Hey, Stefan. Nice to hear from you. I thought I sent you those responses, but I suppose I never did . . . oops.

As you can imagine, it's a tough call as to whether vinyl or CD is actually "better." The answer you get depends upon who you're asking (and from what era) and what their particular point of view and experience has been. Still there's no one answer as evident below.

So, for whatever it's worth, here are some of the responses I got to your question:

1) Interesting. Vinyl is "organic" the sound lives in the grooves and the grooves are the sound. CD's/digital are numerical representations (1's & 0's) of the sound, much like the dots & dashes of morse code. Depending on who's changing the dots & dashes into words will affect the accuracy of the message. I (and you) grew up in the organic analog world of rolling tape & bouncing VU meters where the entire recording process seemed to have a life of it's own.

Digital for all it's pristine, noise free, no generation loss, ultimate computer flexibility of 8 bazzillion tracks is to me as far as music is concerned is like making love by email. Something is missing.

"If the tape ain't rolling we ain't recording"

2) This is worthy of a dissertation as it is not cut and dry.  I own great sounding CD's and sh*tty sounding LP's.  There is a psycho/emotional aspect which is hard to articulate, so need some time to organize my thoughts.

3) I think that if it's recorded today, that cd is fine. Otherwise, it should be taken into account what a recording like "Introducing the Beatles" was meant to sound like coming off of a monaural vinyl disc. And with a really good mastering engineer... that shouldn't be a problem either.

4) CDs for me!! Plus they take up less space. LOL.

5) The cd comes extremely close to the original master tape - much closer than vinyl does.  In cases where vinyl sounds better it is not because it is more accurate than a cd. Read on...

Vinyl can add a pleasing, or "euphonic" kind of distortion and noise.  The distortion can help "sand off the rough edges" that may exist on the master tape, e.g. sharp transients. It can "soften" the bottom, making it seem less hard than the master tape. Tube (valve) amplifiers can do something similar. The surface noise can create a sort of "cocoon" - note the sound of the lead-in groove just after you put the tone arm town.

But vinyl has a lot of trade offs - if you want to cut something loud you will get less noise, but more distortion. -- and vice versa.  Frequently, if you want more bottom you cannot fit as much time on a record. That's why so many albums are lacking bottom.

What's "superior?" Whatever sounds best to you!

6) Ah...haven't heard this argument in a while. But I do have some opinions and views. Just recently, witnessed first hand. I did a playback of an analog multitrack I had recorded some years back. I couldn't believe how good it sounded. It had been a while since I had listened to anything other than digital files and cds. There was just something more pure, more pleasing, more full about what I heard. Made my ears go,"Ahhhh..."

I also remember witnessing first hand a tech measuring the frequency response of the Ampex 1/2 inch 2 track machine at Afterhours Studios in North Miami. It was still holding it's own, and didn't start rolling off until 37,000 hertz! Even the tech was surprised. Now, one may say we can't hear that high, and any sound engineer will agree with you, but we can certainly FEEL that high!

I remember getting test pressings of albums, for our approval. Big difference between pressing plants even. Some just sounded dull and lifeless, others were markedly better. I still believe the best shot the public had of hearing what I heard in the studio was the first 3 or 4 playings of a vinyl disc from a good pressing plant (and the buyer has no control of where the disc was pressed). Tough stuff

AND...the last song on the sides had to be EQ'D differently than the rest because of the loss of groove integrity.

But, you can jog with a cd player, you can jog with your files in an ipod and all the other obvious advantages. I think the people that would argue about the great sound of the cd have never heard the sound of an analog mix or a real good vinyl record playback and I'm talking about a whole generation of sound engineers that have known nothing except tapeless sound storage. I hate to sound like a close-minded older generation engineer, but...they don't know what they are missing!!

---

Well, Stefan, there you have it. Some varied opinions, to be sure, but they're straight from a bunch of seasoned veterans in the sound recording business.

What do I think? Well, I don't even own a working turntable these days, so it's impossible to offer a valid opinion. Ha! I will say that back in the day, I had a hell of a time getting some of the records I made transferred to vinyl. When I brought the first RAMONES album in to mastering, the engineer stared and me and said something like, "are you kidding?" There were other projects, too, that were most challenging to get onto vinyl. When transferring to vinyl, unless you've played it very safe, something always had to be compromised -- either the length of the album, or the overall loudness, or the loudness of particular cuts, or even the order of the tracks. Vinyl posed a very limiting medium for loud rock and roll records, especially ones like the first RAMONES album which had the bass one side (instead of the usual center) and a kickin' loud guitar on the other! :)

Hope you enjoyed this little discussion and it helps you make some conclusions of your own.

Best,

Rob

Jeg håber at nogen vil finde det interessant hvad nogle af de gamle lyddrenge mener?

P.S. Jeg er både til vinyl og cd, nogle gange det ene og nogle gange det andet, skifter en del afhængig af indspilningen og humør!