Why CDs May Actually Sound Better Than Vinyl

Boris2008 wrote:

Witchfinder wrote:

 

Sentinel - CDs will be become rarer, but they will remain the dominant physical media for many, many years.  CDs are extremely cost effective at this point - most new releases are $10 or less - and I would stick with that format if I were you.  Frankly, if I weren't a collector type who enjoys the process of hunting down albums and acquiring them, I would have moved to a completely MP3 collection a long time ago.  The vast majority of my listening is done on my computer or phone with MP3s and headphones.  I listen to vinyl occasionally, but my lifestyle won't allow me to listen to it frequently.

I'm not so sure, vinyl will definitely not start selling in the huge quantities that they did when we were kids but it will outlive CDs which are on the way out. Kids I know don't really care out collections and stuff like that, they want a choice of a million different songs accessed by their phone.The more nerdy collector types will go for vinyl or as seems to be the case at the moment cassettes!!

I don't mind the 'trendiness' factor, it's always been a part of the music scene.

There were 140.8 million CDs sold in 2014 and only 9.2 million LPs. CDs will be around for a long time as a format based on volume alone. They won't be the preferred format, but they won't disappear. I am sure 10-15 years from now there will be a "resurgence" in collecting of CDs by people that came of age in the 90s and want to collect them for nostalgic purposes just like vinyl and cassettes. In the interim, I will snap up all the CDs that people are unloading on Ebay, Amazon, music stores, etc...

I am not arguing against vinyl as a format at all - I collect it, but I don't think it's resurgence will last in the long term.

Streaming doubled in 2014 from 2013 as many more people decided that having access to tracks is all they really need. It will be interesting to see if that trend continues over the next couple years and if sales of physical items continue to drop at a faster rate because of it.

There isn't a single person I work with that buys music in any physical format, they all stream via Spotify, Pandora or Youtube.

I think with vinyl, it's a question of what you want it for.

CDs are phenomenal right now, particularly with all of these record labels trying to get more cash from their stables of legacy artists.  Complete discography box sets are going for pennies compared to what they once would have run and it's been a great way for me to explore musicians I missed the first time around (Ian Dury was the last acquisition) and I don't have to worry (for the most part) about bad pressings or something like that.  Digital is pretty uniformly good.

Vinyl, on the other hand, can be a great way to do the exact same thing when you consider how many bands' original LPs are now being given away on Craigslist or for a pittance in bargain bins in record stores.  AND you get the pop and crackle, which gives me the warm fuzzies.

With 3d printing becoming more and more economical, I wouldn't be surprised to see that both CDs and vinyl become an "on demand" thing rather than a "print up a few thousand and try to move them" thing in the coming years.  For my part, if they're solid and hold up over the years, I'm totally ok with that happening.

I am hoping streaming dies a death. Between the loss in quality and how badly boned artists are by it, I can't see much to recommend it. Given that it's damn near impossible to turn a profit doing it, my suspicion is that it will eventually run out of investors willing to resurrect it. This, I am ok with.

It was recently revealed that the record labels keep 73% of the revenue from Spotify and they give NOTHING back to the artists from that 73%, if falls under something called "breakage". So, all you Spotify haters need to turn your sights on the real culprit...the record labels, the same villains that have been bending artists over the table for decades.

I can't forsee the general public ever jumping back on a physical format again, it's just not going to happen.

S.D. wrote:

I can't forsee the general public ever jumping back on a physical format again, it's just not going to happen.  

General public matters less and less, considering they're not even sure if music is something worth paying for. You should cater to your paying audience, and those are the people that might actually prefer a physical format.

S.D. wrote:

It was recently revealed that the record labels keep 73% of the revenue from Spotify and they give NOTHING back to the artists from that 73%, if falls under something called "breakage".  So, all you Spotify haters need to turn your sights on the real culprit...the record labels, the same villains that have been bending artists over the table for decades.  

I can't forsee the general public ever jumping back on a physical format again, it's just not going to happen.  

"Breakage"! LOL!! How do you have breakage with a non-physical product? What a bunch of scammers!



