is this a fad, or does it actually have merit?
it was a thing decades ago, not only hipsters or teenagers use it because they want "vintage"
when you're older and start using these again, it's pleasant to remember and hear all the quirks and problems each record had
It is the inferior technology. It sounds worse, costs more, is less reliable, takes more equipment, is not portable, takes up more space, etc. There is NO technical advantage.
But not everyone wants the technically superior option. Some people like how they look and like the experience of playing a physical recording. Taking a record out of the sleeve and putting it on a player is different from pushing a play button.
I do not understand why people like that, but it is fine. People can like things I don't like. Liking something in spite of its technical limitations is fine by me.
If someone says they sound better, they're an audiophile idiot.
Analog is a perfectly round sound curve where as digital is just a series of 1's and 0's that try to replicated a curve with a lot of right angles.
Digital takes the emotion out of music therefor analog and vinyl is and always will be superior.
For me its not about the sound quality, its about genres that have built them selves around vinyl and continue to do so, such as DnB, Dub, Dubstep (no brostep shit) etc.
>>52185039
bait
>>52185051
I mean its about the culture, not the sound quality or whatever.
>>52185093
How is that bait?
>>52185134
>dmz
>good
pick one beeyotch
>>52185177
It doesn't make any sense.
>>52185177
Because it might be the dumbest shit I've ever read. Seriously I lost brain cells reading your hipster bullshit.
>>52185194
Lemme guess, you like skream?
>>52185177
>i can hear colors
>>52184692
It had merit in the past, but now it seems just like mindless consumerism. Why buy unnecessary pieces of plastic. The only reasons to buy vinyl nowadays is of you are a legit collector buying rare original pressings or you are a luddite who rejects technology, or you're a dj who still spins vinyl. But its pretty gay and phony if you're a smartphone zombie millennial buying the latest pressing of the "aeroplane over the sea" just to look cool and have a piece of plastic when you can just as easily play the digital files. In that case you're no better than idiot materialistic women who never have enough pairs of shoes or expensive handbags. You're just a consumer whore at that point. There are better things to spend your money on than slabs of plastic. It's the music that matters, not the medium.
>>52185177
Yeah. It's bad science at best and mostly just bullshit bait.
>>52185039
>that try to replicated a curve with a lot of right angles
>I lack even a basic understanding of sampling theory or how DACs work
>>52186322
>not recognizing obvious bait
>>52186288
If it's recorded completely analog, then there is merit to getting a vinyl record. if it's digital; you're just fucking retarded
real dj's use vinyl
>>52185039
That's not how the brain works, the brain is much more liberal when interpreting things and it's not going to perceive a "lack of emotion" or any real difference by the way the audio is stored, especially since the sampling rate is so fast. This is like people who say that we see in frames per second.
>>52185039
You dont seem to know anything.
Just leave the thread
>>52185017
What people like about this is that it sound worst(less mechanical)... Personaly i hate vinyls
>>52186367
>If it's recorded completely analog
True. However there technically can be a slight improvement in sound quality from a digital pressed source, most vinyl now a days would be pressed from a hi res 24bit 96-192KhZ WAV file, also less loudness compression. So it IS better than cd but still not as good as a 1 - 1 Analog recorded, mix, mastered and pressed album.
>>52186383
False : old nostalgic djs use vinyls
I buy used records for 2-5$ each, and play them on a $35 player. As far as economics go, it's not bad for having a physical copy of a piece of media. The player also Bluetooths to my phone so I can listen to digital music on it too.
The vinyl versions of some albums use better masters than the digital/CD versions so they sound better to people with good equipment that can appreciate the dynamic range.
Other than this the only reason to use vinyl is aesthetics.
>>52186539
>purposefully releasing inferior versions of your product to an uncultured mass userbase just 'cuz
>creating a "better" product in an archaic form that costs the manufacturer more to produce
>2016
Seriously, it's basically two shit products for the purpose of giving a minority of users a sense of smug superiority
>>52186491
I'm a location sound recordist for a hobby (i.e. orchestra, classical, secular). The most popular recording quality is around 24-bit/96k, rarely more since it just takes up too much space and would require better hardware to support anyway. Digital has huge dynamic range, and isn't a limitation when working with raw sound, consumers will only get to hear 1/6th of the total range since no one owns speakers that can reproduce that sound, even audiophiles.
