The great thing about vinyl isn't necessarily the sound quality, it's the experience. When you decide to listen to a record, your mind is on it. You have to choose it off of a shelve, remove it from the sleeve, maybe clean it, and set the needle. You are primed to really listen. Then you have the cover and the liner notes to peruse. You are committed to it. The ease and convenience of digital music cheapens the experience. It's disposable.
I experienced something close to that.I was stuck at my house when the wifi went out and lived in a valley with shit signal. I had an old CD player and my late uncle left Outlandos d'amour in our living room before he died. I immediately had a huge appreciation for boomer music when I heard the first track.
@@bkkersey93 Yeah, the vinyl sound is just bigger. It's louder. I don't know what the technical reason for this is, but you could have a record and CD of the same music and with the stereo set at the same volume, the record will be louder than the CD. Higher dynamic range?
@@vagabondarcade7633 vinyl has a limited dynamic range, cause you can only cut so deep. CD has a bigger dynamic range if you really want to hear what CD is capable off buy a classical CD and compare it to the vinyl. The CD wil sound better because of the bigger dynamic range that CD can deliver. That is why vinyl did not get affected by the loudness wars because you cant clip audio like that on vinyl. So there is a positive side to vinyl that it did not get affected by the loudness wars, but on the other hand CD is more capable of performing better than vinyl. Just take a daft punk vinyl and CD and compare them, the cd will win. Because daft punk made sure that the CD release would as good as it could get and that is way better than the vinyl release.
Love the irony of Rollins having a 1/2 million $ stereo in his house while all the Black Flag records sound like they were recorded on a cassette deck in the bottom of a dirty kiddy pool.
“What does it take to engineer a machine, that’s invisible to the experience.” Very well said. And he had me at Bill Evans, waltz for Debby is a masterpiece
@@increase9896 good FLACs are higher fidelity than vinyls. and anything more than 24/96 on FLAC is a waste of hard drive space. but a lossy 192kbs file that was encoded from a lossless format sounds the same to the human ear which is referred to as "transparent".
@@Madrrrrrrrrrrr Yes the question wasn't really specifically answered. First, it's not true that vinyl is the closest to the master, but he also explains that digitally mastered songs mean that a lossless audio file is essentially identical to the master. I think the real answer is that records aren't the best audio, but people like the ritual of putting on the record, of looking at the huge record cover, the pop and hiss of the needle going on, having to get up and flip the record.
That was the best way I've ever heard someone describe what the best, of most experiences, should be like. I don't remember the following two minutes because my dumb brain was still shell shocked from that quote.
You need magic rocks wrapped around your silver plated RCA cables if you want the best sound quality. Telling ya, the vocals so pronounced and the soundstage is out of this world when you add magic rocks to your collection!
Chris McCartney you should listen to Jack White talk about vinyl, it’s fucking beautiful, he even has his very own factory where they make records in the back, sell them in the front. The guy from myth busters has a video where he visits and makes his own record, it’s good shit.
He wasn't talking out of his ass; he was talking out of someone else's. Digital is superior and capable of producing any waveform analog can. You would not be able to tell the difference between a high-quality digital signal versus an analog one. Mathematics and science support this conclusion. It has nothing to do with subjectivity.
My first stereo in the house was a victrola and it was the wood that made the speakers sound great. My own first stereo was a small $149 dollar with a turntable, eight track, and FM radio and a plastic cover and it was the best experience ever, I was 14 years old and my moms knew how much I loved music and purchased it for me, nothing can replace that feeling, sort of like your first kiss.
Far better than what 14 year olds hear today. To get the experience you had at 14 it would cost thousands today and only those with real money can afford it.
Vinyl as a medium is not actually better sonically. It actually has quite a bit of limitations. This is the main reason why it sounds "better" to some people. I am a sound engineer and have mastered for vinyl. When you're mixing/mastering for vinyl, you cannot push maximizing limiters to make the recording 'extra loud' the way you can on digital (this includes flac, so flac and vinyl have little in common). You also need to roll off a lot of the low bass, like 30hz or below. The reason for all of this is more bass takes more space on vinyl, also can literally cause skips. If the recording is maximized too much, it can cause vinyl distortion and also flaws in the pressing. Mastering for vinyl is a careful process, which gets ignored often in the digital world, where people just slam the volume up as loud as they can. This actually makes records as a whole more dynamic since they have certain limitations on the way they can be mixed and mastered.
I've heard a sound system like he's explaining that costs $150K. If I remember right that system was upwards of $200K and most of that was the speaks and I really wish I could remember the brand. It's incredible. I listened to an orchestra recording and if you closed your eyes it was like being in the room with them. You could point to the individual players/sections in the orchestra. I've never experienced anything like that. The imagining of the audio was unreal. This was a system playing a FLAC digital recording.
It doesn't cost anywhere near $150k to achieve that. You can achieve the same thing for less than $10k... even less if you have a small-ish room and don't need a system with massive dynamic range. The key is not buying into the snakeoil and marketing. Those Wilson speakers aren't even the best cost-no-object speakers available. They measure pretty badly. Very easy to find much better for 1/20 of the price.
@@dtz1000 Those ultrasonic frequencies only matter to bats and your dog. Humans can't hear them anyway. Never mind that most music isn't recorded/mixed/mastered with them anyway.
I love collecting old records from garage sales and used bookstores for a buck a piece. Some of the records I bought were hardly ever played and in exceptional condition. They were mostly jazz, crooners and old rock and roll records. Quite a blast playing them.
The fact is that you will never hear a recording like it is in the studio because the room is just as big a factor as the speakers and amplifiers. Studio monitors are not like Hi Fi speakers, which are generally colored in various ways and then add to that different home room environments and the sound will be altered in so many ways from what was heard in the studio. Not all studio monitors are the same either and not all studios have full acoustic treatment. And vinyl records do NOT accurately reproduce what was recorded because of inherent physical limitations, especially in the low end frequencies. The best recording quality will be at the same recorded bit rate - usually 24 bits and not 16 bits like a CD - and the same sample rate, ie: 44.1kHz or higher if it was recorded at a higher rate. Almost all studios now master everything digitally, while using various analog equipment or plugins, which are now virtually indistinguishable from analog. So getting a digital master guarantees the best possible sound 'source' and the rest depends on your setup and room, which will all contribute to altering the original sound in various good and bad ways.
A good sounding system and a well treated room or at least having the walls filled up with furniture or books will enable you have an excellent near to studio experience. Remember he is talking about near to the experience and not exactly saying it is the same standard.
@@bighands69 Damn, I'm a professional studio-owner, I've recorded lots and lots of bands, famous and less famous, I've invested in real expensive studio-monitoring, roomaccoustics etc. and now all I should have done was put a lot of books and furniture in the controlroom... 🤣 But seriously, it's absolutely smart to at least make the room where you listen to music accousically good. But believe me, the difference between good studio-sound and "a nice sound" at home is huge!!! At home I don't even try it, I have a "fair" system, nothing more or less. And I enjoy the music there just as much. In my job I have to be picky, as an engineer/producer/musician, but at home I wanna enjoy the music! No more, no less!
I bet the room the audio gear was in was treated acoustically too. Treatments are often overlooked and can make a much more modest system sound excellent.
@@jeb419 man... when i was stoned for the first time and threw the thriller record on, listening to human nature, i couldn't believe my ears! it's most definitely the ultimate improvement to the sound
@@Ghoopty nope people don't master their audio in those speakers in studios nor do they are true to real life They can be nice sounding tho because they are made more for experience/feel rather than technicality or them being realistic
I know exactly what he's talking about too. I was at a home electronics expo about twenty years ago. There was an sign with an arrow pointing up a flight of stairs to the "high end audio" section. I got to the top and could hear music faintly playing. Then, I must have walked right into the sweet spot. The music suddenly got louder and clearer, and I felt like the music was emanating from the air around me. Totally surreal. It sounded _better_ than live music to my recollection. At first I was looking around me to try to work out where the music was coming from, even though the speakers were right in front of me, because I just couldn't comprehend that the it was coming from them. Normally you can kind of _feel_ that the music is coming out of the speakers, but these just looked like inanimate objects, and the music was just 'there'. That's the first time I listened to electrostatic speakers, and I'll never forget it.
I’m going to help y’all out a little bit here. I’ll start with record wear. One variable not considered is the quality of phono cartridges. Some needle assemblies (a needle in a phono cartridge is usually referred to as a stylus) are way lower mass than others, meaning they do less damage over time. Phono cartridges are critical because they’re the phase other than speakers or headphones where there’s a translation between mechanical energy and electrical energy. A device that does that is called a transducers, and transducers generally influence sound more within similar price ranges than electronics do because of the mechanical component. This means pay a lot of attention to phono cartridges when you buy a turntable; in actuality, the phono cartridge makes more of a difference in the sound of your record than the rest of your turntable does, unless it’s really lousy. Making equipment sonically invisible is expensive and not easy. Why is vinyl under ideal conditions closer to perfection than digital? Think of the difference between a painting and seeing the painting on your TV set. The painting is basically infinitely detailed, the TV picture is not because the TV picture is comprised of pixels. The more pixels you can fit per square inch, the closer you get to reproducing the painting perfectly. At some point you get enough pixels not to be able to detect the difference. The same is basically true of digital audio. Sampling rate is like pixels: the more times you sample per second, the finer your detail. The main problem here is that CD’s were released to the public before the sampling rate was quite as high as it should have been, and that’s why vinyl remains better. Actually, right now the bigger problem is that MP3’s are worse than CD’s. But there are advantages to digital, particularly if you can get the sampling rate high enough. Digital is encoded, and there are some benefits to this. The first is that as you make other copies you don’t wear anything out - it’s the same set of ones and zeroes no matter how many times you duplicate it, which is not true of record pressings. Another is that once encoded the signal isn’t susceptible to added distortion. Dust on a stylus harms the sound because it affects the movement of the needle, thereby becoming part of the sound. Dust on a CD, however, isn’t encoded, and thereby can’t be read as noise. Scratches aren’t read as noise either whereas on vinyl they are because they move the stylus. As to headphones vs. speakers: the advantage of headphones is that you can get better sound out of headphones than out of speakers for the same money. The headphone has to do a lot less and the headphone has the advantage of being unaffected by the acoustics of the room you’re playing back in. Also, when listening to headphones you’re always in the ideal listening position. However, there are a lot of disadvantages to headphones. You always listen alone. You can’t talk to anyone. You’re always wearing something on your head, and the best ones have a wire attached to them. And whenever you turn your head, where the stage is moves with your head. As to the variables in speaker design, that one takes a while. Suffice it to understand that, as is often true with anything, making a difference in sound is more related to the proportionate increase in price than to the actual increase in price, i.e. the difference you hear between a $500 speaker and a $1,000 speaker is way more than between a $10,200 speaker and a $10,700 speaker. Diminishing returns. By the way, the observation that listening to stereo will get you a better result than going multichannel for the same money is absolutely true and most people don’t realize that. Automotive listening: I don’t care how good your system is, you have two intrinsic obstacles. The less important one is that you’re not listening in the center of the room. The more important one is that the environment isn’t quiet because of ambient engine noise and wind noise.This makes a huge difference listening to classical music. You’re listening to a quiet passage, you’ve got it turned up loud enough to hear over the ambient noise, a loud note comes through and you’re blasted into the back seat. The soft parts have to be too loud in order not to be masked. The normal way around this is something called compression, which means reducing the loudness differences between the soft parts and loud parts. However, compression takes impact out of music and it will sound a lot more flat (not in pitch, in overall sound) than an uncompressed signal which you can listen to at home. Really covering this would probably take a book but these basics should help.
