

I'll agree though that most people are listening with mediocre equipment. But FWIW, there are fantastic quality "ear bud" style IEMs out there (I like Shure's range) that'll blow a lot of non-professional headphones out the water.

[-] Shimitar@feddit.it 34 points 1 month ago

Foreword: I only stream my music, from FLAC preferably. I don't own vynils but mostly i don't own CD's anymore either.

CD is dead and should be dead. Rip it and stream it, full stop. No need or reason to keep a degrading digital format when you can just rip it (full quality and store as FLAC) and stream it. That's the whole point.

Vynil instead gives you the experience of listening, with all the associated crap/fun depending on your POV.

So while there is a case for vynil today, but I don't share it, there is zero case for CDs. Just download the bits. Don't waste plastic and shit with a polluting and degrading medium that make no sense today that downloading a full quality uncompressed audio file takes seconds.

[-] MerchantsOfMisery@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 month ago

Compartmentalized optical media is a really nice way of storing things, though. I'm way more likely to listen to an album from start to finish if it's from a CD than a folder of files on my PC. Plus CDs are dirt cheap now more than ever. I get used CDs for like $2-5 each.

load more comments (23 replies)
[-] kindenough@kbin.earth 25 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

My amplifier has all the streaming services available and some of them like Tidal stream at higher bitrates than a CD. CD's are obsolete these days, I don't know anyone who still has a CD player. So obviously sales decline.

Vinyl on the other hand is an (analog) experience by itself. In my experience there is nothing like crate digging for unique samples at the local record shops, sampling them with my AKAI S-1100, the warm dynamic sound of it, the noise floor bringing harmonic distortion, the ticks and cracks that add to the groove.

[-] toofpic@lemmy.world 18 points 1 month ago

Yeah, vinyls would die if it was only about sound quality. So as would heating food over campfire when there are perfect convection ovens, effective microwaves, etc

[-] Bgugi@lemmy.world 11 points 1 month ago

I really like the campfire analogy. It's worse on purpose because that's the experience they want.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] PP_BOY_@lemmy.world 24 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

You're making multiple arguments here and trying to wrap them up into one.

CDs are in every way better than vinyl records. They are smaller, much higher quality audio, lower noise floor and don’t wear out by being played.

Most of these aren't universal positives for most people.

Economy of space is not a big concern for me when it comes to physical media. Playing physical media is a ritual more than anything for most folks, and I want to hold that giant 13"x13" cardboard sleeve in my hands while listening to the music, not toss around a little plastic jewelcase.

On audio quality: that has been debated on audiophile forums for decades now and the most political conclusion to it is that: music sounds best on the format it was mastered for. Not all music was (properly) mastered for digital.

The bit about LPs "wearing out" is overstated to say the least and 99/100 times, that degradation comes from poor setups. Other than that, you're kind of just describing a alluring fault of analog media. The fact that a piece of plastic can change with you over time as you listen to it, at the exact pace you set it to and in an environment you create, humanizes it and helps build a connection in a way that files on a computer don't really do. Let's not act like disc rot isn't a thing, either.

The fact you can rip and stream your own CD media is fantastic because generally remasters are not good

Funny, because CDs were one of the first examples of shitty remasters in the 90s. You can also rip LPs with minimal effort, too.

streaming services typically only have remastered versions, not originals. You have no control on streaming services about what version of an album you’re served or whether it’ll still be there tomorrow. Not an issue with physical media

None of this supports "CDs are better than vinyl records."

On the rest of your post, none of that really supports CD > Vinyl, either. If you're talking about how people interact with their music and the equipment they do it through, there's far more support for analog setups than CD.

With analog, you can actually make real, physical, adjustments to the audio output. On digital, you're effectively just messing with a bunch of 1s and 0s inside a computer. The whole process is much less authentic.

👊🎤

[-] RickRussell_CA@lemmy.world 17 points 1 month ago

The whole process is much less authentic.

I remember reading a letter to the editor in Stereophile magazine 30 years ago, when tube amps were coming back into style after decades of transistor and semiconductor amps. The reader pointed out that the language used in a review to describe the benefits of tube amps was ridiculous, and that calling the output "warm" or "intimate" (or dare I say, "authentic") compared to semiconductor amps was simply an admission that the tube amps were making a change to the audio output that was not part of the original recording.

