November 12th! Already!

[life_with_alger]

I am becoming more and more of a geek. I started college as a dork interested in the Internet and not much else. In college I started to become more hip and listen to music and do hip things. I thought I had finally become cool, but now that I've moved to New York my nerd has begun to flourish again. In Seattle I was only kidding myself when I

Comments

[mrmcgrath]

I always thought it was really lame when people said that something sounds better on vinyl, just because I didn't think it could possibly make that much of a difference and whenever I listen to that boards of canada album I'm like 'damn this sounds great on vinyl.'

Also, I went to school with a kid who could set up his computer so that he could record records directly and then import them into itunes and put them on his ipod. I have know idea how he did it but maybe we should figure it out. or maybe ian knows!

[thispaperplane]

my friend mr. steven mingus of cincinnati knows how to do it. i'll try to figure it out.

[mrmcgrath]

awesome!

[abumponthehead]

but putting the needle on the record and watching it spit around is half the fun!

[abumponthehead]

and by spit i do mean spin

[remitmeruit]

recording them into the computer will convert the audio to digital, which will destroy the warmth of the records, and then itunes will further convert them to mp3, which will compress them a lot and make them sound considerably worse. there's really no reason to convert vinyl to digital (especially mp3, which is really very poor quality audio) unless you can't get the songs anywhere else or you just like the cracking and popping noise. the reason they sound so amazing is because of the acoustics of vinyl, the way sound waves are represented physically on records. if you convert them to any digital format then the magic you're hearing will totally disappear.

a pretty good explanation of why vinyl really does sound better than digital: http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/question487.htm

[life_with_alger]

We know we'll lose sound quality, but it would be nice to convert them to digital so we could listen to the on our ipods when traveling. It is a bit hard to take a record with you on the subway.

[remitmeruit]

You should just get the digital versions of them in that case, because they'll sound cleaner once compressed. You won't gain any quality by converting them from vinyl (unless, like I said before, you just like the pops and crackling). I have well over a hundred BOC mp3s, including a lot of weird old unreleased stuff. I'll bring them with me when I come for Thanksgiving.

[life_with_alger]

I would like to just buy vinyl and it's gonna be annoying to have to download everything I buy. But, I suppose it will probably be just as annoying to hookup the turntable to my laptop and convert all those files.

les vinylists pathétique.

[thejollyoctagon]

Nominally, iTunes converts raw audio into Apple Lossless (aac), not mp3. Certainly a format not without flaw, but sonically superior in many regards. Sure vinyl records may sound better, but it's a psychoacoustic phenomena, it is literally "all in your head". You must remember that this technology is about 115 years old, and is subject to a near limitless amount of corruption and degradation. Every time you play a record, it will sound less authentic than the time before. Damn it man, this is the 21st century! We strive for scientific precision*!

*I must concede that those cardboard 12"x12" jackets are splendid.

I beg your pardon?

[remitmeruit]

Sorry, but you're wrong. AAC is not the same as Apple Lossless, they are two different (though similar) formats. Do a Google search on "Apple Lossless" and see. And iTunes converts to either MP3 or M4A (which is, in fact, Apple Lossless) - but both are compressed digital formats which, despite the "lossless" tag, unavoidably degrade uncompressed audio. I've been working in digital music for years and have converted .WAV files to both MP3 and M4A many times, and the difference is definitely noticable (or rather, it is definitely noticable with good quality monitors or headphones - of course, if you're listening to iPod in-ear phones on a subway, you won't notice).

As far as vinyl recording technology being "old," what is your point? Of course records degrade, but it takes many, many plays for this to start audibly affecting the recording, and the records we play today weren't manufactured 115 years ago. Why does it matter how old the technology itself is

these days it's all recorded digitally.

[thejollyoctagon]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analog_sound_vs._digital_sound

scientific precision is a metaphor, a construct for a binary era.

relax, do not take it so personally, I just enjoy that "icy" digital sound.

what I am implying is that it all comes down to personal preference,
what you may like in yr. recordings (pop, clicks, warmth) may not
be what others enjoy. "Sounds Better" is subjective.
So take it easy, and let us both salute the death
of the audiocassette.

Is not! Okay, well most of it is.

[remitmeruit]

Though "digital at several stages" in a studio would probably refer to DAT, which is FAR better quality than any computer-based digital format. And not compressed. Listening directly to DAT with studio headphones is an amazing experience.

Incidentally, DAT uses tape even though it's digital - so it's not quite dead yet. :) I actually have a DAT recorder right across the room from me as I type this, which I just finished lugging around downtown Chicago for two hours.

Not taking anything personally. I'm just an audiophile, and spend a lot of time thinking about these things.

correction

[remitmeruit]

*note: not ANY computer-based digital format, just the standard lower-bit ones.