Hey @koshersalaami just wanted to say thank you for the insightful message. I’m new to vinyl and your message taught me so much about music and audio that I didn’t even know existed. I appreciate you and hope that you’re doing well!
I love that Reggie described Bill Evans’ music as “holographic” because that is exactly the term Evans described what he strived for in his improvisational style. When you’re dealing with music that transcends the boundaries we’re used to, you gotta make sure your system is tuned to capture that transcendence!
You will find this type of deep-cut Music Store Audiophile in New York, Los Angelas, Chicago, and Miami... but if you want an auditory religious experience find an old-school audio engineer from Nashville.
I read once that there is a simple explanation for Vinyl sound superiority - the record and stylus GENERATE an electric signal FROM SCRATCH, while with any other medium, be it digital or CD or even master tape, you need a pre-existing signal which you then "load" with music information; i.e. power supply starts playing an important role, etc. But with vinal - stylus on a record is the generator, thus the signal is both more pure and vivid, not to mention it is analog in wave front as opposed to digital micro-stepping... Cheers!
Absolutely. I don't know of any recording artist who doesn't use the car as the final word. That's where we compare our stuff to everything else. If it sounds good in the car you're golden!!!!!
Widely known amongst recording artists and engineers alike! Dr. Dre wont throw out a beat if it doesnt sound right in his 89 civic with that old Alpine 5" mids with tweet 2 6x9s working the rear deck/hatch and the RF sub 😆😆😆
Strangely, I noticed Reggie Watts when he was on TV in Australia, before he started appearing more on U.S. TV shows. His music and improv is amazing. I could listen to him talk all day about music, and music tech and not get bored
I really think Reggie Watts is really a music guru, he chose comedy instead pursuing music he can sing and create beats. Watch all of his IFC episodes and Conan show. I’m really a big fan, he really knows what he’s talking about.
I am an old Baby Boomer. Vinyl records and stereo systems were what our experience was. OFC, if you were home with a lot of other people, you had to use headphones. But when the opportunity came to listen to with high quality speakers came along, it was nearly spiritual. The main difference IMO is that with external speakers, everything vibrates with the music. The room vibrates, the furniture vibrates and your own body vibrates. That is a connection to the music you don't get any other way. We didn't have video games or anything but we could sit for hours in a dark room listening to great music and be mesmerized by the VU meters as they responded to the sound. Add in a few black light posters and you felt like you were in another dimension. It was a total experience.
Mastering is what matters. Vinyl is very flawed and uses its own means of compression techniques. Hi res formats are vastly superior. Vinyl grooves can only be cut so deep or wide. Sacd, dvd audio,blu ray audio like dts and dolby true and standard dolby and dts can record in ways vinyl can and cant. No two vinyls sound the same and when you remove the rumble and his and shit people think something is missing. Ya the shit that shouldnt be there. Burn in is bullshit too. That being said i do love vinyl but i dont pretend that its something its not. Reel to reel is superior to vinyl too. And yes i have about 15 to 20 grand in my main setup and have flipped tons of gear.
So full of shit. I've heard plenty of hi res files, and NONE of them have sound better than vinyl. Neither is superior and I bet you wouldnt hear any differences in the right setup.
@Mr Vespa So you would rather spend thousands on a audiophile turntable setup that sounds no better than a decent CD player from the 1980s? No thanks. I love records as much as next person but I'm not going to be the idiot that claims vinyl records are objectively superior to CD, because they aren't even close. You know what records sound really amazing though? Records that we're digitally recorded, go figure. I'm not saying vinyl sucks but the digital age came and it made things better for sound. Vinyl records are a hobby of mine, but I won't discriminate against CDs either.
@Mr Vespa Like I said, I enjoy vinyl records as much as the next person but I also enjoy digital formats. I also don't mind the quirks of vinyl records but I will never say it's objectively superior to CDs. Lower noise floor, much greater dynamic range, higher fidelity, less prone to physical damage, easier to store, cheaper to get quality sound. Those are all traits of a CD. I love music on any format as long as the source master is not terrible.
Burn-in/break-in is real! Speakers sound better after they have been played for a while. speakers have moving parts and are very stiff when first purchased, but after playing awhile they become more sensitive and sound better! sometimes way better!
Really good audio can be super cheap if you get into it and spend a few months learning the basics. As one example, you can spend $10k+ on a few different models of commercial hifi speakers that use a shared formula: A high sensitivity 15" woofer paired to a 15" wide shallow waveguide and sensitive, low distortion compression driver. The drivers they use are less than $650 for the pair. The formula is so common in various DIY forums that there are detailed writeups for constructing your own pair, measuring their response with a $70 calibrated microphone and using those measurements to build a crossover-or simply upload them to a $100 DSP. Crude youtube jigsaw skills and a lightly used recent model table saw will have you with a fantastic pair of speakers that save for low end extension and top octave detail will compete with many a new car-priced commercial design. Putting a box together, learning simple free tuning software and either soldering together a dozen things or using a DSP to type in some numbers for no soldering needed costs 10-20 hours of time plus another 5 or so for a first try box. To save 8 grand, cool. Next you need an amp. One company, Hypex, makes the boards used in a whole bunch of ~$7-15k amps for years. Great sounding boards, reliable, efficient and cool running with loads of power on tap. Then Hypex opened up to the DIY market. Now you can get those same amps and power supplies in different boxes for 500-600 bucks used. At least two companies sell the newer version of the same amps for 900 dollars or so in nice boxes with warranties. There are lots of fabulous used preamps in the $800-1000 range with sound within spitting distance of esoteric high priced new stuff. If you want digital, a great DAC is no longer obscenely expensive. I have two popular DACs from the same company, one $350 (Schiit Bifrost Uber), the other $150 (Modi Uber). I think the price difference should be more like $50. Comparing their $850 DAC on lone, it feels like it should be priced like the mid tier unit, you really don't need to spend lots on this piece. A well tuned, well isolated turntable with a good cartridge and a used phono pre lets you get a cheaper Rega or similar and have better sound than an ill-tuned very high end turntable. Also, if you can built a speaker box, you can build a turntable stand that's ultra-isolated and a serious upgrade for very little money. You can splurge for cables, but why not use some of the better quality stuff used by the same studios making your music? I like Neutrik Profi RCA connectors on Mogami microphone wire. $60 for a 6 foot cable that will last forever. A hifi brand (nordost) used the same connectors in interconnects that sell for $1000+ used! Use your calibrated mic to tune your DSP to the room. For 200 bucks you can get a DSP that takes 2 channels of digital in and lets you create crossovers for 8 output channels to feed 4 dacs. Combined with 2 ~$150 range dacs and it's a scary nice sounding digital front end that can be tuned in realtime from your computer and leave 4 channels of DSP free for later distributed bass. A huge part of sound quality is the room. Ever walk into a Best Buy and hear their nice Bowers & Wilkins speakers that cost as much as a new hatchback and feature diamond tweeters on $6000 McIntosh amps? They sound like poop. In a properly set up room, they sound incredible. Build your own bass traps and absorption/diffraction panels. Even easier than making those boxes. A sound system that will put a band in your room, capable of insane output with no compression or distortion (around 100 decibels from 1 meter with a single watt- and you have 250w available, for roughly 124 decibels of continuous output and very understressed amps at normal listening volumes. Virtually identical to a $20,000 commercially bought stereo for $4000 and a hobby. Alternatively get a $80 tripath chip amp with bluetooth, pair it to a DIYSG bookshelf speaker kit you just glue together and have a $300 system that is glorious in small rooms. Just regained awareness, super stoned thought I was somewhere else, sorry mates
My neighbor bought some absurdly expensive speakers. They don't sound any better than cheap chinese ones. Basically all audio gear reached perfection over a decade ago. Those outrageous looking expensive speakers are just a placebo.
@@mitchelloliver3704 Nope, I have a degree in audio engineering and psychoacoustics. I have heard so many more rigs than the average person, and have seen many studies, etc. Frequency response is all that matters really, and even very cheap modern chinese stereo speakers have flat responses. I am not talking about laptop or bluetooth speakers, but full range speakers. The technology matured many years ago, just like digital recording media. Some people are just not comfortable with perfection though, because it means there is nowhere else to go.
@@34672rr sorry, total rubbish. I work as a mastering engineer and speaker performance is very different from box to box. This is easily measurable. If you want a very flat performing speaker, something mix and mastering studios require, then any old cheap home stereo speaker won't cut it. In fact even the best speakers are not flat. They are incrementally closer to flatness. This is why in a recording or mastering studio, we will take measurements of the room and apply room treatment, diffusion, bass trapping, absorption, to get the sound at the listening spot as flat as possible. Different speaks use different drivers, different crossovers, these things have different performance ratings... A ribbon tweeter does not perform the same as a soft done tweeter, for example. Speaker accuracy HAS improved in general for sure, as technology is cheaper and better. But speaker design is a fine art. So many elements combining, porting or closed box? Transmission line? Active or passive crossovers... So many decisions that effect the sound, it's a fine science.
So being a kid from the '80s, I used to buy vinyl cheap as CDs were the main thing, but only because I wanted to audition an album before I bought it on CD. There were two things that liked about vinyl: the large artwork and how much you could put in there, and watching the record spins as years into your music, which was hypnotizing. Otherwise, I always found it inconvenient as I had to keep on cleaning the records and turned them over. I still love CDs, but have a soft spot for vinyl. That being said, what kids need to do nowadays is get a proper stereo system, complete with amplifier and good speakers, not those crappy Bluetooth ones or even headphones. My son heard a Queen album on Yamaha amplifier with Wharfedale Demton speakers, and he couldn't believe how immersive they were compared to even the car.
Playing a record on a record player is so much more magical to me than just streaming a song on a digital device. Just the fact that wondrous and complex music can be conjured into the ether from physical grooves on a record seems like magic.
Such a talented dude. It’s painful to see how little the late show utilizes his skills and creativity. His stand up was some of the most entertaining shit ever
I like old music that was originally released on vinyl, but prefer them on uncompressed digital formats. Albums remastered on Dvd and Blu-ray sound amazing.