The function of an audio reproduction and amplification system, the author pointed out, was to reproduce the audio signal as accurately as possible to capture the content of the original recorded signal. Full stop. Anything else is nonsense.

[-] Redredme@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago

There is no discussion about audio quality. Zero. Zilch. Nada. Nothing. You can talk about the format, cds being less nice to handle with that awkward plastic box which always breaks. But not about the audio quality. Its measurable.

Yes, perfectly pressed vinyl can sound fantastic on very hq hifi. But it will crack. It will hiss. It will degrade each time you play the record. Thats not up for debate. How much, or how little, that is up for debate. And also, how you store your vinyl has a big impact on how they age. (but the medium will always age) Anyway :thats what you are referring too. How much. But how much isn't the issue: it is, unmistakenly, always there. It's physics. You can't deny it.

On the same hq hifi setup a hq hifi (super) cd player will at the very least sound equally good. It will never hiss. It will never crack. It will never pop. It will not degrade.

Most times it will sound better. It will always sound cleaner. But we don't like cleaner. We like stuff that creeks. We, people, like things which seem to "live". It makes it easier to relate too. It's why we cannot say goodbye to big steamengines of bygone eras. Its why we loooove the sound of high octane ICE's and still use them a lot while we all know electric is probably better in every way. And the same applies to music: the pops and hisses make it sound more authentic, more alive. And this is where science goes of the rails and feelings take over. Its a slippery slope.

Op is talking about the loudness war. Look it up, its a real thing, but reading your comment you must be aware already. "remasters" these days are all most always oversteered in every way possible because... Reasons. I recently listened to a vinyl remaster of a 90s dance record: horrible on hifi. But sufficient on a Bluetooth phonogram player.

Like you said: nobody plays on hifi anymore. So its getting remastered more and more for shit setups. Sonos. Bluetooth headphones and the likes. And while sounding nice, that is a far cry from hifi.

When playing your original cd's you get the original remaster. Not that oversteered shit on apple music, youtube or Spotify which sound horrible on a hifi setup. There is a very definite difference. Easy to spot.

And tbh: I'm guilty too. I chose the comfort (ease of use) of sonos over the sound quality of a hifi setup. In the end it costed the same and my wife is happier without the cabling. Living (together) is always compromising ;).

I get why people chose vinyl. It's the experience. It's like smoking cigars in a lounge with some friends while drinking brandy. But like those cigars vinyl is not the best choice. But I do like cigars and brandy anyway...

And lastly: no. Ripping LPs is a tough job taking at least the playtime of the album. Cd's can be ripped and the files automatically named in minutes.

Is ripping LPs complex? No. But it takes a good setup and it takes a lot of time. You dont need neither when ripping cd's.

So, anyway: physics, science, support the statement "cds are superior to vinyl". It's measurable. You may not like it, you may miss the authenticity but the dynamic range coming of a cd vs lp setup (of the same cost, mind you) is almost always better.

But hey, I'm no bob Dylan. Who never was and still isn't a fan of anything digital. He swears he misses something. I don't. I look at the science and see better numbers for cds.

And I do believe that analog recordings of anything (sound and vision) can always be superior to digital. Digital always has a max. So many pixels. So many kbit. Analog does not have that problem. The only problem analog has, is the medium on which it is set on. That has limitations. And those limitations always always result in a lower quality then what you can easily achieve with digital. At home. (for a reasonable cost) add a megapixel. Add a mbit. In the end it will and has crossed the anolog boundaries of the used mediums far and wide.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Prunebutt@slrpnk.net 8 points 1 month ago

Like, I get your points but

With analog, you can actually make real, physical, adjustments to the audio output. On digital, you're effectively just messing with a bunch of 1s and 0s inside a computer. The whole process is much less authentic.

That's just damn ridiculous. The signal gets converted into audio, otherwise you wouldn't be able to hear it.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] zod000@lemmy.ml 22 points 1 month ago

This is 100% correct, but I don't think most people buy vinyls because of the audio quality. I own plenty of vinyls, but I know for a fact that my CDs and even higher bitrate FLACs stomp all over it for audio quality. Records are just kind of fun and nostalgic.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Noel_Skum@sh.itjust.works 21 points 1 month ago

Some of my 25+ year old cd’s appear to have started “rotting” inside and playback has been compromised / ruined in many cases.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] seaQueue@lemmy.world 20 points 1 month ago

I mean, if we're just talking high bitrate digital audio then yeah, convenience and sound wise digital beats the pants off of analog any day. CDs in particular though? Nah. Gimme that solid state no moving parts convenience I get from packing 50GB of flac, aac or vorbis rips onto my phone and a Chromecast audio to plug into my sound system.

