I echo Steve (as I often do)! Cute example, too, from your kidhood that illustrates your point (this former teacher appreciates)! That anecdote reminds me of something you said to me (in an e-mail) I wanted to respond to, but forgot (that happens a lot lately)! For your readers, they should know I'm in the states, while I'm sure most know you're in London:
You had complimented me on my new-found bravery to record audio (as you do, routinely) for your articles, as you obviously inspired me to do so. In your comment, you said you enjoyed hearing "my accent," which of course I giggled at! And, I adore (and, if I'm being honest....covet) yours!
Which got me thinking about perspective and self-awareness.....cut to your Quasimodo (and, his possible siblings, Partialmodo, Semimodo, and of course, Todomodo)....and, more to the point, Igor (that's Eye-gor) from Mel Brooks' "Young Frankenstein."
Unsure of its availability, ever, in the UK (theatrical release as well as video/streaming, etc since), and realizing you were born several years after its release, anyway, here's the clip I was remembering: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Pr36CANB04
So, after your comment, my in-head reply (with tongue planted firmly in cheek, of course) was: "What accent?"😂😂Hamlet, you're a prince.....and great minds think alike, even across the proverbial pond! It took your story of Quasi to remind me of what I forgot to bring up a couple weeks ago!
As for your wonderful article, I've been searching for years for a reason or rationale for why I love the vinyl format.....something other and more than just, "it's what I grew up with," and I finally have concrete, and even empirical, data! Thank you!
Wow, Brad. Thanks a lot for all of this. Such nice words, for which I am very grateful, but also, it’s always so entartaining to read your comments. So... double thanks for that!
Of course, one of the great mysteries of languages is that one is never fully aware of one’s own accent, and yet, others find it so distinctive. As a linguist; I still find it fascinating, even though I had to study the science behind it. How certain things sound so natural to some and so foreign to others.
Thanks a lot for the YouTube clip, with which, as you correctly guessed, I wasn’t familiar. It put a smile on my face.
And I am really glad you liked the article and found it interesting. Of course, as you grew up with vinyl, you kind of “breathed” organically with it, and acquired a lot of knowledge (perhaps more knowledge than you were/are aware of) like second nature. The relationship between listener and vinyl was a lot more “organic” back then. A lot of things didn’t have to be “learned” because... well, because that was the way things were! Whereas my generation, who grew up without it, we kind of have to learn the A to Z because we don’t have a lot of (or any) intuitive vinyl “reservoir” of knowledge that we can rely on. It’s almost like we’re learning vinyl as a foreign language. Fascinating stuff indeed!
Please stop with the nonsense. A record is many times removed from the original production when you pull that record from its sleeve. It is scientifically well-known that analog reproduction suffers from degradation. Digital offers something different. Restoration. This restoration isn't possible with analog signals, because with analog there aren't just two possibilities. Compare a photocopy of a photocopy to a copy of a copy of a copy of a computer file. The computer files are (very probably) perfect copies of the original file. That is one reason why studios almost exclusively now use Digital Audio Workstations for recording. Subjectively you may love the sound of a vinyl records and I get that, but don't pretend science is why.
The point of the article, which you seem to have missed, is to suggest a succint way of explaining some of the differences between vinyl and digital in the simplest of terms, as one would explain things to a child. This was partly inspired by the personal anecdote from my childhood that I narrate at the beginning. Nowhere in my piece do I claim that vinyl is an exact replica of the original recording. Ultimately what sounds better or worse belongs to the subjective realm: the warmth of the analogue recording and the harmonic distortion that vinyl often brings with it are common examples of why so many music lovers, from casual listeners to audiophiles, prefer vinyl over digital. That is what I was referring to primarily when I said that with vinyl there is "more" to hear. Now, the aggressive tone of your comment is completely out of order and totally unacceptable. If you don't like what you read, you can simply scroll on. I often welcome constructive debates but not in these terms and far removed from the offensive, derogatory and patronising tone you have used with me. May I suggest you try to find some happiness in your life as you are clearly in desperate need of it. Best wishes.