@@phise1 This. You would also have to hire all of the bands in your music library, at any given moment, as often as you'd like, for a setlist most artists would not want to play. So it's much more convenient and a fraction of the cost.
a lot of flirting with real information but unfortunately most statements he makes are incorrect. Vinyl has a lot higher noise floor and is a lower fidelity medium than digital audio. this doesn't mean digital audio is better, vinyl has a a character and a sonic texture that sounds warm and lovely to humans. but digital audio has more dynamic range , a wider frequency spectrum and can be ultimately way more transparent than vinyl. Most modern music is recorded on to hard drives via analog to digital converters, probably less than 1% of the music out there is actually analog meaning never converted to digital through the production process (recording/mixing/mastering/production onto medium). so the purity he mentions of analog to analog is close to non-existent in the modern world. As a record label owner and mastering engineer 100% of the time a digital master is cut onto vinyl at the pressing plant. It's rare to send tape reels .
Agreed. As an audio engineer who has spent many decades daily making recordings - a lot of what he is saying is innacurate - oversimplified or even wrong. There's a lot more going on. It's not always about accuracy.
Should add that even theoretically perfect analog to analog has no advantage over a digital recording for humans at 44.1khz, which captures all information upto 22.05khz perfectly. Wiki page for Nyquist-Shannon sampling theorem lays out maths, key word to look for is "perfect". Misconception is that digital is some sort of grid over audio waves, like a blocky bitmapped image, whilst analogue results in "perfect" curves... but digital output is also "perfect" curves.
Yeah man. Reggie’s friend could have played that album on a Bluetooth speaker shaped like a banana bought from a gas station, and it would have still been a transcendental experience for everyone.
Vinyl might be be the closest thing to mastered tape from the 50’s, and it does have some whimsical allure to it, but it’s definitely not the most accurate source nowadays. Both vinyl and tape have frequency range limitations, and a high resolution digital wav file will be more true to the source.
Just be careful- a lot of turntables from that era can be record eaters, and its deceptive because they will sound killer. They sound good because they're putting way too much pressure on the record.
@@korryramone yeah I haven't played any records yet. It needs a needle never got around to getting one. It's crazy because I say some months later I seen one from like the 70's at the same thrift store and it had a price on it for 200 dollars. I was like what.
@@Eye2Eye24 Main things to look for are an adjustable counter weight, adjustable anti-skate, and then a good stylus. You really want to dial it in, then look into aligning the cartridge. There are videos on RUclips that walk you through all these things.
While I agree that great Hi-Fi Audio System is crucial for a great listening experience, including modern music. More importantly, is room treatment! Treat your your room with good and strategic acoustic panels, then get your expensive Hi-Fi System, and be submerge.
definitely one of the better guests, I started to get really into high end home and car audio systems in 1992 and I agree with pretty much everything he said on audio.
@@Gucc111 I'm no expert in the actual science behind it but essentially from what I understand that as a FLAC file is being played back it is being "decompressed" back into a lossless source before it hits your ears. There are all kinds of arguments online about all this stuff and some might say that going WAV (uncompressed) to FLAC and back to WAV means loss of quality but I think at that point it's getting ridiculous. I'd be willing to bet in a double blind experiment that 99% of people out there wouldn't know the difference between 320 mp3 and WAV let alone FLAC and WAV. Having said that, I'll rip WAV every time...lol.
@@doublestrokeroll Thanks, compression/decompression sounds inherently bad. To your point, I've never noticed any consistent difference in wav, flac, or mp3.
@@Gucc111 You wont notice a difference until you're on very expensive speakers. I can't tell the difference between flac and wav either, but I can definitely hear the difference between mp3 and flac on my studio speakers.
The information given here that a vinyl is the closest to a final master you can get is just a 100% lie. When transferring to vinyl, you loose a lot of the bass and the highs, and there is also going to be a big loss of stereo width on the bass. CD format 16bit 44.1k audio has less distortion, more bandwidth and dynamic range. Higher resolution digital is just leagues above vinyl. The only reason why some people love vinyl is that the distortions that are inherent in the format can be pleasurable.
I agree with your accessment. People like vinyl for the same reason they like tube amps. Because they add 2nd order harmonic distortion, which is psycho-acoustically pleasing.
Hi kelainefes. Thats not always true what you say about vinyl records exhibiting less bass. I use to have vinyl records and the bass on the actual audio coming through the speakers was better than digital cd's of the same tracks that i bought from stores when i switched over to digital in 2006. And yes, i did play them through the same amp and speakers. I just disconnected the old record player and connected a cd player to the same amp when i bought the extra cables when switching to digital. You must be talking about very high quality digital stuff - as opposed to the standard mass produced cd's that people purchase from regular music stores Also, a good pressed vinyl will always sound better than a regular mass produced digital cd, in terms of atmosphere, as the hiss on a vinyl record helps to add atmosphere to the track. The real test should be in term of comparing the highest quality digital format - against the highest quality vinyl records - in a head to head sound comparison when BOTH played through the SAME stereo system. Then you would be right in your analysis on sound.
Shauni Gothic TV vinyl does lose both high and low end, but mostly high end. The needle cannot move fast enough to produce high frequencies well. The hiss is can be perceived as “atmosphere”, sure. But when it comes down to it, it’s just not supposed to be there. Many people prefer vinyl because it’s warmer from the loss of high frequencies, and that’s fine, but a high quality digital format will better reproduce the recording.
It’s impossible for vinyl to “sound” better than CD due to its physical limitations. Digitally mastered music captures more data and frequencies than analog. Sounding “better” is more a matter of subjective opinion in this discussion.
Vinyl, bass up, subwoofer, in a trailer home lol, really sounds amazing...the raised floor allows rippling/resonation of the bass purr. Especially early 70's prog organ bass👌
I'm a huge vinyl fan and I love collecting it. But seriously nothing beats high Res digital files in terms of quality. It's absurd to say vinyl has higher quality, just look at the numbers and you'll see digital high res FLAC files have way much higher clarity. Without surface noise. But vinyl is a much more engaging and enjoyable experience.
We record to tape and our records you buy have never been converted to digital. Really makes a difference when you make a record fully analog instead of emailing the record manufacturer a digital file.
For you fools: (Format vs Format) hi-res digital is superior. However the problem lies within the mastering of the music. In this day in age digital masters are so highly compressed in dynamic range, that the physical limitations of a record restricts what can be done to a master. Allowing it to be of a higher quality comparitively. References I suggest looking into are "loudness wars", "dynamic range database", and the "db range of both formats".
This was cool to watch, and I'm a big fan of vinyl records - but Reggie has it the wrong way round; digital isn't "the closest you can get to vinyl". You could argue that vinyl is "as close as you can get to digital" - I would disagree, but lossless digital recording allows the creation of bit-perfect exact copies of studio masters in a way no vinyl record could ever hope to achieve.
Sheffield Labs cut vinyl is recorded direct to disk are some of the best pure analog recordings ever... And sound best on discrete electroncs or tube systems! Back in the day they cost 10x more than standard vinyl and came in antistatic sleeves. My dad had MacIntosh and Marantz Gold quadrophonic rack systems and huge Klipsch horn speakers. The Marantz Gold system used gold solder on their discrete circuit boards... Just like they used in our spacecraft programs because gold was the best electrical conductor. I miss vinyl acoustics! Joe, this was one of your best interviews that you've done. Keep them coming.
A direct copy of an original master tape, would be the safety copy (ies), which are archived and/or used if the original has degraded significantly during the recording process (e.g. Fleetwood mac had this issue during the making of RUMOURS..the safeties salvaged the degradation to the top.end due to all the overdubbing)A regular consumer Vinyl pressing isn't that. It's not even close, but the range limitations are something we can love. Vinyl has a mid rangy sound, with a warmth that digital can lack. Older vinyl sounds incredible for certain types of music, such as mono mixed stuff , and due to the denser , naturally compressed sound of older consoles which mostly used valves, and thickened the sound unintentionally. That's been available as a software effect for some years now, but I'm simplifying everything greatly. In essence, As he said, FLAC and lossless formats are superb for any modern music made using digital audio workstation software or equivalent. They're also great for anything else, provided the source tapes have had a good restoration and even remix applied , in order to bring them up.to date with modern sonic fidelity tolerances.
Too much mariJuana. When people don't know the difference between "what sounds good" and "what's the truest replication of the original recording". No mentions of all the limitations of vinyl, ie. distortion, hissing, rumble playback speed inconsistencies, stereo imaging issues, etc. It's all these negatives that end up sounding more natural to human ears, but definitely steer far from original recording quality.
There are technical differences but it's mostly a matter of taste. You can get very good sound with records but it will cost you. For my money the most bang for the buck is in the speakers.
Love me some FLAC. Used to buy CD's for decades and finally started getting into vinyl a few years ago. Had no idea it could degrade that quickly though.
Vinyl is pointless unless your a collector, i know vinyl heads re record it all to FLAC anyway so not to damage record when playing, ill just take the Flac ty.
@@lutello3012 I moved cities 15 years ago and my Akai turntable and 80w stacker stereo unit is still wrapped up in a box in the garage...along with 4 cartons of vynel ... from The Who to Uriah Heep to America .... all in mint condition...once a month used to pour a glass of red and wash them with a sponge and warm soapy water.
Vinyl has a limit. It is limited in resolution. Digital is not limited like vinyl, it's got different limitations. Vinyl has really pleasing harmonic distortion, above 20 khz. So you can have playback equal to vinyl in digital, but you cannot have equal playback of digital from vinyl. The mastering for vinyl ensures high frequencies are out of the mix, so the needle won't jump because of the limit of the needle.
Javier Perea You’ve got it arse about face, it’s the low frequencies that are cut from vinyl mastering due to the grooves not being deep enough. And harmonic distortion above 20khz would be completely inaudible - except maybe to a 5 year old.
@@Howling-Mad-Murdock your body is an ear and can perceive frequencies above 20 khz. Read some Rupert Neve on the studies about 20 khz and human perception. I believe you about the low frequency limitation as well..low resolution on vinyl.
Javier Perea I’ve read LOTS about audible perception, there is no verifiable evidence that I’m aware of that adults can perceive sound above 20khz. I’m aware of claims that bone conduction can transfer “sound” that our ears can’t, but as far as I’m aware these claims have never been backed up. The audiophile world is so full of bs and snake oil that I want to see verified proof (usually by an independent blind listening test such as ab/x) of any new claims. Blind listening tests and a willingness to accept that the mind is designed to play “tricks” on you is the way forward, it’s a real eye (ear!) opener.
In my experience there is an experience of pressure on my ears with frequencies at the edge of my hearing, but that goes away when the frequency is high enough. Of course you can easily feel lower frequencies in your body, but I think 20k+ material is only for exceptional babies to perceive lol.