I was looking into getting into Reel to Reel, but that is just beyond what I want to pay for this hobby. I do have one R2R that I found at a GW for $2. A Horowitz live concert (Horowitz At Carnegie Hall - An Historic Return).

It's not just Spotify, they're just the "Napster" of this new movement, so it's a name used to describe streaming in general.

The bottom line from my end is that the whole thing just seems to be a bad faith setup. Yeah, it's the record labels ripping off the artists under the "breakage" clause (which is absurd on its own), but Spotify and its ilk are in bed with some shady operators and sit there going, "Gee, our competition is having its windows broken out by the mob. Got nothing to do with us!" Weird analogy, but I trust it's coming across.

Can it be salvaged? Sure! Hell, if artists were getting their due AND it was full lossless quality streaming, I could probably be sold on it. As things stand, I don't care WHY people are getting hosed, I just know that, if I use streaming services to get my music, artists are getting hosed and I don't want to be a part of that OR pay people to keep it rolling. If the service can be fixed so that bad-faith operators can't keep skewing the odds in their own favor, I'll give it a chance. In the meantime, I'll stick to physical product as often as I can.

And good lord, chewie... Reel-to-reel is just next level vintage collecting. If you manage to get that hobby rolling, keep us posted because that would be pretty epic stuff.

Quote :

I was looking into getting into Reel to Reel, but that is just beyond what I want to pay for this hobby.

Only reel to reel is tr00!

Seriously tho, I'd never even seen a reel-to-reel player till fairly recently. My father-in-law had a pretty sweet one in his house that he'd brought back from Thailand (he was stationed there with the Air Force during the Vietnam conflict)... he busted it out one time during a family gathering and played some ancient doo-wop/old time country music on it.  

...unfortunately he lost it (along with everything else) in a house fire about a year ago.

Runicen wrote:

And good lord, chewie... Reel-to-reel is just next level vintage collecting. If you manage to get that hobby rolling, keep us posted because that would be pretty epic stuff.

LOL! I actually thought that Quadraphonic would be the next level. I love old Pioneer gear and have a Pioneer QX-747(it has CD-4 capability) that I want to be serviced before I put it into action. I found a Kenwood SQ/QS decoder that I currently use for really cheap a few years ago. Also have a 1957 stereo Grundig console. Yeah, I know, I have a problem.

If I do get one, it will be the RT-707 because it is nice and compact.


The RT-909 is beautiful with its flourscan lights, but it is a bit large.




It's just a lot of $$ to keep these old machines maintained.

Fat Freddy wrote:

Quote :

I was looking into getting into Reel to Reel, but that is just beyond what I want to pay for this hobby.

Only reel to reel is tr00!

Seriously tho, I'd never even seen a reel-to-reel player till fairly recently. My father-in-law had a pretty sweet one in his house that he'd brought back from Thailand (he was stationed there with the Air Force during the Vietnam conflict)... he busted it out one time during a family gathering and played some ancient doo-wop/old time country music on it.  

...unfortunately he lost it (along with everything else) in a house fire about a year ago.

I remember my uncle having a R2R when I was a kid. It looked sooo cool. He worked for the City of Milpitas and had a lot of nice audio gear(and boat, rv, car, etc.). I wonder whatever happened to his audio gear?

I had a "portable" reel-to-reel my grandfather had given me. It played alright, but the transport (FF/REW) controls were jammed and didn't work. It ended up donated to a thrift store and I'm hoping it made its way into enthusiastic hands and has had some life given back to it.

It was a neat piece of hardware, but I was intimidated to even try opening it up. It was presumably used for field recording and could do 4-track "sound on sound," with two separate tube-based stereo pre-amps on it.

Neat in concept, not really sure what it would have been used for though...

chewie wrote:

The RT-909 is beautiful with its flourscan lights, but it is a bit large.

I'm not an audiophile but who the hell wouldn't want one of those!!!

I actively collect both formats. They both have their pros and cons, so the point of "higher sound quality" could go either way -- it's all a matter of preference.

I prefer CDs more because the sound quality doesn't deteriorate, but vinyl has the benefit of larger packaging.

