Which do you prefer? Bumps or holes?

[mas52indy 82]

So, what is your favorite method of storing and retrieving the audio information that is our passion?

I have a certain fondness for vinyl (bumps/analog), since it is what I grew up with. However, I do find the care and feeding of vinyl to be a bit on the tedious side.

CDs and such (holes/digital) do provide a particular ease in terms of storage/replay solutions, but some believe that the "richness" of vinyl is lacking to some degree in digitally stored audio.

My preference is digital. My audio collection, for the most part, is stored digitally in a lossless audio format (no MP3 for me). This provides me the ability to easily catalog my music collection, create playlists for hours of listening without interruption, and store information about artist/album with each item in my collection. This also ensures that original source material can be stored and played without risk of damage.

So, what is your favorite?

[PDR 1,192]

For fathers day my daughter bought me a 200gm remaster of Rush 2112.

My wife bought a 45rpm double of Ed Sheeran.

I thanked them and listened later that night.

Both were just excellent, a pleasure to listen to, surprised me.

 

I have a decent tubed CDP that lets good recordings really

shine as well. I goosebump just thinking of some of them.

 

I think my preference isn't one type or the other, rather

well done productions of either. When its good its great,

when its bad....it sucks. 

[chiroacademy 828]

Bumps I've always been fond of a nice set of bumps and I like vinyl too.

[kve777 6,681]

I like infinite loop ferrite film best.

 

 

 

 

(8-track tapes!)

[Rockster2U 668]

When I saw this thread title, my first thought was oh - oh, are venturing into the female anatomy on the Carver Site? Clever title indeed. And, what's a guy to do when he favors both flavors? Like PDR, I'll take both thank you. It's tough to beat vinyl and personally, I enjoy the ritual of spinning records but there's a lot to be said for the convenience of loading up a few CD's and sitting down with the remote. That said, I'm in full agreement with PDR re: the quality of production with either format. "When it's good, it's great. When it's bad .... it sucks".

[dokblues 101]

I have both mediums, however I do prefer bumps. But if you look at my signature or my system pic`s you would never know that.   I like vinyl and have a pretty good sized collection. Now I will say I do also like a great cd as well. I have a decent sized collection of cd`s as well. I just prefer bumps.

[sKiZo 186]

Bumps are nice, but you know what they say about anything more than an earful ...

 

Pretty much all digital here. Kinda snuck up on me too. I built an HTPC server a while back and ripped all my CDs to that, then the albums followed slowly but surely. Had some birthing pains getting everything to play nice ... the last step was going with jRiver Media Center as a front end ... but now that it's done, vinyl is a rarity. Just the convenience of point 'n click if nothing else, and truth be told, the digital side sounds better to me.

 

 

 

[BillWojo 542]

I'm with PDR, I like them both. It just depends on what I'm doing. If I want to submerse myself in music and pay attention to it, than it's time to fire up the turntable. If I'm doing other stuff that I'll throw a CD in or even listen to the radio. Just depends on my mood. I also agree that it must be produced well. Bad mastering or production sounds terrible on any format, well except Kev's fav, the 8 track.

 

BillWojo

[PMAT 1,843]

It's all about the mood. Which toy depends on the idea of the moment. Cassette, vinyl, CD, iPhone, reel to reel, 8 track, music DVDs, it's all good. Sometimes I want the clicks and pops of a ratty LP. This hobby is @$;/~^%€+{\ (Holes and bumps).

[CWT50 60]

Sometimes I get in the mood to just chill out with my favorite music, its bump time, the whole process is part of the listening experience,  other times when I can not totally immerse myself in the music the holes win. But no matter what it has to be a good recording. 

 

Wayne 

[mas52indy 82]

 

 

Bumps are nice, but you know what they say about anything more than an earful ...

 

Pretty much all digital here. Kinda snuck up on me too. I built an HTPC server a while back and ripped all my CDs to that, then the albums followed slowly but surely. Had some birthing pains getting everything to play nice ... the last step was going with jRiver Media Center as a front end ... but now that it's done, vinyl is a rarity. Just the convenience of point 'n click if nothing else, and truth be told, the digital side sounds better to me.