I love it when some people come to me and pretend to convince me Vinyl can't be as "good" as their favorite formats. They always start mentioning all the physics, the numbers and datas and frequencies...you know all of that is true and fascinating but there is a CRITICAL elements missing there : the personal emotional experience. We all have different ears, we all react differently to a specific imput. You play a specific album on a specific format on a specific system in front of 5 people and all those 5 people are going to react differently to it. I am a 23 year old musician, I have significant experience in recording studios and my hearing can reach the 18k barrier so..I CAN DEFINETELY HEAR. Well I had the privilege of listening to certain albums on a specific system in all the possible formats that exist and even though CDs sounded "more realistic" to me the most satisfying experience was the one with the vinyl format. The vinyl sound TO ME is unbeatable in terms of listening experience and pleasure and that's the main reason why I want to listen to music! I don't give a crap if the frequency wave is going to be inferior, less competitive or whatever...."realism" is not my goal and I am sure it's the exact same thing for many other listeners! So just stick with your favorite format, enjoy it to death and stop bothering people with your annoying useless theories and physical knowledge because at the end of the day our ears are going to value what they hear from the system and not what they hear from you
The way I think about it in my head is in making a vinyl it's taking the physical sound and, unlike taking a digital reproduction. I know that's kind of a silly explanation, but that's how I visualize it
@@DotToryX Why on Earth would you draw that conclusion? Why wouldn't a data format that allows greater breadth of artistic expression NOT be the way you'd want to go. I can think of plenty of reasons off the top of my head you'd want to pan the bass. What a damn delusional cloud you're living under.
Reggie is right that older tracks sound better on vinyl, this is because it was mastered for vinyl and and most digital versions are going to be remasters or duplicates of the vinyl version. Newer media is recorded digitally so it will sound fine digitally. There are file formats that will have even better resolution than vinyl, but you can't take lower resolution stuff and make it higher, so stuff that started on vinyl will never sound better. Vinyl isn't an uncompressed format like most people think. The variations in the groove need to be large enough for the needle to pick it up but at the same time small enough to not cause the needle to skip and to fit enough songs on a record. The sweet spot for this compression is how we ended up with so many records in the 50ish minute mark. TL;DR: New stuff, uncompressed digital, old stuff, vinyl.
Good digital to analog converters. That is what needs to be added to this conversation to make it complete. Records are good for the ritual, a high performing DAC can produce what an audiophile wants, unless it is ritual they are after.
Records have a nice warm sound but no where near the best. Lossless digital file is the highest. Honestly how good a song sounds has more to due with how it was recorded/mixed and mastered. For example using SSL consoles to track a song gives it a special sound because of the analog signal and the on board processing. Recording on tape, certain mics and using tube compressors also do this. They make digital plug ins that emulate these pretty good.
A lot of what people call "warm" is just saturation man, just tossing that out there. Light distortion, I just find it funny that light distortion is considered of higher quality sometimes. Although I get why it sounds pleasing, you're adding extra harmonics to the frequency spectrum go fill it out a bit more.
The best virgin press vinyl is better than any digital. However, wide track/high speed/high output tape is still by far the best. Digital though is more than good enough for everyday listening, and on average better than vinyl.
@@Deuce1042 only the first pressing and first few listens. but it does depend a lot on your individual taste. analog always sounds rawer, and some may prefer the more polished sound of digital. I bet a lot more people would when high quality digital first emerged, as it was a novelty much like vinyl is now.
@@34672rr I don't think even high quality digital of jazz records sound "polished" I think it sounds fine but is lacking in the dynamics and organic quality of a vinyl record. Especially in mono which has more low end drive. And it's not only first pressings. Early pressing and various reissues mastered from the analog master tapes by competent sound engineers.
Sort of off topic but does anyone remember when the Game of thrones directors blamed peoples tvs for the final season being too dark hahahahah. Not everyone has the top of the range equipment when it comes to music or tv
Wow, he really is talking out of his ass here when it comes to vinyl. When the master for vinyl, they need to make a special mastering that basically removes a lot of bass and highs to accommodate the vinyl limitations. Vinyl is a highly frequency limited medium. Nothing beats having the original master in high resolution wav file.
@@subg8858 True but a good portion of the frequencies they remove when mastering for vinyl can totally be heard by human ears. Just look up videos about mastering for vinyl, you'll be stunned by how much they remove.
Also there is a significant loss in dynamic range when using vinyl which technically makes it a lesser resolving source than what your able to get from a digital source.
CD quality is great. When converted to FLAC you get everything: Best quality, compression without loss of quality, portability, streamability and you can play it billions of times. Don't be fulled by Hi-Fi industry.
These 2 gentlemen are on the exact opposite ends of the hair spectrum.
ronjon83 hahahaha
Thank you for that, sir.
The adventures of CueBall and Q-tip
Joe Rogan isn't on the hair spectrum lol
But for how long...
The great thing about vinyl isn't necessarily the sound quality, it's the experience. When you decide to listen to a record, your mind is on it. You have to choose it off of a shelve, remove it from the sleeve, maybe clean it, and set the needle. You are primed to really listen. Then you have the cover and the liner notes to peruse. You are committed to it. The ease and convenience of digital music cheapens the experience. It's disposable.
Even though the sound can be of excellent quality. Most dont think so because they've never heard it.
I experienced something close to that.I was stuck at my house when the wifi went out and lived in a valley with shit signal. I had an old CD player and my late uncle left Outlandos d'amour in our living room before he died. I immediately had a huge appreciation for boomer music when I heard the first track.
@@bkkersey93 Yeah, the vinyl sound is just bigger. It's louder. I don't know what the technical reason for this is, but you could have a record and CD of the same music and with the stereo set at the same volume, the record will be louder than the CD. Higher dynamic range?
Well said
@@vagabondarcade7633 vinyl has a limited dynamic range, cause you can only cut so deep. CD has a bigger dynamic range if you really want to hear what CD is capable off buy a classical CD and compare it to the vinyl. The CD wil sound better because of the bigger dynamic range that CD can deliver. That is why vinyl did not get affected by the loudness wars because you cant clip audio like that on vinyl. So there is a positive side to vinyl that it did not get affected by the loudness wars, but on the other hand CD is more capable of performing better than vinyl. Just take a daft punk vinyl and CD and compare them, the cd will win. Because daft punk made sure that the CD release would as good as it could get and that is way better than the vinyl release.
I got friends playing vinyl records on a $80 record player connected to a bluetooth speaker telling me it sounds much more natural than CD
Lmao
That means they heard somebody say vinyl is way better and then just decided to think that, oh I'm in the know, vinyl sounds way better. Lol
Slap them.
You do need better quality equipment than that to actually experience the true sound quality of Vinyl .
Ouch
Love the irony of Rollins having a 1/2 million $ stereo in his house while all the Black Flag records sound like they were recorded on a cassette deck in the bottom of a dirty kiddy pool.
He's such a douche
You do know he doesn't just listen to black flag? He has a huge collection
@@mannystech4776 you're missing the point and are rude about it. lefty, hm?
@@s1nnocense dog explain how that implies someones a leftist
Lefty? You do understand punk isnt right wing conservative music right?
“What does it take to engineer a machine, that’s invisible to the experience.” Very well said.
And he had me at Bill Evans, waltz for Debby is a masterpiece
thats the only true thing he said here, he doesnt know what hes talking about when it comes to digital encodes.
@@zvezdan956 FLAC isnt the best for digital? genuinely asking.. i don't know. I bought the last Tool album on FLAC.
@@increase9896 good FLACs are higher fidelity than vinyls. and anything more than 24/96 on FLAC is a waste of hard drive space. but a lossy 192kbs file that was encoded from a lossless format sounds the same to the human ear which is referred to as "transparent".
Peace piece
And vynil completly contradicts that..
Joe when he doesn’t know what a guest is talking about: Mmmm
That's because guest doesn't know what's he talking about either
@@ShindlerReal Precisely. LOL
@@ShindlerReal haha... exactly what I was thinking!
@@ShindlerReal damn talk about kissing Joes ass
@@ShindlerReal and how do u know that wise guy?
Lil Wayne when he introduces himself be like 3:49
Bruhh 😂😂
Most underrated comment 😂
Lmaoooo 😂
Good one bro 😂
best comment on here
"I tried digital DMT and it just wasn't as smooth as DMT on vinyl." - Joe Rogan
ffs
Best comment
yawnfest
Hell yea
But have you ever given DMT to a digital chimp?
Title: Reggie Watts explains why records sound better
Video starts: “I don’t know”
Andy Inwards lollllz.
He doesn't really. A good cut and pressed 12" sounds the closest to a 2 track master. Not just vinyl. Also at least 50% is snake oil in audio land.
@@Madrrrrrrrrrrr Yes the question wasn't really specifically answered. First, it's not true that vinyl is the closest to the master, but he also explains that digitally mastered songs mean that a lossless audio file is essentially identical to the master. I think the real answer is that records aren't the best audio, but people like the ritual of putting on the record, of looking at the huge record cover, the pop and hiss of the needle going on, having to get up and flip the record.
Lmao
@@yasseford Some very basic research will tell you why people prefer the sound of vinyl and it's not because they are skinny frisbees.
"what does it take to engineer a machine that becomes invisible to the experience" wow
ya that blew my mind as well... fuck i love a good stereo experience.
About $150,000 apparently.
@@SuperScottCrawford looool
Now a days it doesn’t matter. The recording process has changed.. But with older music! Other story!
That was the best way I've ever heard someone describe what the best, of most experiences, should be like. I don't remember the following two minutes because my dumb brain was still shell shocked from that quote.
This is the first time in a long time I've heard someone talk about hi-fi audio who wasn't talking out their ass. It's really rather refreshing.
Yep
Reggie ain’t no bozo, he knows his shit.
You need magic rocks wrapped around your silver plated RCA cables if you want the best sound quality. Telling ya, the vocals so pronounced and the soundstage is out of this world when you add magic rocks to your collection!
Chris McCartney you should listen to Jack White talk about vinyl, it’s fucking beautiful, he even has his very own factory where they make records in the back, sell them in the front. The guy from myth busters has a video where he visits and makes his own record, it’s good shit.
He wasn't talking out of his ass; he was talking out of someone else's. Digital is superior and capable of producing any waveform analog can. You would not be able to tell the difference between a high-quality digital signal versus an analog one. Mathematics and science support this conclusion. It has nothing to do with subjectivity.
what really attracts me to vinyl is the expense and inconvenience!
@@zecur Same. I also like the little crackling noise that vinyl makes sometimes.
@@jacobjb That's literally my least favorite part of listening to LPs haha
If you're not a collector/audiophile type person you probably won't understand but thats ok.
@@jacobjb if you're not a fucking idiot with your records it's not gonna have that
original comment
Wow love this guy..
His voice sounds like it's been audio engineered to perfection
He's a GREAT singer. It's so unfair that joe toegan didn't mention or talk or ask about Reggie's onstage performances
@Javier medina nah man. He came to get stoned and have a chat
My first stereo in the house was a victrola and it was the wood that made the speakers sound great. My own first stereo was a small $149 dollar with a turntable, eight track, and FM radio and a plastic cover and it was the best experience ever, I was 14 years old and my moms knew how much I loved music and purchased it for me, nothing can replace that feeling, sort of like your first kiss.
Far better than what 14 year olds hear today. To get the experience you had at 14 it would cost thousands today and only those with real money can afford it.