Witchfinder wrote:

Boris2008 wrote:

Witchfinder wrote:

 

Sentinel - CDs will be become rarer, but they will remain the dominant physical media for many, many years.  CDs are extremely cost effective at this point - most new releases are $10 or less - and I would stick with that format if I were you.  Frankly, if I weren't a collector type who enjoys the process of hunting down albums and acquiring them, I would have moved to a completely MP3 collection a long time ago.  The vast majority of my listening is done on my computer or phone with MP3s and headphones.  I listen to vinyl occasionally, but my lifestyle won't allow me to listen to it frequently.

I'm not so sure, vinyl will definitely not start selling in the huge quantities that they did when we were kids but it will outlive CDs which are on the way out. Kids I know don't really care out collections and stuff like that, they want a choice of a million different songs accessed by their phone.The more nerdy collector types will go for vinyl or as seems to be the case at the moment cassettes!!

I don't mind the 'trendiness' factor, it's always been a part of the music scene.

There were 140.8 million CDs sold in 2014 and only 9.2 million LPs.  CDs will be around for a long time as a format based on volume alone.  They won't be the preferred format, but they won't disappear. I am sure 10-15 years from now there will be a "resurgence" in collecting of CDs by people that came of age in the 90s and want to collect them for nostalgic purposes just like vinyl and cassettes.  In the interim, I will snap up all the CDs that people are unloading on Ebay, Amazon, music stores, etc...

I am not arguing against vinyl as a format at all - I collect it, but I don't think it's resurgence will last in the long term.

Vinyl's resurgence is a trend. It's a supposed "backlash" of non-physical digital media. It won't last, especially when they're charging $25 for Taylor Swift on vinyl.

I guess nobody gets the irony of pressing music onto vinyl that was recorded on a computer.

Shawn Of Fire wrote:

Witchfinder wrote:

Boris2008 wrote:

Witchfinder wrote:

 

Sentinel - CDs will be become rarer, but they will remain the dominant physical media for many, many years.  CDs are extremely cost effective at this point - most new releases are $10 or less - and I would stick with that format if I were you.  Frankly, if I weren't a collector type who enjoys the process of hunting down albums and acquiring them, I would have moved to a completely MP3 collection a long time ago.  The vast majority of my listening is done on my computer or phone with MP3s and headphones.  I listen to vinyl occasionally, but my lifestyle won't allow me to listen to it frequently.

 
I'm not so sure, vinyl will definitely not start selling in the huge quantities that they did when we were kids but it will outlive CDs which are on the way out. Kids I know don't really care out collections and stuff like that, they want a choice of a million different songs accessed by their phone.The more nerdy collector types will go for vinyl or as seems to be the case at the moment cassettes!!

I don't mind the 'trendiness' factor, it's always been a part of the music scene.

There were 140.8 million CDs sold in 2014 and only 9.2 million LPs.  CDs will be around for a long time as a format based on volume alone.  They won't be the preferred format, but they won't disappear. I am sure 10-15 years from now there will be a "resurgence" in collecting of CDs by people that came of age in the 90s and want to collect them for nostalgic purposes just like vinyl and cassettes.  In the interim, I will snap up all the CDs that people are unloading on Ebay, Amazon, music stores, etc...

I am not arguing against vinyl as a format at all - I collect it, but I don't think it's resurgence will last in the long term.

Vinyl's resurgence is a trend. It's a supposed "backlash" of non-physical digital media. It won't last, especially when they're charging $25 for Taylor Swift on vinyl.

I guess nobody gets the irony of pressing music onto vinyl that was recorded on a computer.

I think people do get that, that's why some bands are deliberately not recording that way. Vinyl is a trend that has only lasted about 110 years so I don't see the end of it as there will always be audiophiles, DJ's and nostalgic types like me that will keep it alive, although it's popularity will go up and down as fashion dictates. I just think that CD's will go more the way of video tapes and 8 tracks, ie once they have outlived their usefulness and better methods of listening to music really become the norm they will be gone.