 

 

 

 

Do you let your HTPC do the D/A, or do you have an offboard DAC? If so, what are you using for that? What did you use to rip your audio? Did you rip to FLAC or some other lossless codec?

 

I built an HTPC which I also use for surround audio. I came across an excellent program for upconverting 2 channel to as much as 7.1 audio. I haven't spent a lot of time with that, but it is fun to listen to a significantly expanded soundstage. 

[mas52indy 82]

 

 

 

I think my preference isn't one type or the other, rather

well done productions of either. When its good its great,

when its bad....it sucks. 

 

I can't agree with this more. I certainly have come across poorly produced/manufactured vinyl and CD, but when both processes are spot on, pure ecstasy. 

[Chuck 74]

How about Reel to Reel, I still enjoy watching the Reels

[UncleMeat 1,173]

I'm a connoisseur of bumps, but the holes are getting more and more flavorful these days! The Karma 490t and Kev's (KVE777) generous offer to let me roll tubes totally opened my eyes again to the beauty of holes! Getting the most out of your holes with an excellent tool is important!! The right tubes are like 'viagra' for your tool! ABSOLUTELY MIND BLOWING!!

[jazzman53 1,219]

I've embraced digital and not turning back now but I do get frustrated whenever I buy a recording that's so compressed it's fatiguing to listen to.  With the wonderful capability of digital media available, why would anyone squash flat what otherwise would have been be a magnificent recording?   

[mas52indy 82]

 

 

I've embraced digital and not turning back now but I do get frustrated whenever I buy a recording that's so compressed it's fatiguing to listen to.  With the wonderful capability of digital media available, why would anyone squash flat what otherwise would have been be a magnificent recording?   

 

I'm a little confused about your post. What sort of digital media are you purchasing that is squashed flat?  

[dr_gallup 42]

 

 

 

I've embraced digital and not turning back now but I do get frustrated whenever I buy a recording that's so compressed it's fatiguing to listen to.  With the wonderful capability of digital media available, why would anyone squash flat what otherwise would have been be a magnificent recording?   

 

I'm a little confused about your post. What sort of digital media are you purchasing that is squashed flat?  

The vast majority of new releases are majorly compressed in all formats.  Still done for radio and streaming where the loudest is still perceived to be the best.

[Herbies101 14]

 

 

 

I've embraced digital and not turning back now but I do get frustrated whenever I buy a recording that's so compressed it's fatiguing to listen to. With the wonderful capability of digital media available, why would anyone squash flat what otherwise would have been be a magnificent recording?

I'm a little confused about your post. What sort of digital media are you purchasing that is squashed flat?

 

Loudness Wars...

 

 

[Chuck 74]

Even my old ears can hear the difference

[jazzman53 1,219]

 

 

 

I've embraced digital and not turning back now but I do get frustrated whenever I buy a recording that's so compressed it's fatiguing to listen to.  With the wonderful capability of digital media available, why would anyone squash flat what otherwise would have been be a magnificent recording?   

 

I'm a little confused about your post. What sort of digital media are you purchasing that is squashed flat?  

 

Here's an example:  

Wonderful voices singing great tunes on what should be a wonderful album -- if only the moron recording it hadn't applied so much compression that I can't stand to listen to it.  

 

 

[mas52indy 82]

Here's a short documentary on the current state of "music delivery".

 

 

[mas52indy 82]

 

 

 

 

I've embraced digital and not turning back now but I do get frustrated whenever I buy a recording that's so compressed it's fatiguing to listen to.  With the wonderful capability of digital media available, why would anyone squash flat what otherwise would have been be a magnificent recording?   

 

I'm a little confused about your post. What sort of digital media are you purchasing that is squashed flat?  

 

Here's an example:  

Wonderful voices singing great tunes on what should be a wonderful album -- if only the moron recording it hadn't applied so much compression that I can't stand to listen to it.  

 

 

 

I finally found a copy of this album, and I have to agree with you, it has so much potential but has been utterly destroyed by the engineer. Too bad. 