Vinyl as a medium is not actually better sonically. It actually has quite a bit of limitations. This is the main reason why it sounds "better" to some people. I am a sound engineer and have mastered for vinyl. When you're mixing/mastering for vinyl, you cannot push maximizing limiters to make the recording 'extra loud' the way you can on digital (this includes flac, so flac and vinyl have little in common). You also need to roll off a lot of the low bass, like 30hz or below. The reason for all of this is more bass takes more space on vinyl, also can literally cause skips. If the recording is maximized too much, it can cause vinyl distortion and also flaws in the pressing. Mastering for vinyl is a careful process, which gets ignored often in the digital world, where people just slam the volume up as loud as they can. This actually makes records as a whole more dynamic since they have certain limitations on the way they can be mixed and mastered.
Reggie seems like the kind of guy that anybody could talk to about anything
him and quest love could get stuck in an infinite loop of pleasant & interesting conversation
ThexInsidexMan and hair
Another Joe Rogan you say?
I think it’s what’s commonly referred to as being a bullshit artist
@@volod3mir Ever seen his specials? His entire act is bullshit, strung together masterfully.
I've heard a sound system like he's explaining that costs $150K. If I remember right that system was upwards of $200K and most of that was the speaks and I really wish I could remember the brand. It's incredible. I listened to an orchestra recording and if you closed your eyes it was like being in the room with them. You could point to the individual players/sections in the orchestra. I've never experienced anything like that. The imagining of the audio was unreal. This was a system playing a FLAC digital recording.
Well, it depends on the stereo system on how good vinyl can sound. And everything else he said is 99% bullshit.
Ofc it was flac is the best
@@antonioilardo6691 FLAC is low quality audio. It has most of the ultrasonic frequencies stripped from it. Vinyl still retains those frequencies.
It doesn't cost anywhere near $150k to achieve that. You can achieve the same thing for less than $10k... even less if you have a small-ish room and don't need a system with massive dynamic range. The key is not buying into the snakeoil and marketing. Those Wilson speakers aren't even the best cost-no-object speakers available. They measure pretty badly. Very easy to find much better for 1/20 of the price.
@@dtz1000 Those ultrasonic frequencies only matter to bats and your dog. Humans can't hear them anyway. Never mind that most music isn't recorded/mixed/mastered with them anyway.
I love collecting old records from garage sales and used bookstores for a buck a piece. Some of the records I bought were hardly ever played and in exceptional condition. They were mostly jazz, crooners and old rock and roll records. Quite a blast playing them.
Reggie is such a great conversationalist, very personable
very mid-cent mod
The fact is that you will never hear a recording like it is in the studio because the room is just as big a factor as the speakers and amplifiers. Studio monitors are not like Hi Fi speakers, which are generally colored in various ways and then add to that different home room environments and the sound will be altered in so many ways from what was heard in the studio.
Not all studio monitors are the same either and not all studios have full acoustic treatment. And vinyl records do NOT accurately reproduce what was recorded because of inherent physical limitations, especially in the low end frequencies. The best recording quality will be at the same recorded bit rate - usually 24 bits and not 16 bits like a CD - and the same sample rate, ie: 44.1kHz or higher if it was recorded at a higher rate.
Almost all studios now master everything digitally, while using various analog equipment or plugins, which are now virtually indistinguishable from analog. So getting a digital master guarantees the best possible sound 'source' and the rest depends on your setup and room, which will all contribute to altering the original sound in various good and bad ways.
A good sounding system and a well treated room or at least having the walls filled up with furniture or books will enable you have an excellent near to studio experience.
Remember he is talking about near to the experience and not exactly saying it is the same standard.
@@bighands69 Damn, I'm a professional studio-owner, I've recorded lots and lots of bands, famous and less famous, I've invested in real expensive studio-monitoring, roomaccoustics etc. and now all I should have done was put a lot of books and furniture in the controlroom... 🤣
But seriously, it's absolutely smart to at least make the room where you listen to music accousically good. But believe me, the difference between good studio-sound and
"a nice sound" at home is huge!!! At home I don't even try it, I have a "fair" system, nothing more or less. And I enjoy the music there just as much.
In my job I have to be picky, as an engineer/producer/musician, but at home I wanna enjoy the music! No more, no less!
Reggie's style of comedy is not for me, but god damn can he really draw you in with what he's talking about. Interesting man.
I agree man, if Reggie was funny like Bert Kreischer, Brendan Schaub and Brian "Redban" Reichle, I would respect him more as a comedian
Orlando Trustfull what about Reggie’s brand of comedy is less deserving of respect than any of the carnival barkers you listed?
Tim Noonan Yeah, liking is one thing. Respect is different. I can respect something I don't like.
@@TheOrlandoTrustfull yeah you have to be kinda smart to get his comedy.. you can keep finding brain dead comedy funny
@@tim.noonan Brendan schuab is funny ? Lmao what fucking work ik every body sense humor is different but geez
If you're playing a used Bill Evans Trio album on the Crosley record player you got for Christmas you might have a different experience.
I bet the room the audio gear was in was treated acoustically too. Treatments are often overlooked and can make a much more modest system sound excellent.
Exactly what I was saying.. vinyl in general sounds pretty shitty, It's more the equipment you play it on that makes the sound better.
Acoustics make up around 50% of the sound quality.
Digital recordings will sound better than vinyl if you color all your door jambs and window sills with a black magic marker.
@@JDines been sniffin that magic marker haven't ya.... They don't call it magic for nothing.
CLAYTRON You are kinda clueless when you are being trolled...
My father had a vinyl press that made thousands of records a day,his own studio & equipment
in 1985 that was pretty decent
May he R.I.P.
"we smoked some marry-joe-hannah" that's why it sounded holographic, reggie
That's why they were crying 😢 purple venom lol
That and the $150,000 system...
Many audiophiles admit that the ultimate improvement to the sound of a sound system is smoking mary jo huana
@@jeb419 man... when i was stoned for the first time and threw the thriller record on, listening to human nature, i couldn't believe my ears! it's most definitely the ultimate improvement to the sound
@@Ghoopty nope people don't master their audio in those speakers in studios nor do they are true to real life
They can be nice sounding tho because they are made more for experience/feel rather than technicality or them being realistic
The trio album for those who want it is probably Waltz for Debbie or Live from the Village Underground.
Village Vanguard, but yes
Fritz Jackson Waltz for Debby but yes
@@biffboffo Sunday at the Village Vanguard, but yes.
Just played that last night
And yeah, it's on Village Vanguard. But there is a more complete Waltz For Debbie session.
This guy dropped the name Bill Evans and my world just changed...
lightining teleportation, brody
Sunday at the village vanguard
@@XXthekingofyouXX "what are next?"
I dropped Acid many times and my world changed 😃
Everybody Digs Bill Evans is one of my favorite albums.
“A machine that becomes invisible to the experience.”
How wonderful.
I know exactly what he's talking about too. I was at a home electronics expo about twenty years ago. There was an sign with an arrow pointing up a flight of stairs to the "high end audio" section. I got to the top and could hear music faintly playing. Then, I must have walked right into the sweet spot. The music suddenly got louder and clearer, and I felt like the music was emanating from the air around me. Totally surreal. It sounded _better_ than live music to my recollection. At first I was looking around me to try to work out where the music was coming from, even though the speakers were right in front of me, because I just couldn't comprehend that the it was coming from them. Normally you can kind of _feel_ that the music is coming out of the speakers, but these just looked like inanimate objects, and the music was just 'there'.
That's the first time I listened to electrostatic speakers, and I'll never forget it.
caz lab Beautifully said
“A machine that becomes invisible to the experience.” Apple products, it's in their philosophy.
I’m going to help y’all out a little bit here. I’ll start with record wear. One variable not considered is the quality of phono cartridges. Some needle assemblies (a needle in a phono cartridge is usually referred to as a stylus) are way lower mass than others, meaning they do less damage over time. Phono cartridges are critical because they’re the phase other than speakers or headphones where there’s a translation between mechanical energy and electrical energy. A device that does that is called a transducers, and transducers generally influence sound more within similar price ranges than electronics do because of the mechanical component. This means pay a lot of attention to phono cartridges when you buy a turntable; in actuality, the phono cartridge makes more of a difference in the sound of your record than the rest of your turntable does, unless it’s really lousy.
Making equipment sonically invisible is expensive and not easy.
Why is vinyl under ideal conditions closer to perfection than digital? Think of the difference between a painting and seeing the painting on your TV set. The painting is basically infinitely detailed, the TV picture is not because the TV picture is comprised of pixels. The more pixels you can fit per square inch, the closer you get to reproducing the painting perfectly. At some point you get enough pixels not to be able to detect the difference. The same is basically true of digital audio. Sampling rate is like pixels: the more times you sample per second, the finer your detail. The main problem here is that CD’s were released to the public before the sampling rate was quite as high as it should have been, and that’s why vinyl remains better. Actually, right now the bigger problem is that MP3’s are worse than CD’s.
But there are advantages to digital, particularly if you can get the sampling rate high enough. Digital is encoded, and there are some benefits to this. The first is that as you make other copies you don’t wear anything out - it’s the same set of ones and zeroes no matter how many times you duplicate it, which is not true of record pressings. Another is that once encoded the signal isn’t susceptible to added distortion. Dust on a stylus harms the sound because it affects the movement of the needle, thereby becoming part of the sound. Dust on a CD, however, isn’t encoded, and thereby can’t be read as noise. Scratches aren’t read as noise either whereas on vinyl they are because they move the stylus.
As to headphones vs. speakers: the advantage of headphones is that you can get better sound out of headphones than out of speakers for the same money. The headphone has to do a lot less and the headphone has the advantage of being unaffected by the acoustics of the room you’re playing back in. Also, when listening to headphones you’re always in the ideal listening position. However, there are a lot of disadvantages to headphones. You always listen alone. You can’t talk to anyone. You’re always wearing something on your head, and the best ones have a wire attached to them. And whenever you turn your head, where the stage is moves with your head. As to the variables in speaker design, that one takes a while. Suffice it to understand that, as is often true with anything, making a difference in sound is more related to the proportionate increase in price than to the actual increase in price, i.e. the difference you hear between a $500 speaker and a $1,000 speaker is way more than between a $10,200 speaker and a $10,700 speaker. Diminishing returns. By the way, the observation that listening to stereo will get you a better result than going multichannel for the same money is absolutely true and most people don’t realize that.
Automotive listening: I don’t care how good your system is, you have two intrinsic obstacles. The less important one is that you’re not listening in the center of the room. The more important one is that the environment isn’t quiet because of ambient engine noise and wind noise.This makes a huge difference listening to classical music. You’re listening to a quiet passage, you’ve got it turned up loud enough to hear over the ambient noise, a loud note comes through and you’re blasted into the back seat. The soft parts have to be too loud in order not to be masked. The normal way around this is something called compression, which means reducing the loudness differences between the soft parts and loud parts. However, compression takes impact out of music and it will sound a lot more flat (not in pitch, in overall sound) than an uncompressed signal which you can listen to at home.
Really covering this would probably take a book but these basics should help.
