Can we all just agree that vinyl sounds like shit? http://ww

>>71665271
>banana
>>>/b/

Yeah, never fall for the meme

>>71665271
>can we all agree about something subjective
Nah

technical quality isn't a measure of art. listening is subjective. the argument of "this is objectively a better medium" is fucking dumb, vinyl people just need to own that they simply think it sounds better to them subjectively and not try to prove anything. it's art. there's nothing to prove.

vinyl does not enable brickwalling mastering

>>71665534
>ignoring the fact that brickwalling results in a lower noise floor

>>71665463
Please tell me how one can enjoy music that sounds like vaseline. It's like listening to all music you have with a cutoff filter and calling it Vaporwave.

>>71665534
Solution: buy old CDs.

>>71665594
>Please tell me how one can enjoy music that sounds like vaseline.
Are you saying no one enjoyed music before 1985?

>>71665669
They had to settle for the best option they had.

>>71665693
Yet we now have lots of options, and there is a vinyl resurgence. Clearly someone enjoys them more.

i really really like this image

>>71665712
For non-musical reasons. I'll still buy some records just because having a copy of a 500-copy run makes it a neat collector's item.

>>71665839
>For non-musical reasons
Such as?

>>71665712
>vinyl resurgence
Totally not because of the le "vinyl is better" meme pushed by recording studios. Coming right up: LaserDisk is better because it is also analog!

>>71665895
>meme pushed by recording studios
Wouldn't it make more sense for them to push CDs because there is a higher profit margin?

Nice try though

File: mike is hard.png (325KB, 377x512px) Image search: [Google]

325KB, 377x512px

>>71665861
Collectibles.

File: just price it higher.png (162KB, 930x352px) Image search: [Google]

162KB, 930x352px

>>71665924
You just price it higher.

i don't understand vinyl obsession. yes they look beautiful but why would an old format of a giant disc that gets scratched over time and therefor loses quality be the best format? and they seem to be so fragile. when they get too warm they melt or bend? you cant staple them onto each other? you cant touch them on the grooves? a shitty player or bad needle can harm them? the only good thing about them is literally the big cover art.

Yeah, I fell for the meme when I was a wee teen and blew 50% of my job income on records I have never listened to

File: GOTG-exploded-with-front.png (740KB, 1093x591px) Image search: [Google]

740KB, 1093x591px

>>71665895
>Coming right up: LaserDisk is better because it is also analog!

The best part about it is that, unlike audio technology, which hasn't really significantly improved in the last 20-30 years or so (actually has improved, but the apparent returns are more diminished over time), home video is only improving, and no one looks past the older formats other than nostalgia or maybe exclusive releases, because they they all sucked.

>>71665924
yes but pushing CDs doesn't work

>>71666021

I like vinyl as much as everyone else but I don't consider it a primary format nowadays, but more like being a format alongside digital. I listen to vinyl whenever I'm chilling at home, digital whenever I'm on my computer or I'm away.

Also, use HDPE sleeves if you want to avoid scratches, and vinyl lasts a surprising amount of playback.

>>71665960
No, people listen to vinyl.

Try again
>>71666041
Neither does vinyl. it's a niche market
>>71665999
Less people will buy.

>>71665999

Because vinyl production is more expensive. The profit margin is more or less the same.

>why cds MAY actually sound better

No, they sound better, they're more accurate and there is no limitations of the format. If an artist masters their record differently for their vinyl and that master sounds better, then the vinyl has absolutely nothing to do with it, they could use that master and it would be more accurately represented on a cd.

This is not an argument anymore. CDs give a more accurate representation of what the artist themselves hear when they're mixing and mastering the record in the studio. If you like the sound of vinyl, that's completely fine, but it isn't a "better" sound, any subjectivity that comes into place here doesn't have to do with measured quality.

Vinyl are great for collecting, having that physical sleeve and record is so much better than a shitty plastic cd case, but that's it.

>>71666150
>Neither does vinyl. it's a niche market
I guess it does? Vinyl has blown up. I doubt the same thing could have happend with CDs. I can't imagine highschool girls doing videos of their CD collection of vampire weekend albums.

>>71666177
>>71665463

>>71665470
this, i dont know what the problem is. Its up to whoever is using it. Im for vinyl myself but i still use cd and think that they are both fine.

People just need to calm down

>>71666206
http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2016/09/20/vinyl-records-drop-9-us-2016/
>I can't imagine highschool girls doing videos of their CD collection of vampire weekend albums.
They just download it and talk about it IRL

>>71666210
It isn't subjective, in terms of accuracy a CD is better. You can like the signature vinyl sound over a clean digital one, but it isn't better, it is measurably inferior actually.

>>71666150
> Less people will buy.
>>71666176
> Because vinyl production is more expensive. The profit margin is more or less the same.

With 60 seconds on google I learned that studios will burn CDs for about $2.50 each (worst case scenario) and will press LPs for $5.20. It's twice as much, but you can bump up the cost of the recording three to four times easily, because it's now a "collectible".

>>71666231
>http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2016/09/20/vinyl-records-drop-9-us-2016/
ok i guess its dying again. but they already must have made quite some profit of the past years when sales were that big.

>>71666257
>studios
I don't think you know what you are talking about

>>71666305
>dat damage control

Is there any point to owning music in physical formats other than for collecting? Arguing CD vs vinyl quality seems pretty pointless to me if neither my phone or my computer can play either back.

>>71666373
If you do that you'll pay less attention to the music itself. It breeds poor music criticism

>>71666373
Old CDs have a chance of less brickwalling, and are also cheaper than downloading from HDtracks.

>>71666467
Older CDs run the chance of having being made from inferior masters

>>71666467
That's fair.

>>71666373
I see what you're saying but I don't know if there's an actual correlation there. Depends on your mindset when you're going to listen I guess.

>>71666467

Old CDs are also mostly poor tape transfers.

File: 14204968456530.png (35KB, 546x567px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 546x567px

>>71666558
Proofs?

>>71666322
damage control? i only said vinyl has blown up and thats true it has. maybe its declining again but before that it surely made big profit for a few years when it was at its peak for hipsters.

>>71666678
>it surely made big profit for a few years when it was at its peak for hipsters.
Wait I thought you said "high school girls", not "hipsters.

Which is it?

>>71666718
both doesnt contradict each other.

>>71666766
Nah, they completely do.

Ever seen a line at Record Store Day?

>>71666906
those type of high school girls that post their vinyl collection videos on youtube are hipsters. hipsters arent a homogeneous group. i used them as an example. i just cant imagine CDs being marketed as this trendy thing that trendy hipsters want to show off on youtube. that will probably only work in 10-20 years when CDs are considered vintage.

>>71666943
>those type of high school girls that post their vinyl collection videos on youtube are hipsters
They are also the minority of people who buy vinyl
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/dec/07/vinyl-sales-tesco-lps-labels

>>71666965
>They are also the minority of people who buy vinyl
who cares, thats not what we are talking about and its not relevant to the point im making. what argument are you even trying to make currently? are you disagreeing with my point that CDs aren't marketable as cool?

>>71667012
>who cares
Well you used that as an argument against vinyl sales. Are you tarded?
>what argument are you even trying to make currently?
Did you read the thread?

>>71667066
>Did you read the thread?
nah desu