Jump to content

Why do we listen to CDs instead of record albums?


Recommended Posts

Full Name: Paul Edward Wagemann

Occupation: foole

Hobbies & Interests:: Rockism

Those are the details the person who started this thread provided.

Do you believe he/she is to be taken seriously?

Have you seen those signs at the Zoo "Please don't feed the Animals" ?

:P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CDs sound better

That's subjective. IMO vinyl sounds better.

I do admit that you can put a cd in and not worry about turning it over midway through--but if I'm not mistaken, there were some record players that coudl do that automatically--weren't there?

Another advantage is that you can play CDs in your car, but you cant do that with record albums (but you can with 8 tracks!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In 20 years of using CD's I've never had to replace one due to deteriorating sound quality. Can't say the same for vinyl. Granted, if you take good care of your vinyl (as I do) you will get several hundred plays out of them before sound quality declines. But eventually the vinyl will need to be replaced. That will happen with CD's too, but over a much longer time.

Good thread, PEW (aside from the conspiracy angle).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All right thanks to those of you who answered the question honestly instead of acting like its a stupid question--like people on ohter boards do. Anywya heres some things that you might want to consider:

~Do you think that by being able to skip tracks, artist feel free to put shiddy tracks on their CDs that they wouldnt have done otherwise?

~As for the idea that CDs cna last for years and still soudn good while records cant--just let me say that if you treat a record with proper care it can jsut as long as a cd...

~good vinyl will always sound better because it is not limited to a max frequency of 22khz--like cds are.

~Last of all, let me ask about albums that were made before CDs were the norm--these were specifically made with the idea in mind that they woudl be played on record players not cd players...so doest converting them to CD take away something?

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few more angles to think about onthis subject amtter:

~Do you think that by being able to skip tracks, artist feel free to put shiddy tracks on their CDs that they wouldnt have done otherwise?

~As for the idea that CDs cna last 1000 plays and still soudn good while records cant--just let me say that If you treat vinyl right (follow the manufacturers instructions) a record has an indefinite life...

~good vinyl will always sound better, It has no form of quantisation, and is not limited to a max frequency of 22khz, which most people should be able to hear above.. seeing as good speakers can go up to about 30khz.

~Also, the argument is void that digitally recorded music should sound better on cd either, as it will almost certainly be recorded (unless the engineer is stupid) at a higher sample rate than 44.1khz and much higher than 16bit.

~Last of all, let me ask about albums that were made before CDs were the norm--these were specifically made with the idea in mind thta they woudl be played on record players not cd players...so doest converting them to CD take away something?

How to sound knowledgeable and plausible ...............

[i]"If you treat vinyl right (ie follow the manufacturers instructions) it has an indefinite life..."

grockle: Drowned in Sound 28th May 2006

[i]"It has no form of quantisation, and is not limited to a max frequency of 22khz, which most people should be able to hear above.. seeing as good speakers can go up to about 30khz, it almost seems like a bit of a waste."

grockle: Drowned in Sound 28th May 2006

[i]"The argument is void that digitally recorded music should sound better on cd either, as it will almost certainly be recorded (unless the engineer is stupid) at a higher sample rate than 44.1khz and much higher than 16bit."

jampster: Drowned In Sound 28th May 2006

Drowned in Sound Discussion prompted by PEW

Simply post the same question on multiple boards and compile the responses as your follow up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's subjective. IMO vinyl sounds better.

I was just answering your question. In most people's opinions, CDs sound better. That's why they replaced vinyl.

A few more angles to think about onthis subject amtter:

~Do you think that by being able to skip tracks, artist feel free to put shiddy tracks on their CDs that they wouldnt have done otherwise?

Perhaps, but tons of old records have bad tracks as well. It's not as if CDs created the concept of a filler song.

~As for the idea that CDs cna last 1000 plays and still soudn good while records cant--just let me say that If you treat vinyl right (follow the manufacturers instructions) a record has an indefinite life...

I've seen and heard my dad's records, and that's not true. A lot of them sound pretty bad, even though he claims to have held them by the edges, and for the past 40 years he's kept them in a cool, dry place (my grandma's garage in San Francisco). They still work, but the sound quality isn't that good.

~good vinyl will always sound better, It has no form of quantisation, and is not limited to a max frequency of 22khz, which most people should be able to hear above.. seeing as good speakers can go up to about 30khz.

Maybe the reason CDs can't go as loud as records is because we learned our lesson, now that all the baby boomers are losing their hearing at early ages.

~Also, the argument is void that digitally recorded music should sound better on cd either, as it will almost certainly be recorded (unless the engineer is stupid) at a higher sample rate than 44.1khz and much higher than 16bit.

I don't know what you're talking about, so I can't refute this.

~Last of all, let me ask about albums that were made before CDs were the norm--these were specifically made with the idea in mind thta they woudl be played on record players not cd players...so doest converting them to CD take away something?

Yes, but what you should really be comparing are CDs and records made in the 80's, when the switch was being made. You shouldn't be comparing records to cds made from records.

And lastly, why would the RIAA want to secretly destroy records anyways?

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, CDs actually do have better sound quality.

HOWEVER, the reason being is that instead of being scratched to be played, it uses lasers (which means we probably should have used CDs back in 1943, the same year lasers were invented). When you first buy a record and put it on the phonograph, it sounds REALLY good. After that, it is scratched by a needle, ruining the sounds. With CDs, if you manage to keep them clean, give off the same lovely sound all the time.

You probably already knew that, I just had to inject this into the conversation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How to sound knowledgeable and plausible ...............

[i]"If you treat vinyl right (ie follow the manufacturers instructions) it has an indefinite life..."

grockle: Drowned in Sound 28th May 2006

[i]"It has no form of quantisation, and is not limited to a max frequency of 22khz, which most people should be able to hear above.. seeing as good speakers can go up to about 30khz, it almost seems like a bit of a waste."

grockle: Drowned in Sound 28th May 2006

[i]"The argument is void that digitally recorded music should sound better on cd either, as it will almost certainly be recorded (unless the engineer is stupid) at a higher sample rate than 44.1khz and much higher than 16bit."

jampster: Drowned In Sound 28th May 2006

Drowned in Sound Discussion prompted by PEW

Simply post the same question on multiple boards and compile the responses as your follow up.

Why would someone go to so much trouble? Must be a really important subject to him I guess...? Maybe he is writing a paper on this subject or something and is gathering multiple responses as feedback?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few more angles to think about onthis subject amtter:

~Do you think that by being able to skip tracks, artist feel free to put shiddy tracks on their CDs that they wouldnt have done otherwise?

~As for the idea that CDs cna last for years and still soudn good while records cant--just let me say that if you treat a record with proper care it can jsut as long as a cd...

~good vinyl will always sound better because it has no form of quantisation and is not limited to a max frequency of 22khz

~Also, the argument is void that digitally recorded music should sound better on cd since it is usually recorded at a higher sample rate than 44.1khz and much higher than 16bit.

~Last of all, let me ask about albums that were made before CDs were the norm--these were specifically made with the idea in mind that they woudl be played on record players not cd players...so doest converting them to CD take away something?

Okay, look here:

#1: Thats a matter of opinion. Also, records could have the ability to skip tracks, it just took skill.

#2: Like I said, CDs use lasers. Imagine scratching one with a needle... it will skip. Same with with a record, it won't skip, but it will give off white noise.

#3: I ain't touching that spelling.

#4: That makes absolutely no sense. With our modern technology, things have higher bits or KHz or whatever.

#5: Um, not really. Walk into a Hot Topic or Tower and BAM! vinyl. If you love your precious vinyl so much, DON'T THROW AWAY YOUR PHONOGRAPH!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that CD's do have better sound quality, but there are certain situations in which records are nice. It has a nicer feel and sound, kind of nostalgic. The argument about the records being made for record players just makes no sense, because the artists made the albums for the media avalible at the time, but it is doubtful that the records would have been different if CD's had been around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...