Not just an opinion. Simple fact. Claiming the vinyl is better is like denying climate change. Best, John Haley On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 4:18 PM, Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Hi John, > > My point was exactly your point. The sound quality of lousy-sounding CDs > and hi-rez have nothing to do with the technology or format, as I said in > my original posting. I also said, the better sounding LP is the state of > the art until a better-sounding digital version comes out. Given today's > economics of the reissue business, that is not likely in many cases. I > don't agree that vinyl "loses" any "battle" since listening enjoyment is > very subjective. All of the LPs I've overseen are made from the same > sources as the digital (ie the digital master files). Some people have > expressed a very strong preferences for LP. They like the sound of that > media on their playback system. The problem I have with your OPINION is > that "better" is just that, an opinion. You prefer the sound of digital, > others prefer analog playback. Fortunately, there is a thriving niche > market for those who prefer vinyl. I am happy about anything that is > profitable to those in a position to fund reissues of great music. > > -- Tom Fine > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Haley" <[log in to unmask]> > To: <[log in to unmask]> > Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2016 3:17 PM > > Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] The new normal - "hits" are hard to come by, the > vinyl niche continues to thrive > > > The solution to all of this discussion is simple. We should be cutting an > optimal digital signal into shellac records for the long term. ☺ We don't > even need a wide frequency response to carry the digital signal. > > Tom, with all due respect I think your comments about liking the > engineering on some LP's better than their CD or hi-def counterparts is off > point. That really has nothing to do with the format and everything to do > with the human fallibility that goes into making all of these things. If > the same audio product is pressed into vinyl and put on CD or a hi-def > format, the vinyl is going to lose that battle every time. Vinyl is just a > fad based more on nostalgia than anything else. I, for one, will be glad > when it passes. > > Best, > John > > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 2:49 PM, Dave Burnham <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > Tom is correct; 78s can't possibly have the same hi-end content as LPs >> because of the limitation caused by speed vs. stylus size. However in my >> own experience, I have tens of thousands of 78s stored in out door units >> which endure the temperature extremes of South Ontario, (winter lows below >> minus 20 degrees C.(0 degrees F.) and summer highs over 30 degrees C. (90 >> degrees F.) and beyond, without any apparent deterioration over many >> years; >> however I never bring records inside from deep freeze to indoor warmth, >> but >> a fellow collector, (David Lennick), told me that that's even an >> unnecessary precaution, that he does it all the time without a problem. >> >> db >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> > On Feb 3, 2016, at 1:54 PM, Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >> > >> > 78s are quite brittle and breakable, so long-lasting only if carefully >> stored and used. And, no offense to any of the fans on list here, but they >> are hardly high fidelity to their source. Everything from the recording >> system (frequency-limited, essentially no top end, very high noise floor, >> most of this caused by the cutting elements and methods because Nick Bergh >> has demonstrated that what hit the cutterhead was actually pretty high >> fidelity although treble-lacking, as early as the early 1930s) to the >> release medium (commercial shellac was almost always very noisy, variable >> from unbearably noisy to too noisy for comfortable listening) were stacked >> against high fidelity. LPs got closer, especially as the technology >> evolved >> (less distortion in the cutting chains, quieter vinyl compounds). >> > >> > As one who has had a hand in selecting content for modern LP reissue >> projects, and approved test pressings, I can say that the quality level of >> both the cutting and pressing is very impressive. It's still a craft, but >> I'm happy to say there are craftsmen out there, here and now. >> > >> > Because it's a luxury-priced niche, much more attention CAN be paid at >> the factory (but not always is) to matters like plating and pressing >> quality, vinyl compounds and sleeve printing. It's not a mass medium like >> days of yore, so it doesn't need to be manufactured to the most cost-cut >> point to be competitive. I maintain that many buyers of modern vinyl are >> buying a physical artifact, something consider beautiful and collectable, >> and that is why they niche will remain healthy. The mass market either >> wants to pay nothing for music, or wants to pay very little for something >> that is very convenient and instantaneous, which is why vinyl will always >> be a niche. What has made me happy in the past decade or so is that the >> niche has emerged as big enough to be viable and have some economies of >> scale. The fact that new and refurb presses are still coming on-line, and >> the fact that I know there is a 3-month wait to get something pressed in >> any quantity right now, tells me the niche is very healthy and the economy >> has room to scale up a little bit (but not overbuild). I also know that >> the >> really good cutting engineers are booked months ahead too. >> > >> > As for the usual disdain about the low-tech nature of LP records vs a >> modern digital chain, my ears tell me all I need to know. If more CDs and >> other digital products sounded better, I'd be standing in the back row, >> hook-horns raised, in agreement. But, alas, too many CDs, especially >> remasters of content originally put out on LP, sound awful. That's not the >> fault of the technology, but it is the state of the art for at least those >> albums, since one can't buy a better-sounding product except the LP. When >> there is a better-sounding CD or high-rez digital alternative, I favor >> that >> as my listening source. >> > >> > -- Tom Fine >> > >> > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris Bishop" < >> [log in to unmask]> >> > To: <[log in to unmask]> >> > Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2016 12:55 PM >> > Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] The new normal - "hits" are hard to come by, the >> vinyl niche continues to thrive >> > >> > >> >> 78s weren't ever pure shellac, which is too brittle, there were all >> kinds >> >> of fillers in them, like later vinyl records. Many post-war 78s were >> made >> >> with vinyl compounds. But I'm sure the best shellac discs hold up very >> >> well. >> >> >> >> Properly-produced vinyl is a very stable medium and a cheap material >> too. I >> >> don't know how long a record could remain an accurate document sitting >> on a >> >> library shelf - a few hundred years, a thousand? Maybe archives should >> >> purchase some lathes and start training people to master and cut vinyl. >> It >> >> may be a better option than digital for long-term preservation - or at >> >> least the best physical backup available. >> >> >> >> Artists who record digitally and upload to bandcamp or soundcloud will >> more >> >> likely than not have their music be inaccessible in a hundred years, >> while >> >> those who produce vinyl albums or singles, whatever the aural >> shortcomings, >> >> will see theirs survive. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 12:32 PM, Frank Strauss <[log in to unmask]> >> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Diamond Disks! >> >>> >> >>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 11:41 AM, Chris Bishop <[log in to unmask] >> > >> >>> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> > Most people don't even want downloads let alone CDs. So in that >> sense >> >>> vinyl >> >>> > is as doomed as every other physical medium. >> >>> > >> >>> > But I disagree that vinyl is a dead medium at this time. The DJ >> scene is >> >>> > stronger than ever in every genre. >> >>> > >> >>> > Records produced 50 or 60 years ago can be pulled off the shelf, >> cleaned >> >>> > and played with almost no deterioration from age. What medium is >> more >> >>> > stable in average storage conditions? >> >>> > >> >>> > Chris >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 11:28 AM, John Haley <[log in to unmask]> >> wrote: >> >>> > >> >>> > > It's the old question--do you want fame or money? Many "artists" >> of >> >>> > today >> >>> > > apparently keep their day jobs and go for fame by giving it away, >> >>> > thinking >> >>> > > fortune will follow. Seems like it seldom does, and this has very >> >>> little >> >>> > > to do with basic talent. It's a recipe for a lousy pop music >> world, >> >>> > which >> >>> > > to my ancient ears is just what is happening. Meanwhile any >> third-rate >> >>> > pop >> >>> > > artist from the past can sell out a hall today. Thank goodness >> they >> >>> are >> >>> > > there. >> >>> > > >> >>> > > As for vinyl, it's a blip and a fad. If it gets people listening >> who >> >>> > > otherwise wouldn't be, then fine, I like it, but we who ought to >> know >> >>> > > better mustn't kid ourselves. As a format, vinyl is a dead one, >> and it >> >>> > > deserves to be. Of course I'm not tossing out my record >> collection, >> >>> but >> >>> > as >> >>> > > a person who restores old records in modern formats, I have no >> >>> nostalgic, >> >>> > > romantic illusions about vinyl's supposed virtues. If people are >> happy >> >>> > > listening to it, then be happy and go for it. But as "audio >> people" >> >>> let's >> >>> > > not go fooling ourselves. >> >>> > > >> >>> > > Best, >> >>> > > John Haley >> >>> > > >> >>> > > >> >>> > > >> >>> > > >> >>> > > >> >>> > > On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 9:09 AM, Tom Fine < >> [log in to unmask]> >> >>> > > wrote: >> >>> > > >> >>> > > > Interesting stats from Nielsen: >> >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> >>> > > >> >>> > >> >>> >> >> http://www.theverge.com/2016/1/22/10816404/2015-album-sales-trends-vinyl-catalog-streaming >> >>> > > > >> >>> > > > Soundscan does not pick up the whole market, but the trends seem >> >>> > > credible. >> >>> > > > Interesting that Adele fans are also vinyl fans in such a >> pronounced >> >>> > > way. I >> >>> > > > wonder if the back-catalog trend was just a blip because so much >> of >> >>> it >> >>> > is >> >>> > > > now in print either as downloads or physical media, just about >> every >> >>> > > > "golden age" audiophile favorite is not out in new-remaster >> vinyl, >> >>> and >> >>> > > what >> >>> > > > CDs are left in the pipeline are heavily discounted. But, that >> said, >> >>> > the >> >>> > > > market to create great new music is not really there -- artists >> make >> >>> > more >> >>> > > > just touring and releasing a song here and there via download or >> >>> video >> >>> > > > streams. So why get in a studio and create great art? There was >> also >> >>> an >> >>> > > > interesting interview in the latest issue of TapeOp magazine >> with the >> >>> > > > Minneapolis hip-hop collective Doomtree. One thing they said >> that >> >>> stuck >> >>> > > in >> >>> > > > my mind is that there is a penalty today for taking the time to >> write >> >>> > > > great, meaningful lyrics. The music-buying public wants catchy >> >>> phrases >> >>> > > and >> >>> > > > well-worn stereotype statements set to music, they want simple >> >>> ditties, >> >>> > > and >> >>> > > > simple sells. >> >>> > > > >> >>> > > > This report looks at unit sales for the first half of 2015: >> >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> >>> > > >> >>> > >> >>> >> >> http://www.musicbusinessworldwide.com/us-album-sales-fall-4-in-first-half-of-2015-as-cd-rules-market-just/ >> >>> > > > The problem that isn't documented in unit sales is that >> copyright >> >>> > owners, >> >>> > > > artists and everyone else with a stake in making quality music >> get >> >>> > > pennies >> >>> > > > on the dollar from these streaming services, and that's the main >> >>> growth >> >>> > > > area as far as consumer uptake (yes, the vinyl niche is >> thriving, but >> >>> > > it's >> >>> > > > a tiny niche compared to overall music sales, and does not >> produce >> >>> > enough >> >>> > > > revenue to float any artist or major copyright owner). I think >> it was >> >>> > > very >> >>> > > > foolish for the record companies to surrender to streamers on >> the >> >>> > cheap. >> >>> > > > They should be charging royalties like radio, plus a download >> fee, >> >>> and >> >>> > > the >> >>> > > > streamers should be forced into a model where everyone who >> streams >> >>> > pays a >> >>> > > > monthly fee. Most of the streaming is freebie streaming, and >> that >> >>> just >> >>> > > > doesn't produce enough revenue. If I were an artists, I'd say >> you get >> >>> > > > nothing for free streaming, and if I'm a hit-making artist I'd >> say >> >>> you >> >>> > > get >> >>> > > > nothing without paying me regular download fees. >> >>> > > > >> >>> > > > -- Tom Fine >> >>> > > > >> >>> > > >> >>> > >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> -- >> >>> Frank B Strauss, DMD >> >>> >> >> >> >>