This is a simple and correct explanation for why vinyl sounds different (and arguably better) than digital, but I must raise a point of order. Not all vinyl sounds “better” than all digital formats (in particular CDs played on a good stereo system). There are plenty of vinyl reissues that don’t sound as good as the “original” pressing of the album and in many cases may not sound as good as the CD version. As an example, I purchased a reissue of Coltrane’s Africa/Brass from about 1974. It sounded flat, thick and lifeless - absolutely nothing like what I imagine Coltrane, Dolphy, Tyner & Co. actually sounded like in Rudy Van Gelder’s studio. I put it one more than once and each time got angry; I eventually traded it back to the record store. About a year later, I found an “original” pressing of Africa/Brass (my guess is it was pressed in 63; the LP was released in 61). It sounded much better than the reissue I had briefly owned. But more to the point, I think a CD of Africa/Brass would have sounded infinitely better than the 74 reissued vinyl I briefly owned. Indeed, for awhile I would stream the album rather than play that reissued LP.
Hi Marcus! Thanks for your comment. You raise valid points. My article is intentionally oversimplified: the main goal was to explore how one could explain Vinyl 101 to a child or a complete lay person at a dinner party.
Of course, what you say is technically true. In fact, I own some CDs that sound more “present” and less muffled than some lower-quality vinyl pressings.
The thing is, “better” will always belong in the realm of the subjective as it’s ultimately a personal appreciation.
Vinyl will always (to me, at least) sound warmer and more organic. Digital will, to my ears, sound dull. I prefer a good CD to a bad vinyl pressing but one thing doesn’t exclude the other 😊 I will still hear the difference. It’s a matter of preference (and habit), at the end of the day.
Do you remember the country of issue of that 1974 reissue you mention? Quality is not always consistent across countries/editions.
Wear and tear is another factor to consider. If a record sees considerable wear and tear (or misuse) throughout the years, this will directly affect the sound, even if no visible signs are present.
Not sure if you had a chance to check my archive but you may find these pieces interesting:
Thanks a lot for your comment, Teresa! Yes, indeed: vinyl is back with a vengeance. In case you haven’t had a chance to read it yet, in this article I talk about this phenomenon in more depth:
Such a simple and clear explanation! My inner 6-year-old (and inner 50-something with the attention span of a 6-year-old) thanks you!
Cheers, Steve! I’m glad both man and child enjoyed it 😄
Great explanation, Andres!
Thank you, Marc!
I echo Steve (as I often do)! Cute example, too, from your kidhood that illustrates your point (this former teacher appreciates)! That anecdote reminds me of something you said to me (in an e-mail) I wanted to respond to, but forgot (that happens a lot lately)! For your readers, they should know I'm in the states, while I'm sure most know you're in London:
You had complimented me on my new-found bravery to record audio (as you do, routinely) for your articles, as you obviously inspired me to do so. In your comment, you said you enjoyed hearing "my accent," which of course I giggled at! And, I adore (and, if I'm being honest....covet) yours!
Which got me thinking about perspective and self-awareness.....cut to your Quasimodo (and, his possible siblings, Partialmodo, Semimodo, and of course, Todomodo)....and, more to the point, Igor (that's Eye-gor) from Mel Brooks' "Young Frankenstein."
Unsure of its availability, ever, in the UK (theatrical release as well as video/streaming, etc since), and realizing you were born several years after its release, anyway, here's the clip I was remembering: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Pr36CANB04
So, after your comment, my in-head reply (with tongue planted firmly in cheek, of course) was: "What accent?"😂😂Hamlet, you're a prince.....and great minds think alike, even across the proverbial pond! It took your story of Quasi to remind me of what I forgot to bring up a couple weeks ago!
As for your wonderful article, I've been searching for years for a reason or rationale for why I love the vinyl format.....something other and more than just, "it's what I grew up with," and I finally have concrete, and even empirical, data! Thank you!
Wow, Brad. Thanks a lot for all of this. Such nice words, for which I am very grateful, but also, it’s always so entartaining to read your comments. So... double thanks for that!
Of course, one of the great mysteries of languages is that one is never fully aware of one’s own accent, and yet, others find it so distinctive. As a linguist; I still find it fascinating, even though I had to study the science behind it. How certain things sound so natural to some and so foreign to others.
Thanks a lot for the YouTube clip, with which, as you correctly guessed, I wasn’t familiar. It put a smile on my face.
And I am really glad you liked the article and found it interesting. Of course, as you grew up with vinyl, you kind of “breathed” organically with it, and acquired a lot of knowledge (perhaps more knowledge than you were/are aware of) like second nature. The relationship between listener and vinyl was a lot more “organic” back then. A lot of things didn’t have to be “learned” because... well, because that was the way things were! Whereas my generation, who grew up without it, we kind of have to learn the A to Z because we don’t have a lot of (or any) intuitive vinyl “reservoir” of knowledge that we can rely on. It’s almost like we’re learning vinyl as a foreign language. Fascinating stuff indeed!