Hey @koshersalaami just wanted to say thank you for the insightful message. I’m new to vinyl and your message taught me so much about music and audio that I didn’t even know existed. I appreciate you and hope that you’re doing well!
Very helpful.
I love that Reggie described Bill Evans’ music as “holographic” because that is exactly the term Evans described what he strived for in his improvisational style. When you’re dealing with music that transcends the boundaries we’re used to, you gotta make sure your system is tuned to capture that transcendence!
Yeah, and then the weed part comes, and all that crap just smokes away...
Listen to Sgt. Pepper or Hendrix on vinyl with good speakers. It's mind blowing.
that's a pretty put together sentence for someone with a blown mind...
You will find this type of deep-cut Music Store Audiophile in New York, Los Angelas, Chicago, and Miami... but if you want an auditory religious experience find an old-school audio engineer from Nashville.
can you explain more, im interested
Me too, could you recommend a place to have an audio experience in New York? Thanks!
Like everyone else I'm really interested about why Nashville?
theylied1776 visit Phonoluxe next time you’re in town if you haven’t. Still there on Nolensville Rd.
@@metalligeek093 The mexican breakfast burrito place next door fucked me up once. That spot is cool though
Reggie Watts is one of those ever-captivating people. Anything he does I'm completely submerged and tuned in. Such a brilliant and super chill dude.
I read once that there is a simple explanation for Vinyl sound superiority - the record and stylus GENERATE an electric signal FROM SCRATCH, while with any other medium, be it digital or CD or even master tape, you need a pre-existing signal which you then "load" with music information; i.e. power supply starts playing an important role, etc. But with vinal - stylus on a record is the generator, thus the signal is both more pure and vivid, not to mention it is analog in wave front as opposed to digital micro-stepping... Cheers!
When my band recorded. We would go check the mixes in my car to see how it would sound to everyone else
Absolutely. I don't know of any recording artist who doesn't use the car as the final word. That's where we compare our stuff to everything else. If it sounds good in the car you're golden!!!!!
Widely known amongst recording artists and engineers alike! Dr. Dre wont throw out a beat if it doesnt sound right in his 89 civic with that old Alpine 5" mids with tweet 2 6x9s working the rear deck/hatch and the RF sub 😆😆😆
Owl City is famous for car audio. He says he always finishes a song and then runs it in his car to check the quality.
Strangely, I noticed Reggie Watts when he was on TV in Australia, before he started appearing more on U.S. TV shows. His music and improv is amazing. I could listen to him talk all day about music, and music tech and not get bored
Vinyl sounds better on a hi-fi that costs $150, 000.
@@betterversionn 🤣👍
@@betterversionn I agree. I listen to vinyl on a system that is 20 years old, the turntable is 3 years old.
I think a $50,000 system would make me cry
@@zorth42 That was funny :)
@@betterversionn If I spent a $150k system, I'd cry too.
I really think Reggie Watts is really a music guru, he chose comedy instead pursuing music he can sing and create beats. Watch all of his IFC episodes and Conan show. I’m really a big fan, he really knows what he’s talking about.
I am an old Baby Boomer. Vinyl records and stereo systems were what our experience was. OFC, if you were home with a lot of other people, you had to use headphones. But when the opportunity came to listen to with high quality speakers came along, it was nearly spiritual. The main difference IMO is that with external speakers, everything vibrates with the music. The room vibrates, the furniture vibrates and your own body vibrates. That is a connection to the music you don't get any other way. We didn't have video games or anything but we could sit for hours in a dark room listening to great music and be mesmerized by the VU meters as they responded to the sound. Add in a few black light posters and you felt like you were in another dimension. It was a total experience.
Mastering is what matters. Vinyl is very flawed and uses its own means of compression techniques. Hi res formats are vastly superior. Vinyl grooves can only be cut so deep or wide. Sacd, dvd audio,blu ray audio like dts and dolby true and standard dolby and dts can record in ways vinyl can and cant. No two vinyls sound the same and when you remove the rumble and his and shit people think something is missing. Ya the shit that shouldnt be there. Burn in is bullshit too. That being said i do love vinyl but i dont pretend that its something its not. Reel to reel is superior to vinyl too. And yes i have about 15 to 20 grand in my main setup and have flipped tons of gear.
So full of shit. I've heard plenty of hi res files, and NONE of them have sound better than vinyl. Neither is superior and I bet you wouldnt hear any differences in the right setup.
@@bkkersey93 There's a reason why people switched to CD in the 1980s, and it wasn't just the convenience...
@Mr Vespa So you would rather spend thousands on a audiophile turntable setup that sounds no better than a decent CD player from the 1980s? No thanks. I love records as much as next person but I'm not going to be the idiot that claims vinyl records are objectively superior to CD, because they aren't even close. You know what records sound really amazing though? Records that we're digitally recorded, go figure. I'm not saying vinyl sucks but the digital age came and it made things better for sound. Vinyl records are a hobby of mine, but I won't discriminate against CDs either.
@Mr Vespa Like I said, I enjoy vinyl records as much as the next person but I also enjoy digital formats. I also don't mind the quirks of vinyl records but I will never say it's objectively superior to CDs. Lower noise floor, much greater dynamic range, higher fidelity, less prone to physical damage, easier to store, cheaper to get quality sound. Those are all traits of a CD. I love music on any format as long as the source master is not terrible.
Burn-in/break-in is real! Speakers sound better after they have been played for a while. speakers have moving parts and are very stiff when first purchased, but after playing awhile they become more sensitive and sound better! sometimes way better!
Really good audio can be super cheap if you get into it and spend a few months learning the basics.
As one example, you can spend $10k+ on a few different models of commercial hifi speakers that use a shared formula: A high sensitivity 15" woofer paired to a 15" wide shallow waveguide and sensitive, low distortion compression driver. The drivers they use are less than $650 for the pair. The formula is so common in various DIY forums that there are detailed writeups for constructing your own pair, measuring their response with a $70 calibrated microphone and using those measurements to build a crossover-or simply upload them to a $100 DSP. Crude youtube jigsaw skills and a lightly used recent model table saw will have you with a fantastic pair of speakers that save for low end extension and top octave detail will compete with many a new car-priced commercial design.
Putting a box together, learning simple free tuning software and either soldering together a dozen things or using a DSP to type in some numbers for no soldering needed costs 10-20 hours of time plus another 5 or so for a first try box. To save 8 grand, cool.
Next you need an amp. One company, Hypex, makes the boards used in a whole bunch of ~$7-15k amps for years. Great sounding boards, reliable, efficient and cool running with loads of power on tap. Then Hypex opened up to the DIY market. Now you can get those same amps and power supplies in different boxes for 500-600 bucks used. At least two companies sell the newer version of the same amps for 900 dollars or so in nice boxes with warranties.
There are lots of fabulous used preamps in the $800-1000 range with sound within spitting distance of esoteric high priced new stuff.
If you want digital, a great DAC is no longer obscenely expensive. I have two popular DACs from the same company, one $350 (Schiit Bifrost Uber), the other $150 (Modi Uber). I think the price difference should be more like $50. Comparing their $850 DAC on lone, it feels like it should be priced like the mid tier unit, you really don't need to spend lots on this piece.
A well tuned, well isolated turntable with a good cartridge and a used phono pre lets you get a cheaper Rega or similar and have better sound than an ill-tuned very high end turntable. Also, if you can built a speaker box, you can build a turntable stand that's ultra-isolated and a serious upgrade for very little money.
You can splurge for cables, but why not use some of the better quality stuff used by the same studios making your music? I like Neutrik Profi RCA connectors on Mogami microphone wire. $60 for a 6 foot cable that will last forever. A hifi brand (nordost) used the same connectors in interconnects that sell for $1000+ used!
Use your calibrated mic to tune your DSP to the room. For 200 bucks you can get a DSP that takes 2 channels of digital in and lets you create crossovers for 8 output channels to feed 4 dacs. Combined with 2 ~$150 range dacs and it's a scary nice sounding digital front end that can be tuned in realtime from your computer and leave 4 channels of DSP free for later distributed bass. A huge part of sound quality is the room. Ever walk into a Best Buy and hear their nice Bowers & Wilkins speakers that cost as much as a new hatchback and feature diamond tweeters on $6000 McIntosh amps? They sound like poop. In a properly set up room, they sound incredible. Build your own bass traps and absorption/diffraction panels. Even easier than making those boxes.
A sound system that will put a band in your room, capable of insane output with no compression or distortion (around 100 decibels from 1 meter with a single watt- and you have 250w available, for roughly 124 decibels of continuous output and very understressed amps at normal listening volumes. Virtually identical to a $20,000 commercially bought stereo for $4000 and a hobby.
Alternatively get a $80 tripath chip amp with bluetooth, pair it to a DIYSG bookshelf speaker kit you just glue together and have a $300 system that is glorious in small rooms.
Just regained awareness, super stoned thought I was somewhere else, sorry mates
After reading all of this I am happy to spend $10k-15k.
Or just buy a pair of genelecs.
Autism at its best
I bought my La Scalas for 400 bucks
Also the CEO of PSAudio will give anybody a tour on weekdays in Boulder CO, and he has Infinity IRS 5 speakers that are worth 300k
Seriously? I'm out there rn. I'll reach out to him.
My neighbor bought some absurdly expensive speakers. They don't sound any better than cheap chinese ones. Basically all audio gear reached perfection over a decade ago. Those outrageous looking expensive speakers are just a placebo.
@@34672rr youre deluded if you think that
@@mitchelloliver3704 Nope, I have a degree in audio engineering and psychoacoustics. I have heard so many more rigs than the average person, and have seen many studies, etc. Frequency response is all that matters really, and even very cheap modern chinese stereo speakers have flat responses. I am not talking about laptop or bluetooth speakers, but full range speakers. The technology matured many years ago, just like digital recording media. Some people are just not comfortable with perfection though, because it means there is nowhere else to go.
@@34672rr sorry, total rubbish. I work as a mastering engineer and speaker performance is very different from box to box. This is easily measurable. If you want a very flat performing speaker, something mix and mastering studios require, then any old cheap home stereo speaker won't cut it. In fact even the best speakers are not flat. They are incrementally closer to flatness. This is why in a recording or mastering studio, we will take measurements of the room and apply room treatment, diffusion, bass trapping, absorption, to get the sound at the listening spot as flat as possible. Different speaks use different drivers, different crossovers, these things have different performance ratings... A ribbon tweeter does not perform the same as a soft done tweeter, for example. Speaker accuracy HAS improved in general for sure, as technology is cheaper and better. But speaker design is a fine art. So many elements combining, porting or closed box? Transmission line? Active or passive crossovers... So many decisions that effect the sound, it's a fine science.
Isis the band on vinyl is an eargasm. They knew exactly what to do when it came to mastering and pressing etc.
So being a kid from the '80s, I used to buy vinyl cheap as CDs were the main thing, but only because I wanted to audition an album before I bought it on CD. There were two things that liked about vinyl: the large artwork and how much you could put in there, and watching the record spins as years into your music, which was hypnotizing. Otherwise, I always found it inconvenient as I had to keep on cleaning the records and turned them over. I still love CDs, but have a soft spot for vinyl.