[-] corroded@lemmy.world 19 points 1 month ago

Kind of late to the party here, but I'm going to offer my take anyway.

You're right, and you're wrong. CDs are better than vinyl records in terms of sound quality, but CDs are absolutely pointless. Instead of a CD, go to Bandcamp, send some money to your favorite artist, and download the audio files in FLAC format. You own the media (albeit digitally) and it can never be taken away from you as you make sure it's saved to a safe location. You may even be getting better quality audio than you would on a CD.

On the other hand, while I recognize that CDs are better quality, I am an avid collector of vinyl records, at least for a few specific genres. I've spent thousands of dollars on my HiFi setup, built my own tube amplifier, and I can say as a point of pride that there are absolutely no solid-state components in the signal path between the record and my speakers. While owning your own media makes sense in the era of streaming, owning physical media is in no way practical, but it's just fun. When I want to listen to a record, it's an event. I'll remove the record from its sleeve, maybe take it over to my record cleaner if it's a bit dusty or has some static charge. At the same time, I've just switched on my isolation transformer, and the tubes in my preamp and power amp are warming up. Then I'll place the record on the turntable, start the motor, drop the needle, and sit back in my recliner to enjoy the music.

If I'm sitting at my desk working, I'll put on some bluetooth headphones and play some music from my phone. But I'm not listening to music, I'm working and putting on music to pass the time, help get me motivated, whatever. If I want to listen to music solely for the joy of listening to music, I'm going to play a record.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Chocrates@lemmy.world 17 points 1 month ago
[-] hardcoreufo@lemmy.world 17 points 1 month ago

Have you not heard of FLAC? You can get files at higher bit rates and sampling frequencies than CDs. That being said I much prefer vinyl collecting. No it doesn't always sound the best but I feel more in touch with the album. No ability to skip tracks, having to flip it over or change disks is more engaging than just pressing play.

[-] JadenSmith@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 month ago

You can still choose your tracks on vinyl, it's just more manual.

Look at the grooves, and in-between them there'd be thin almost ungrooved flat lines going into the centre: those are the track separators. Hover the tonearm above those and drop it in to play the track you want.
I used to do this with some records I wouldn't have a big care about with preservation (compilations such as Now That's What I Call Music!), since it would mean those tracks would have more wear than the record as a whole.

[-] BmeBenji@lemm.ee 16 points 1 month ago

Did you just wake up from a coma that started in 1985?

CDs are better than vinyl for every reason that MP3s are better than CDs. That’s not news to anyone.

Vinyl is not “better” by any of the metrics you mentioned, but I prefer it because if I feel like buying a physical medium for the purpose of collecting music, I want my music to actually be physical. I don’t want a collection that boils down to 1s and 0s, I want one that more closely replicates the original source of the music.

That’s the reason I like vinyl, even if I do listen to digital music far far more.

[-] silver13@lemmy.world 16 points 1 month ago

Nope, mp3 is not "better" than CD since its a lossy format. It uses how we perceive audio so we notice it as little as possible, but you definitely loose details

[-] WolfLink@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 month ago

Which is why I buy from sources like BandCamp when possible, that offer lossless download options.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] blackstrat@lemmy.fwgx.uk 9 points 1 month ago

CDs more closely represent the original music than vinyl though and are physical media you can collect.

[-] vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 1 month ago

mp3s are objectively inferior on all fronts except file size

[-] lemming741@lemmy.world 16 points 1 month ago
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Alpha71@lemmy.world 16 points 1 month ago

I listen to 128.kb mp3's on my phone speaker.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Hawk@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 1 month ago

I can easily get equal or higher quality than CDs online.

I'd rather support artists by buying a nice vinyl so I can appreciate the artwork.

load more comments (10 replies)
[-] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 13 points 1 month ago

If I'm going to listen to digital music, it may out may not come from a CD. Vinyl provides a different experience that digital provides. CD's are just a way to distribute digital content.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] stoy@lemmy.zip 11 points 1 month ago

Yes, but vinyl is fun.

CDs are boring.

[-] Geth@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 1 month ago

Vinyl uses a metal rod to poke the grooves in the disk like a blind caveman.