Please stop with the nonsense. A record is many times removed from the original production when you pull that record from its sleeve. It is scientifically well-known that analog reproduction suffers from degradation. Digital offers something different. Restoration. This restoration isn't possible with analog signals, because with analog there aren't just two possibilities. Compare a photocopy of a photocopy to a copy of a copy of a copy of a computer file. The computer files are (very probably) perfect copies of the original file. That is one reason why studios almost exclusively now use Digital Audio Workstations for recording. Subjectively you may love the sound of a vinyl records and I get that, but don't pretend science is why.
The point of the article, which you seem to have missed, is to suggest a succint way of explaining some of the differences between vinyl and digital in the simplest of terms, as one would explain things to a child. This was partly inspired by the personal anecdote from my childhood that I narrate at the beginning. Nowhere in my piece do I claim that vinyl is an exact replica of the original recording. Ultimately what sounds better or worse belongs to the subjective realm: the warmth of the analogue recording and the harmonic distortion that vinyl often brings with it are common examples of why so many music lovers, from casual listeners to audiophiles, prefer vinyl over digital. That is what I was referring to primarily when I said that with vinyl there is "more" to hear. Now, the aggressive tone of your comment is completely out of order and totally unacceptable. If you don't like what you read, you can simply scroll on. I often welcome constructive debates but not in these terms and far removed from the offensive, derogatory and patronising tone you have used with me. May I suggest you try to find some happiness in your life as you are clearly in desperate need of it. Best wishes.
This is a simple and correct explanation for why vinyl sounds different (and arguably better) than digital, but I must raise a point of order. Not all vinyl sounds “better” than all digital formats (in particular CDs played on a good stereo system). There are plenty of vinyl reissues that don’t sound as good as the “original” pressing of the album and in many cases may not sound as good as the CD version. As an example, I purchased a reissue of Coltrane’s Africa/Brass from about 1974. It sounded flat, thick and lifeless - absolutely nothing like what I imagine Coltrane, Dolphy, Tyner & Co. actually sounded like in Rudy Van Gelder’s studio. I put it one more than once and each time got angry; I eventually traded it back to the record store. About a year later, I found an “original” pressing of Africa/Brass (my guess is it was pressed in 63; the LP was released in 61). It sounded much better than the reissue I had briefly owned. But more to the point, I think a CD of Africa/Brass would have sounded infinitely better than the 74 reissued vinyl I briefly owned. Indeed, for awhile I would stream the album rather than play that reissued LP.
Hi Marcus! Thanks for your comment. You raise valid points. My article is intentionally oversimplified: the main goal was to explore how one could explain Vinyl 101 to a child or a complete lay person at a dinner party.
Of course, what you say is technically true. In fact, I own some CDs that sound more “present” and less muffled than some lower-quality vinyl pressings.
The thing is, “better” will always belong in the realm of the subjective as it’s ultimately a personal appreciation.
Vinyl will always (to me, at least) sound warmer and more organic. Digital will, to my ears, sound dull. I prefer a good CD to a bad vinyl pressing but one thing doesn’t exclude the other 😊 I will still hear the difference. It’s a matter of preference (and habit), at the end of the day.
Do you remember the country of issue of that 1974 reissue you mention? Quality is not always consistent across countries/editions.
Wear and tear is another factor to consider. If a record sees considerable wear and tear (or misuse) throughout the years, this will directly affect the sound, even if no visible signs are present.
Not sure if you had a chance to check my archive but you may find these pieces interesting:
https://vinylroom.substack.com/p/original-versus-reissue-the-great
https://vinylroom.substack.com/p/original-versus-reissue-age-matters
https://vinylroom.substack.com/p/original-versus-reissue-age-matters-782
Thanks for reading!
Thanks a lot for your comment, Teresa! Yes, indeed: vinyl is back with a vengeance. In case you haven’t had a chance to read it yet, in this article I talk about this phenomenon in more depth:
https://open.substack.com/pub/vinylroom/p/the-revenge-of-vinyl?r=222vb3&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
Hope you enjoy!
Exactly my thoughts as well! Thanks, glad you enjoyed!