That's an excellent site. I used to buy plenty on there, but prefer digital format now as I don't have any room for more records! I buy the occasional record now and the first thing I do, is record it to wav format. I'm unlikely to play the record again!
That's an excellent site. I used to buy plenty on there, but prefer digital format now as I don't have any room for more records! I buy the occasional record now and the first thing I do, is record it to wav format. I'm unlikely to play the record ag
^ Problem with digital format they are compressed from their original version and formatted to a digital scale. So the Hi and Lo frequencies are cut out and you lose the full feeling of a track. CDs just don't provide the full range of sounds that vinyl records do.
Vinyl coming back in a big way, but some of these new vinyl LPs are a rip-off if it's not created from the original. They cost about £20 for an LP, but why buy a vinyl LP if it is created from digital format. That loses the point of having music on vinyl, you might as well listen to a CD.
Got a huge collection of old vinyl records and 2 vintage record players, use to buy and sell on ebay and record fairs, but don't bother so much with that now although still got a big private collection.
Record players may be old fashioned and like a dead piece of technology, but the sound they provide still is the best today. imo
^ Problem with digital format they are compressed from their original version and formatted to a digital scale. So the Hi and Lo frequencies are cut out and you lose the full feeling of a track. CDs just don't provide the full range of sounds that vi
hound dog is correct. an early vinyl recording by an opera singer such as Gigli, crackly and worn is of better sound quality than anything recorded today digitally.
even the shellec discs of the 1890s had better quality sound than now. every form of sound, musical or speech or any human event sounds richer and more atmospheric when recorded in analogue.
hound dog is correct. an early vinyl recording by an opera singer such as Gigli, crackly and worn is of better sound quality than anything recorded today digitally.even the shellec discs of the 1890s had better quality sound than now. every form of s
I'm don't hold much value in the finer detail of sound quality. I listen to the majority of music either in my car or via moderate quality headphones while walking. I do still have my two Technics SL1200 Mk II's hooked up with a mixer to my moderate old hifi system. I have never owned a decent sound system.
I have a MC6000MK2 Professional Digital Mixer & Controller (a 2nd mixer), which combined with Virtual DJ software, allows you to drag the wav/mp3 files onto the "virtual decks" and make mixes, where the beats are matched. The deck appears on the pc/laptop screen and the mixer/controller works in conjunction with it.
I'm don't hold much value in the finer detail of sound quality. I listen to the majority of music either in my car or via moderate quality headphones while walking. I do still have my two Technics SL1200 Mk II's hooked up with a mixer to my moderate
The other appealing thing about digital music is the cost! Songs are normally £1-2 each. I remember paying around £7 for a US import about 25 years ago!
The other appealing thing about digital music is the cost! Songs are normally £1-2 each. I remember paying around £7 for a US import about 25 years ago!
its interesting to hear some of these new artists on vinyl
i hated tapes, they were awful, and cds were clean sounding but always lacking from vinyl sound, digital ok, and better than tapes.
ive also got one of those brenan things which i loaded with all my cds, well quite a lot of them
we bought a denon stack years back and can play all formats through same speakers except ipod, but we bought some blue tooth speakers that work great
i dont intend re buying any more stuff but add the odd track now and again
got to watch out for scratches on second hand vinyl too !
its interesting to hear some of these new artists on vinyli hated tapes, they were awful, and cds were clean soundingbut always lacking from vinyl sound, digital ok, and betterthan tapes.ive also got one of those brenan things which i loaded with all
There a whole lot of nonsense talked about the wonderfulness of analogue.
If you want to analogue it up by all means run it through a valve amp or something but at the end of the day the musical media should be trying to get the optimum replication of the sound the mixers are hearing in the studio in the final mix, and they aren't running that through a record player. If the studio engineers want you to hear an analogue sound they can put it through valve amps their end, I'm sure some do. Perhaps they should sell "CD V2" at 24bit 88khz to settle all argument. Of course poorly sampled MP3s are cr*p but that's not inherently because they are digital.
There a whole lot of nonsense talked about the wonderfulness of analogue.If you want to analogue it up by all means run it through a valve amp or something but at the end of the day the musical media should be trying to get the optimum replication of
"hound dog have you heard the sound from any of these new "retro" record players, are they any good?"
Some of them are ok, maybe wouldn't win any hi fi awards, but don't go for the cheap ones because the sound quality likely to be very tinny. And basically a poor excuse for a record player. Also if they are cheaply made they can damage your records, (i.e. if the needle's not weighted very carefully it will skip and jump on your records scratching them).
I'd go for something a little more high end,spending over £100, you could get one with nice retro looks and the sound not bad at all, especially if they have a seperate bass and treble control. Just one thing, some are small and you can't shut the lid when playing an LP. On my old record players I shut the lid for a good bass reproduction. I always think the sound is better when you can close the lid.
In short, these retro ones do the job, but I doubt if they will be around in 50 years time like my Dansette and Hacker. And basically you get what you pay for, so wouldn't recommend going too cheap. Although you might be able to return for a refund if you bought one and weren't happy with it.
"hound dog have you heard the sound from any of these new "retro" record players, are they any good?"Some of them are ok, maybe wouldn't win any hi fi awards, but don't go for the cheap ones because the sound quality likely to be very tinny. And basi
it is not cost. the best and most expensive equipment cannot hide what is missing from a digital recording in relation to analogue.
and the least expensive equipment cannot destroy the essential quality that an analogue recording has over digital.
it is in the very nature of the physical material, a bit like comparing something such as acrylic paint to oil paint.
it is not cost. the best and most expensive equipment cannot hide what is missing from a digital recording in relation to analogue. and the least expensive equipment cannot destroy the essential quality that an analogue recording has over digital.it
now if a painting is done in acrylic and a painting is done in oils many people not only will not be able to see the difference, but even if they could would not be able to feel the difference.
they do not have the facility.
now if a painting is done in acrylic and a painting is done in oils many people not only will not be able to see the difference, but even if they could would not be able to feel the difference.they do not have the facility.