A true analog recording path from mic to tape to vinyl is unfortunately very expensive since these devices are rare, huge and require maintenance of parts that don't exist anymore. Outside of big-name studios you'll never find a place that does the whole thing analog end to end. You can bet your ass that the majority of modern vinyls are sourced digitally.
I understand the gimmick and it is kinda nice being able to have something physical as it makes it a little bit more special. The difference between changing records on a machine and double clicking to play a song on spotify are different.
But it is like box sets, my friend has 1000's and when we want to watch something we go up to the shelf and pick one out. it makes him look more of a film critic/buff than me when I just have tons on a media server but when you see that 1 season of breaking bad was like £29.99 and I can pay netflix £4 to get all of them and more it is really easy to see what to do.
But my parents had a large collections of vinyls due to them actually being around when it was acceptable and the collection sold for £2000.
If you are collecting them for selling to gullible people it is ok, I got a £20 box full of 40 of em and I sold each one for £10. it is just easy profit, but there is no point in having one because it sounds better or all that shit
What does "sounding worse" mean? Lower fidelity?
>>52184692
For older recordings, it certainly has merit. Many modern "remasters" of classic albums suffered Loudness War compression and sound terrible.
>>52186367
No, there isn't. Digital is strictly superior to analog, provided you don't fuck up encoding or mastering.
Last year I bought a record player and some records.
It doesn't sound better but it's just FUN. Owning physical copies of media and analog media is just nice to have.
Anyone who says it sounds better is just delusional though.
>>52188610
Lower fidelity, crackling, imperfect EQ, slight warping of the vinyl causes pitch shifting.
>>52189380
I like low-fi and people that say vinyl is shit because it has that sound is wrong.
>>52189434
I didn't say it's shit, I said it's inferior.
It sounds great, but I'm not going to power it with audiophile equipment.
>>52189493
I know you didn't, I'm talking about everyone else.
>tfw owning a record that was limited to 300 copies worldwide
I dunno OP I just like it.
>>52184692
THENK MR SKELTOR
>>52189493
>It sounds great, but I'm not going to power it with audiophile equipment.
You should, especially if you you're into pre-2000 music. Chances are, the LP will sound much better than the shitty master/remastered digital version (if there isn't a MoFi/SA-CD remaster of the album).
>>52189565
Unfortunately, you're more right than you should be. Poor remasters are way too prevalent. However, I don't have a very fancy record player so for me the better option is high quality vinyl rips on my private trackers.
only good thing about these is that most records are before loudness war
>>52184692
it doesnt make sense now, cause albums are recorded digitally
>>52189779
and old albums put on vinyl are digtally remasterd, so buy old vinyls
I know they're inferior, I like them because I like having a physical representation of music I like.
>>52185017
>It sounds worse
If you are Edward Scissorhands with parkinsons maybe, otherwise it has much better range.
>>52190385
audiophool please leave.
>>52190385
>extra range placebo
enjoy spending thousands of dollars on equipment that makes your music sound slightly better provided you really invest your hearing into finding the differences. That money could be better spent finding a gf or going to school to learn an actual skill.
Playing recordings adds a layer of fun to the music in the form of putting the needle on it, watching it spin, taking a look at the inner and outer sleeve, and knowing how fragile these records are (and so taking proper care of them)
I think this helps people in thinking it sounds better, even when(or if) it does not.
>>52185017
Wise man
>>52186239
>Dubstep
>like
LMAO
>>52190747
I know for a fact you are probably right. Playing with your mum's pussy adds a layer of fun watching her spin taking a look at the inner and outer pussy, and knowing how fragile her ass is (and so taking proper care of them)
I think this helps people in thinking she sounds better when I am with her as opposed to making sex calls to her.