CD uses friking lasers like it's superman and spins that fucker until it warps.

[-] stoy@lemmy.zip 7 points 1 month ago

Vinyl has a fun spinny disk, and a cool needle you can tinker with, a CD player has a cradle you put the CD in, it goes into the machine, and music comes out.

If you can see the CD, you just see a blur.

Don't get me wrong, CDs are clearly the superior format for audio quallity and convenience.

But vinyl is just more fun (:

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] RickRussell_CA@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

The fact that CD sales are behind vinyl is a sign that the world has gone mad.

I mean... CD sales are only behind vinyl because vinyl has become collectible, while CDs offer no practical advantage over stored files on a hard drive or high-quality streaming.

And before you say, "but what about compression?", the fact is that even lossy compression is good enough that most audiophiles can't tell the difference. Audiophile publications started doing blind comparisons back in the 90s, and it quickly became clear that somewhere around 192kbps MP3 the ability of humans to statistically discern the compressed vs. uncompressed versions started to disappear.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 9 points 1 month ago

I'd say nostalgia is a big factor in what keeps technically inferior sound quality in the market

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] RegalPotoo@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago

When I'm buying vinyl, I'm not buying it to listen to - I'm buying it cos I want to support the band or want a souvenir from a concert. I own a few dozen albums, none of which have been played more than a handful of times; if I want to listen to one of them I'll stream it, either from a paid service or off my own machine using versions ripped from elsewhere

[-] scytale@lemm.ee 8 points 1 month ago

I think most vinyl purchasers nowadays buy it for the novelty and as collectibles rather than quality. The ones who would die on a hill arguing that vinyl is superior quality are a minority. As for the second point, a lot of people can’t afford high quality audio gear, and some are not tech literate enough to know that Beats by Dre are cheap junk on the inside.

However, you also have to remember that music nowadays is mixed with the lowest common denominator in mind, which is cheap audio gear. Competent sound engineers know to make sure to test that their mixes also sound good on mid-low tier audio gear, which is the vast majority in the market. Unless you’re Christopher Nolan who insists mixing his movies for high tier cinema equipment only when most people will watch them on a tv and maybe with a soundbar, so it sounds terrible.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Glytch@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago

People who listen to vinyl enjoy the sounds of distortion and static. It's a much "warmer" sound, they claim. They are buffoons. Lossless audio files are the best way to ensure a quality, clean audio source.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] gmtom@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago

Yes and you can get all your calories and nutrients from a processed paste, that's much more dense than regular food so you don't need to eat as much and can fit into a small tube so is much more convenient than regular food.

The fact people prefer normal food to Hugh density nutrition paste is proof the world has gone mad.

[-] nef@slrpnk.net 11 points 1 month ago

I don't think that's a good example.

The answer is simple: there is no "correct" way to enjoy art. Anyone saying vinyl is higher quality than digital is deluding themselves, but that doesn't make vinyl a worse way to listen to music.

It's more convenient to beat a video game on easy, and yet, many people find greater satisfaction in playing harder difficulties. It depends on how you would rather spend your time.

[-] Brkdncr@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

Vinyl has better artwork.

Vinyl requires more effort to listen too, forcing the listener to be a part of the listening experience.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 03 Aug 2024
237 points (85.0% liked)

Unpopular Opinion

6052 readers
208 users here now

Welcome to the Unpopular Opinion community!


How voting works:

Vote the opposite of the norm.


If you agree that the opinion is unpopular give it an arrow up. If it's something that's widely accepted, give it an arrow down.



Guidelines:

Tag your post, if possible (not required)


  • If your post is a "General" unpopular opinion, start the subject with [GENERAL].
  • If it is a Lemmy-specific unpopular opinion, start it with [LEMMY].


Rules:

1. NO POLITICS


Politics is everywhere. Let's make this about [general] and [lemmy] - specific topics, and keep politics out of it.


2. Be civil.


Disagreements happen, but that doesn’t provide the right to personally attack others. No racism/sexism/bigotry.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Shitposts and memes are allowed but...


Only until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.


5. No trolling.


This shouldn't need an explanation. If your post or comment is made just to get a rise with no real value, it will be removed. You do this too often, you will get a vacation to touch grass, away from this community for 1 or more days. Repeat offenses will result in a perma-ban.



Instance-wide rules always apply. https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS