Is vinyl really even worth collecting?
I just started. I have 3 full albums and a single. I've listened to all of them and they sound no better than any of the 10 cds I have. The only pros i can see are bigger album art and higher resale value. Should I stop? There's no way I can afford an hq sound system.
idk used prices are so terrible i would suggest anyone interested to not get into vinyl
maybe in 10-15 years when the hype dies down
>>66413601
It's purely an aesthetic thing, especially with modern albums where there is no analog master. Do what makes you happy though.
If im just interested for the audio quality should I go with this or CDs? I think records look cool and all but I just want what sounds best.
>>66413736
If you only want sound and you're not gonna shell out hundreds of dollars on a pro setup, just go with digital. It's cheaper and easier to track down without any huge shortcomings. I only collect vinyl for the novelty and many of my albums I already owned on CD.
>>66413736
CDs. Some people say Vinyls have that 'warmth of analog sound' and is the only truly lossless analog format available on a commercial level but that really doesn't matter in this age. Just spend on some hi quality speakers. Speakers matter most. Test a few Vinyles vs CDs of same records on your speakers and see if that 'warmth of vinyl' makes a difference for you and decide for yourself.
>>66413736
as someone who absolutely loves records and is currently listening to one right now, buy cds. theyre cheap, you have a better chance of getting higher quality audio from a used cd, and all you need is something to play them on and almost never need to worry about preamps or speakers or even headphones in some circumstances. no hassle, and they look almost as cool in a collection.
that being said, i collect records because there are some releases that arent available on cd that i own (such as rare bootlegs or obscure artists), or because theyre worth something (like my pink scroll copy of trespass). most of them sound great, but cds are consistently better and take much less work to get to sound good.
>>66413688
this too. some albums (like led zep ii, imo) sound great on vinyl because they were mastered for the format and were recorded on analog equipment so vinyl has the potential of completely 100% reproducing the sound, where cds would be slightly compressed (not on a totally audible level, mind you). music with a digital source is already at that slight level of compression, so vinyl and cd will best case scenario be the same, with cd being better most likely
>>66413736
It is super fun to collect. If you do want to get a cheap and good setup I recommend you scavenge on Craigslist. That is what I did and I found a Techincs SL-D2, a vitnage Lafayette receiver with a phono input, and some great Polk audio bookshelf speakers for less than 220 dollars. For reference, that is less than an Audio Technica LP120
Really the only way to get the most from vinyl (that is, improved sound quality over CD) is to have really fancy and expensive equipment. Even then, it still takes a carefully trained ear to tell the difference/say which is better in a blind test.
The reason I got into vinyl was that so many punk bands only release their stuff on vinyl and I love punk. It has since become a hobby. It is almost a ritual to put on a record and let it spin, listening to a whole album in one sitting.
In terms of sound quality, as we all know, vinyl records get scratched and wore down. Digital files won't. If you are an audiophile, you should only stick to FLAC files, not vinyl records.
It is fun, albeit very expensive, to collect records, and I feel I support the artists/bands more if I buy the vinyl record.
>>66415060
Yeah, and it usually isn't worth it. It's just for the novelty. Plus, paying out the ass for original pressings is not my thing. But, you know, everyone has their thing.