[sKiZo 186]

Do you let your HTPC do the D/A, or do you have an offboard DAC? If so, what are you using for that? What did you use to rip your audio? Did you rip to FLAC or some other lossless codec?

 

Onboard sound tends to suck ... worst part is all the "free" crap they load on a system along with the sound drivers. Creative is even nice enough to make it almost impossible to remove those. Arghh!

 

You also have the problem of buss noise with all the other stuff that's going on internally, especially with built in sound that shares the video chip and such. No thanx.

 

I went with a Maverick TubeMagic D1+ DAC and haven't regretted it at all. Very nice box that performs well above it's price point ... and it's TUBE-ulicious! I actually prefer the Tenor chipset USB output - that tops out at 96/24, but sounds way better than the S/PDIF outputs (196/24), even using upgraded op amps.  There's also a direct digital to analog out that bypasses the tube circuit, but the tube adds a lot of warmth as a pre-stage for my tube amp. To each their own.

 

PS ... I still had noise! Weird hissing and clicking that's fairly common with USB audio. Come to find out, it was my Gyro wireless mouse and keyboard. Solution there was to install an addon card that created a completely separate USB channel, including isolation of the power supply instead of drawing power from the buss. Great $20 investment as there's just way too much competition for resources on most any computer today.

 

I ripped a bunch of stuff to lossless WAV back in the day using SoundForge, but switched to jRiver Media Center a couple years ago. All in one solution that you can use for rip and playback, and outstanding organization of your library. If jRiver can't do it, it just doesn't need to be done! First go round, I just pointed it to the old WAV directories and it converted the entire collection to FLAC while I wandered off. It uses the EAC ripping engine, which most consider as good as it gets. 

 

Speaking of organization ... screen shot of some of my "special" folders ... don't know if you've ever tried to organize classical recordings, but there's really no method to the madness, especially when ripping from CDs. You may end up with a couple hundred different folders based on whatever screwball naming conventions they used when compiling the set. They also have these filenames from hell that go up to the OS limits before truncating. dOH! I leave that all alone on the hard drive as I never ever have to see it ... MC keeps it all pretty and easy to get to. I can also search for the album, track, composer, or any applicable tag assigned to track down what I want.

 

 

 

Oh. Lots of skins you can use, but I like the basic black.

[sKiZo 186]

How about Reel to Reel, I still enjoy watching the Reels

 

Load up a blank tape and let it roll ... Which do you prefer ... plastic reels or metal? <G>

 

I've also ripped all my old tapes to digital now. Used a Teac 3340 (still got it) and a dbx SNR-1 to kill as much noise as possible and came out with what I think are some major improvements to sound quality.

 

Fun fact ... the SNR-1 also does a killer job on vinyl. I run my table into an external stage, then into the SNR-1 and out to the ADC and amp. As with any post processing, less is better, but I get a dramatic decrease in the noise floor on a lot of the old vinyl. 

 

 

[sKiZo 186]

 

 

I'm a little confused about your post. What sort of digital media are you purchasing that is squashed flat?  

 

Here's an example:  

Wonderful voices singing great tunes on what should be a wonderful album -- if only the moron recording it hadn't applied so much compression that I can't stand to listen to it.  

 

 

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

Shades of the Andrews Sisters! 

 

 

 

I just previewed your album on Amazon. Good stuff ... I'm in a "mood" lately (just picked up Jo Stafford's greatest hits) and may need to add a dash of Puppini to my collection, but I gotta admit I almost lost it in a giggle fit listening to their rendition of Walk Like An Egyptian. Some tracks were just never meant for covers. Couldn't help but thinking of Light My Fire, by The Templeton Twins ...

 

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

Another good example is the new Alabama Shakes, Sound and Color ... they flat out brickwalled that ... load it up in Audacity and it's pegged to the limits.  In their case, it's not so bad as they're going for the grunge garage sound anyway, but still ... I gave it a good 6db cut and applied peak restoration, which made it way more musical to me.

 

Worth mentioning, the same is true with most any of the early CD releases of older music that had been engineered to tape and vinyl. They cranked them out fast with little or no regard for real regard for the engineering to adapt it to the new format.  Slam, bam, thank you, may I have another please? .