That being said, what kids need to do nowadays is get a proper stereo system, complete with amplifier and good speakers, not those crappy Bluetooth ones or even headphones. My son heard a Queen album on Yamaha amplifier with Wharfedale Demton speakers, and he couldn't believe how immersive they were compared to even the car.
Playing a record on a record player is so much more magical to me than just streaming a song on a digital device. Just the fact that wondrous and complex music can be conjured into the ether from physical grooves on a record seems like magic.
Joe " I don't know who Bill Evans is" Rogan
Joe "97% of my audience doesn't know who Bill Evans is" Rogan
Bill ‘Any relation to Bob Evans? Lol’ Evans
@@Amouroso Top.
Any relationship to Sean Evans?
Miles "I think Im better than people cause I know an obscure jazz musician" beyond67
Reggie:
Excuse me, I'm a little wheezy
Bird Man:
Son!?
Such a talented dude. It’s painful to see how little the late show utilizes his skills and creativity. His stand up was some of the most entertaining shit ever
Yeah man I saw him live, the guy is a genius.
Yes!! Agreed. He's a great singer and creative
I saw him live and it was like the body high that comes before you start tripping your a** off
I could just listen to Reggie talk about esoteric engineering things forever
I like old music that was originally released on vinyl, but prefer them on uncompressed digital formats. Albums remastered on Dvd and Blu-ray sound amazing.
150K? Why not just hire the band to perform at your house.
EasyTabrizi because not even a live band can recreate the quality a perfectly mastered track, hence the word MASTERED.
@@phise1 This. You would also have to hire all of the bands in your music library, at any given moment, as often as you'd like, for a setlist most artists would not want to play. So it's much more convenient and a fraction of the cost.
The mastering engineers don't spend this much on their own monitors to mix.
ComicBook Chaos #27 hey aquabats hello
Just hire Led Zeppelin
a lot of flirting with real information but unfortunately most statements he makes are incorrect. Vinyl has a lot higher noise floor and is a lower fidelity medium than digital audio. this doesn't mean digital audio is better, vinyl has a a character and a sonic texture that sounds warm and lovely to humans. but digital audio has more dynamic range , a wider frequency spectrum and can be ultimately way more transparent than vinyl. Most modern music is recorded on to hard drives via analog to digital converters, probably less than 1% of the music out there is actually analog meaning never converted to digital through the production process (recording/mixing/mastering/production onto medium). so the purity he mentions of analog to analog is close to non-existent in the modern world. As a record label owner and mastering engineer 100% of the time a digital master is cut onto vinyl at the pressing plant. It's rare to send tape reels .
thanks for saving me a rant!
@@Nite85 I tried keeping it short. I could elaborate on each statement but I think this should help shed some light. :)
Agreed. As an audio engineer who has spent many decades daily making recordings - a lot of what he is saying is innacurate - oversimplified or even wrong. There's a lot more going on. It's not always about accuracy.
Should add that even theoretically perfect analog to analog has no advantage over a digital recording for humans at 44.1khz, which captures all information upto 22.05khz perfectly. Wiki page for Nyquist-Shannon sampling theorem lays out maths, key word to look for is "perfect". Misconception is that digital is some sort of grid over audio waves, like a blocky bitmapped image, whilst analogue results in "perfect" curves... but digital output is also "perfect" curves.
@@Nite85 Thanks for saving me the "thanks for saving me the rant" rant :)
Bill evans trio live albums some of the greatest music ever
Yeah man. Reggie’s friend could have played that album on a Bluetooth speaker shaped like a banana bought from a gas station, and it would have still been a transcendental experience for everyone.
Can confirm.
Very interesting to hear Joe Rogan takling about audiophiles, speakers and vinyl! Keep em coming!
Vinyl might be be the closest thing to mastered tape from the 50’s, and it does have some whimsical allure to it, but it’s definitely not the most accurate source nowadays. Both vinyl and tape have frequency range limitations, and a high resolution digital wav file will be more true to the source.
Just got a 1950's record player and stereo from thrift store for 25 bucks. Great condition. Sounds awesome.
Kenner "Close N Play"?
Crackle crackle?
Just be careful- a lot of turntables from that era can be record eaters, and its deceptive because they will sound killer. They sound good because they're putting way too much pressure on the record.
@@korryramone yeah I haven't played any records yet. It needs a needle never got around to getting one. It's crazy because I say some months later I seen one from like the 70's at the same thrift store and it had a price on it for 200 dollars. I was like what.
@@Eye2Eye24 Main things to look for are an adjustable counter weight, adjustable anti-skate, and then a good stylus. You really want to dial it in, then look into aligning the cartridge. There are videos on RUclips that walk you through all these things.
reggie's robot voice at 7:23 would work hilarious with steve zaragoza and mike falzone's BBBBBBBBBBBOIIIS
And Joe just carries on, not even noticing.
@@lucvaillancourt8580 joe doesnt deserve some of his guests
Another two horn born boy I see
Casey Cooper ey mate. Wuh’s rool numbah wahn?
I have two Yamaha H7 studio speakers and technics 1210. Love playing vinyl
While I agree that great Hi-Fi Audio System is crucial for a great listening experience, including modern music. More importantly, is room treatment! Treat your your room with good and strategic acoustic panels, then get your expensive Hi-Fi System, and be submerge.
definitely one of the better guests, I started to get really into high end home and car audio systems in 1992 and I agree with pretty much everything he said on audio.
Flac is just a lossless file. Meaning if you ripped a CD, the sound is not degrading because you lose nothing from compression.
WAV is a lossless file too. Better than FLAC (technically) because FLAC is still compressed and WAV isn't. Nobody could tell a difference though.
@@doublestrokeroll Can you explain why you can't tell a difference? I'm generally curious and have no idea what's different.
@@Gucc111 I'm no expert in the actual science behind it but essentially from what I understand that as a FLAC file is being played back it is being "decompressed" back into a lossless source before it hits your ears. There are all kinds of arguments online about all this stuff and some might say that going WAV (uncompressed) to FLAC and back to WAV means loss of quality but I think at that point it's getting ridiculous. I'd be willing to bet in a double blind experiment that 99% of people out there wouldn't know the difference between 320 mp3 and WAV let alone FLAC and WAV.
Having said that, I'll rip WAV every time...lol.
@@doublestrokeroll Thanks, compression/decompression sounds inherently bad. To your point, I've never noticed any consistent difference in wav, flac, or mp3.
@@Gucc111 You wont notice a difference until you're on very expensive speakers. I can't tell the difference between flac and wav either, but I can definitely hear the difference between mp3 and flac on my studio speakers.
The information given here that a vinyl is the closest to a final master you can get is just a 100% lie.
When transferring to vinyl, you loose a lot of the bass and the highs, and there is also going to be a big loss of stereo width on the bass.
CD format 16bit 44.1k audio has less distortion, more bandwidth and dynamic range.
Higher resolution digital is just leagues above vinyl.
The only reason why some people love vinyl is that the distortions that are inherent in the format can be pleasurable.
I agree with your accessment. People like vinyl for the same reason they like tube amps. Because they add 2nd order harmonic distortion, which is psycho-acoustically pleasing.
kelainefes this is 100% correct. Reggie Watts doesn’t understand audio science and everything he says in this video basically wrong
I like vinyl because it reminds me of warm campfires and melts in your mouth s’mores. Yum yum
Hi kelainefes.
Thats not always true what you say about vinyl records exhibiting less bass.
I use to have vinyl records and the bass on the actual audio coming through the speakers was better than digital cd's of the same tracks that i bought from stores when i switched over to digital in 2006.
And yes, i did play them through the same amp and speakers.
I just disconnected the old record player and connected a cd player to the same amp when i bought the extra cables when switching to digital.
You must be talking about very high quality digital stuff - as opposed to the standard mass produced cd's that people purchase from regular music stores
Also, a good pressed vinyl will always sound better than a regular mass produced digital cd, in terms of atmosphere, as the hiss on a vinyl record helps to add atmosphere to the track.
The real test should be in term of comparing the highest quality digital format - against the highest quality vinyl records - in a head to head sound comparison when BOTH played through the
SAME stereo system.
Then you would be right in your analysis on sound.
Shauni Gothic TV vinyl does lose both high and low end, but mostly high end. The needle cannot move fast enough to produce high frequencies well. The hiss is can be perceived as “atmosphere”, sure. But when it comes down to it, it’s just not supposed to be there. Many people prefer vinyl because it’s warmer from the loss of high frequencies, and that’s fine, but a high quality digital format will better reproduce the recording.
Reggie is such an interesting and badass dude. I could listen to him talk like this for hours
Burn in is completely a true statement. Especially in electronics.
Amazing interview
It’s impossible for vinyl to “sound” better than CD due to its physical limitations. Digitally mastered music captures more data and frequencies than analog. Sounding “better” is more a matter of subjective opinion in this discussion.
Vinyl, bass up, subwoofer, in a trailer home lol, really sounds amazing...the raised floor allows rippling/resonation of the bass purr. Especially early 70's prog organ bass👌
I'm a huge vinyl fan and I love collecting it. But seriously nothing beats high Res digital files in terms of quality. It's absurd to say vinyl has higher quality, just look at the numbers and you'll see digital high res FLAC files have way much higher clarity. Without surface noise. But vinyl is a much more engaging and enjoyable experience.
I like vinyl because there's a static sound that happens when it transitions to the next song. It's almost like bacon cooking and sizzling.
We record to tape and our records you buy have never been converted to digital. Really makes a difference when you make a record fully analog instead of emailing the record manufacturer a digital file.
For you fools: (Format vs Format) hi-res digital is superior. However the problem lies within the mastering of the music. In this day in age digital masters are so highly compressed in dynamic range, that the physical limitations of a record restricts what can be done to a master. Allowing it to be of a higher quality comparitively. References I suggest looking into are "loudness wars", "dynamic range database", and the "db range of both formats".
iknowyounaut This 100%.
This was cool to watch, and I'm a big fan of vinyl records - but Reggie has it the wrong way round; digital isn't "the closest you can get to vinyl". You could argue that vinyl is "as close as you can get to digital" - I would disagree, but lossless digital recording allows the creation of bit-perfect exact copies of studio masters in a way no vinyl record could ever hope to achieve.
Well, it depends on the stereo system on how good vinyl can sound. And everything else he said is 99% bullshit.
I love how eager Reggie is to improvise and be silly
😂 Jamie’s open tabs @7:25 - fact-checking Reggie Watts hi-fi knowledge aaaaaandddd... the Blair Witch Project wiki
😂😂😂
Jamie’s Open Tabs will be my new band name.
The magic lies in-between the soft/hard clipping. Analog produce saturation sound while digital format create harsh distortion.
Sheffield Labs cut vinyl is recorded direct to disk are some of the best pure analog recordings ever... And sound best on discrete electroncs or tube systems! Back in the day they cost 10x more than standard vinyl and came in antistatic sleeves.