That said, personally I think that my physical product collecting phase might be coming to an end and I might just go exclusively digital pretty soon (personal circumstances are forcing me to re-evaluate my attitudes towards music completely at the moment)

I said the RESURGENCE of vinyl is a trend. That fact is highlighted by having Taylor Swift and Guardians Of The Galaxy soundtrack on vinyl for stupid prices. THAT part of it will die off. CDs sell 10x more than vinyl still, so while they may not be the choice for mainstream music consumers, they'll remain for niche collectors and underground music.

I buy records, but I will NEVER pay the prices they are charging for newly pressed vinyl. I only buy old record of old music. I have no desire for new bands on vinyl. if I want new bands, I'll buy the CD.

Actually come to think of it, that's one factor that goes completely unexamined in all of these sales figures...

Yes, the numbers are lower now than they were in the 80s or early 90s, but when you consider how damned expensive vinyl is now, how much PROFIT are those sales bringing in? I'd be curious to see what the actually dollar amounts are once you get rid of the "pieces sold" statistics. I'm going to venture to guess that even inflation wouldn't peg an 80s or 90s record at nearly $30.

$8 in 1985 adjusted for inflation is a little over $17 now. The last single LP release I picked up was $17.99 which is right in line with that, the last double LP I bought was $24.99. There is such a demand for vinyl now that the few remaining pressing plants are running 24/7 and have a perpetual backlog. Limited manufacturing venues means the production costs stay high which in turn keeps the retail price high.

Point. I half wonder why this rush hasn't led to more pressing plants opening up. Even a lot of the legacy plants are lacking a lot of the knowledgable staff they would have had even 20 years ago, so the usual arguments against a new startup don't apply.

Runicen wrote:

Point.  I half wonder why this rush hasn't led to more pressing plants opening up.  Even a lot of the legacy plants are lacking a lot of the knowledgable staff they would have had even 20 years ago, so the usual arguments against a new startup don't apply.

"Cost" would be my first guess. Noone wants to invest in the start-up only to have the bubble burst in a year or 2. Business folks in-the-know probably look at it as a fad. My

MetalGuy71 wrote:

Runicen wrote:

Point.  I half wonder why this rush hasn't led to more pressing plants opening up.  Even a lot of the legacy plants are lacking a lot of the knowledgable staff they would have had even 20 years ago, so the usual arguments against a new startup don't apply.

"Cost" would be my first guess. Noone wants to invest in the start-up only to have the bubble burst in a year or 2. Business folks in-the-know probably look at it as a fad. My

Exactly.

You also have to realize that nobody makes record pressing equipment any longer. Most pressing plants are using 40 year old equipment and are constantly having to repair it. Some new facilities will be opening up in the states this year, but those are using pressing equipment purchased from Europe. I've heard that some companies are going to start making the equipment again, but as of yet there are few options available and it's very expensive up-front cost.

S.D. wrote:

$8 in 1985 adjusted for inflation is a little over $17 now.  The last single LP release I picked up was $17.99 which is right in line with that, the last double LP I bought was $24.99.  There is such a demand for vinyl now that the few remaining pressing plants are running 24/7 and have a perpetual backlog.  Limited manufacturing venues means the production costs stay high which in turn keeps the retail price high.  

When I see new vinyl around here, it's almost always between $20 and $40. Everything from the new pressings of Queensryche, to Taylor Swift....I've never seen anything less than $19.99...most are $24.99 for a single record.

Most of the double-albums I've purchased over the past couple years have been $24.99. Occasionally I'll see something from an independent label that is more expensive (the last Orange Goblin album was $29.99, I passed on it). The last single album I bought was The Skull album and that was $17.99. It depends on the label releasing it and whether it's actually an import (many are) or not.

$25 is my personal cutoff for what I'm willing to spend.

and here's an article about a factory expansion allowed because they found 13 old pressing machines in a warehouse...look at the age of this equipment to give you an idea of how hard it must be to keep these things running.

http://www.thevinylfactory.com/vinyl-factory-news/us-vinyl-factory-finds-13-abandoned-presses-to-become-one-of-the-countrys-biggest-pressing-plants/