My dad had MacIntosh and Marantz Gold quadrophonic rack systems and huge Klipsch horn speakers. The Marantz Gold system used gold solder on their discrete circuit boards... Just like they used in our spacecraft programs because gold was the best electrical conductor.
I miss vinyl acoustics! Joe, this was one of your best interviews that you've done. Keep them coming.
2:07 6:28 A guest mentioned expensive speakers and Joe waited almost 5 minutes before bringing up Henry Rollins.
Speakers definitely have a break in period. There are whole break in regimens for guitar amp speakers.
Is any one else glad that Jamie is always there because he provides such a relatable aspect to each podcast
Doesn’t say anything #relatable
ohh stop jamie we know is you
A direct copy of an original master tape, would be the safety copy (ies), which are archived and/or used if the original has degraded significantly during the recording process (e.g. Fleetwood mac had this issue during the making of RUMOURS..the safeties salvaged the degradation to the top.end due to all the overdubbing)A regular consumer Vinyl pressing isn't that. It's not even close, but the range limitations are something we can love. Vinyl has a mid rangy sound, with a warmth that digital can lack.
Older vinyl sounds incredible for certain types of music, such as mono mixed stuff , and due to the denser , naturally compressed sound of older consoles which mostly used valves, and thickened the sound unintentionally. That's been available as a software effect for some years now, but I'm simplifying everything greatly.
In essence, As he said, FLAC and lossless formats are superb for any modern music made using digital audio workstation software or equivalent. They're also great for anything else, provided the source tapes have had a good restoration and even remix applied , in order to bring them up.to date with modern sonic fidelity tolerances.
I’m 66.. never got rid of my vinyl. And my Kenwood 8050 receiver, Dual belt drive turntable and Dalquist DQ10 speakers..oh yeah..👍
Too much mariJuana. When people don't know the difference between "what sounds good" and "what's the truest replication of the original recording". No mentions of all the limitations of vinyl, ie. distortion, hissing, rumble playback speed inconsistencies, stereo imaging issues, etc. It's all these negatives that end up sounding more natural to human ears, but definitely steer far from original recording quality.
Shut up racist
Reggie Watts is such a geek. Love it. I think he was almost too geek for Joe
There are technical differences but it's mostly a matter of taste. You can get very good sound with records but it will cost you. For my money the most bang for the buck is in the speakers.
He’s definitely right about subwoofers having a break in. They get louder overtime for sure
Love me some FLAC. Used to buy CD's for decades and finally started getting into vinyl a few years ago. Had no idea it could degrade that quickly though.
laser stylus is the only way to preserve records.
Vinyl is pointless unless your a collector, i know vinyl heads re record it all to FLAC anyway so not to damage record when playing, ill just take the Flac ty.
Vinyl DOES NOT degrade quickly.
@@bkkersey93 so how many times can you play it before it starts degrading
Jeez. I remember 8 track ... I had a Sansui reel to reel way back then as well.
Cool story bro. Changed my life. 👎
@@landonic81 go play in traffic & leave the adults alone
I'd like to get 8track again but only if it's a high end recorder for a good price. My $10 Pioneer RT-707 is in bad shape.
@@lutello3012 I moved cities 15 years ago and my Akai turntable and 80w stacker stereo unit is still wrapped up in a box in the garage...along with 4 cartons of vynel ... from The Who to Uriah Heep to America .... all in mint condition...once a month used to pour a glass of red and wash them with a sponge and warm soapy water.
Vinyl has a limit. It is limited in resolution. Digital is not limited like vinyl, it's got different limitations. Vinyl has really pleasing harmonic distortion, above 20 khz. So you can have playback equal to vinyl in digital, but you cannot have equal playback of digital from vinyl. The mastering for vinyl ensures high frequencies are out of the mix, so the needle won't jump because of the limit of the needle.
Javier Perea You’ve got it arse about face, it’s the low frequencies that are cut from vinyl mastering due to the grooves not being deep enough. And harmonic distortion above 20khz would be completely inaudible - except maybe to a 5 year old.
@@Howling-Mad-Murdock your body is an ear and can perceive frequencies above 20 khz. Read some Rupert Neve on the studies about 20 khz and human perception. I believe you about the low frequency limitation as well..low resolution on vinyl.
Javier Perea I’ve read LOTS about audible perception, there is no verifiable evidence that I’m aware of that adults can perceive sound above 20khz. I’m aware of claims that bone conduction can transfer “sound” that our ears can’t, but as far as I’m aware these claims have never been backed up. The audiophile world is so full of bs and snake oil that I want to see verified proof (usually by an independent blind listening test such as ab/x) of any new claims. Blind listening tests and a willingness to accept that the mind is designed to play “tricks” on you is the way forward, it’s a real eye (ear!) opener.
@@Howling-Mad-Murdock Rupert Neve talks about one such study. It comes with all his new preamp literature. It's true about bs in audio world. Ha
In my experience there is an experience of pressure on my ears with frequencies at the edge of my hearing, but that goes away when the frequency is high enough. Of course you can easily feel lower frequencies in your body, but I think 20k+ material is only for exceptional babies to perceive lol.
I love it when some people come to me and pretend to convince me Vinyl can't be as "good" as their favorite formats. They always start mentioning all the physics, the numbers and datas and frequencies...you know all of that is true and fascinating but there is a CRITICAL elements missing there : the personal emotional experience. We all have different ears, we all react differently to a specific imput. You play a specific album on a specific format on a specific system in front of 5 people and all those 5 people are going to react differently to it. I am a 23 year old musician, I have significant experience in recording studios and my hearing can reach the 18k barrier so..I CAN DEFINETELY HEAR. Well I had the privilege of listening to certain albums on a specific system in all the possible formats that exist and even though CDs sounded "more realistic" to me the most satisfying experience was the one with the vinyl format. The vinyl sound TO ME is unbeatable in terms of listening experience and pleasure and that's the main reason why I want to listen to music! I don't give a crap if the frequency wave is going to be inferior, less competitive or whatever...."realism" is not my goal and I am sure it's the exact same thing for many other listeners! So just stick with your favorite format, enjoy it to death and stop bothering people with your annoying useless theories and physical knowledge because at the end of the day our ears are going to value what they hear from the system and not what they hear from you
@Giuseppe Maggiò: Well, you do know that you can degrade the sound quality of CDs and digital in general, to make it sound like a vinyl record?
The way I think about it in my head is in making a vinyl it's taking the physical sound and, unlike taking a digital reproduction. I know that's kind of a silly explanation, but that's how I visualize it
@9:30
Reggie: it’s not like ahhh
Joe: yeah you’re not like freaking out
Reggie: (starts freaking out while trying to take a drink)
Not sure if you just thought it was funny so you posted it or don't actually know but he was just pretending to freak out as a joke lol
Vinyl doesn't sound better. It sounds different. It sounds AMAZING, yes, but not better by definition. Bet you didn't know that bass on vinyl is mono
Slinky511nx7 how does that work? from a certain frequency downwards its mono?
All bass should be mono
@@DotToryX Why on Earth would you draw that conclusion? Why wouldn't a data format that allows greater breadth of artistic expression NOT be the way you'd want to go. I can think of plenty of reasons off the top of my head you'd want to pan the bass. What a damn delusional cloud you're living under.
@@DotToryX eww
@@DotToryX Wrong. Subbass, yes, but not normal bass.
Reggie is right that older tracks sound better on vinyl, this is because it was mastered for vinyl and and most digital versions are going to be remasters or duplicates of the vinyl version. Newer media is recorded digitally so it will sound fine digitally. There are file formats that will have even better resolution than vinyl, but you can't take lower resolution stuff and make it higher, so stuff that started on vinyl will never sound better. Vinyl isn't an uncompressed format like most people think. The variations in the groove need to be large enough for the needle to pick it up but at the same time small enough to not cause the needle to skip and to fit enough songs on a record. The sweet spot for this compression is how we ended up with so many records in the 50ish minute mark.
TL;DR: New stuff, uncompressed digital, old stuff, vinyl.
Good digital to analog converters. That is what needs to be added to this conversation to make it complete. Records are good for the ritual, a high performing DAC can produce what an audiophile wants, unless it is ritual they are after.
Love this. In Seattle, Hawthorne Music is the place to go. Naim, Rega P3 turntable with B&W Towers. All good...
Records have a nice warm sound but no where near the best. Lossless digital file is the highest. Honestly how good a song sounds has more to due with how it was recorded/mixed and mastered. For example using SSL consoles to track a song gives it a special sound because of the analog signal and the on board processing. Recording on tape, certain mics and using tube compressors also do this. They make digital plug ins that emulate these pretty good.
A lot of what people call "warm" is just saturation man, just tossing that out there. Light distortion, I just find it funny that light distortion is considered of higher quality sometimes. Although I get why it sounds pleasing, you're adding extra harmonics to the frequency spectrum go fill it out a bit more.
The best virgin press vinyl is better than any digital. However, wide track/high speed/high output tape is still by far the best. Digital though is more than good enough for everyday listening, and on average better than vinyl.
A jazz record mastered from the original analog tape sounds vastly superior to any digital transfer. Especially first pressings in good condition.
@@Deuce1042 only the first pressing and first few listens. but it does depend a lot on your individual taste. analog always sounds rawer, and some may prefer the more polished sound of digital. I bet a lot more people would when high quality digital first emerged, as it was a novelty much like vinyl is now.
@@34672rr I don't think even high quality digital of jazz records sound "polished" I think it sounds fine but is lacking in the dynamics and organic quality of a vinyl record. Especially in mono which has more low end drive. And it's not only first pressings. Early pressing and various reissues mastered from the analog master tapes by competent sound engineers.
Sort of off topic but does anyone remember when the Game of thrones directors blamed peoples tvs for the final season being too dark hahahahah. Not everyone has the top of the range equipment when it comes to music or tv
Wow, he really is talking out of his ass here when it comes to vinyl. When the master for vinyl, they need to make a special mastering that basically removes a lot of bass and highs to accommodate the vinyl limitations. Vinyl is a highly frequency limited medium. Nothing beats having the original master in high resolution wav file.
The human ear is a frequency limited device.
Yeah but then your pre amp and receiver add back the bass so yeah
@@jacobpeck9372 Your pre amp and receiver can't add what's not there in the first place.
@@subg8858 True but a good portion of the frequencies they remove when mastering for vinyl can totally be heard by human ears. Just look up videos about mastering for vinyl, you'll be stunned by how much they remove.
I knew you were out there. A person who gets it... *hi5*
he is so chill he's making me chill
Also there is a significant loss in dynamic range when using vinyl which technically makes it a lesser resolving source than what your able to get from a digital source.
CD quality is great. When converted to FLAC you get everything: Best quality, compression without loss of quality, portability, streamability and you can play it billions of times.
Don't be fulled by Hi-Fi industry.
FLAC is bs for most part too unless you're making music for your dog or bats. Audiofools live above 44.1khz/16 bit.
What type of system do you listen to your music on?