“If you argue with a madman, it is extremely probable that you will get the worst of it; for in many ways his mind moves all the quicker for not being delayed by the things that go with good judgment.” ― G.K. Chesterton
It's like most luxury items (wines, watches, clothes), there's a point where you stop paying for quality and start paying for marketing or sophistication. It's fun to study the market and try to find the sweet spot between cost and benefit.
Dave, as someone who has spent a significant amount of time tweaking my sound system, trying to find the best equipment for the right price, who admittedly loves vinyl for a number of reasons, but also has an enormous collection of CDs… you are absolutely right about almost everything here. I love my vinyl, but it IS utterly ridiculous. I’ve had about 4-5 CDs out of the 5,000+ I own experience some sort of digital corruption even when properly cared for, but that’s anecdotal and a staggeringly low percentage.
Man are you awesome to listen to on a sunday afternoon before an eagles and steelers game. Dave have a great afternoon. No one could have said it any better.
Some thoughts. in the 80ties it was perfectly normal to tape your own LPs on chromium dioxide compact cassettes with dolby to avoid tear and wear to the LPs. This allowed you to listen to the music on the Walkman, on the car and to wake up with the music using an electronic alarm clock. but i wonder why the "original source" LPs are not released on CD as well? Is the process totally specific to vinyl medium by only optimizing the groove density etc. ?
They want you to believe that only analog vinyl as the only true high resolution format is able to reproduce the original analog goodness of the analog remasters. None of this is true, of course, but it adds to the mysticism. Essentially DG here gives their target audience what it wants to believe.
Yes, vinyl was the norm but it wasn't very portable. I copied all of them to cassette and that's how I listened to everything until CDs came around. Sounded great to me.
I was relieved when records went away, I thought then forever. Then we had a horrific plague of cassettes but CDs to the rescue. Finally something without scratchy pops or wow and flutter out the butt. Something with some dynamic range and lack of tape hiss. Then streaming, even better, no crappy media or bad mechanical stuff to get in the way of the sound. And then, like the Walking Dead, it all came back. Its like a bad dream. You can't seem to kill these bad ideas. I mean, the horse and buggy went away eventually. The tube console radio is no more. This is the very definition of insanity. Keep doing something over and over and expecting a different result.
Indeed, it’s not rational. This is the same romance some of us are having with mechanical watches, enjoying the cogs and springs of a well-crafted micro-machine when we all know the accuracy of an electronic quartz watch is way better. The romance of interaction with your gadgets in a physical way goes all the way from cars to coffee machines to diamond-tipped cartridges, and long may that be so!
I can't remember what novel I read a long time ago, but one of the characters loved a certain LP recording of Elgar's "Enigma" Variations so much that his copy was scratchy and full of skips. His friend bought him a brand-new LP copy, but the guy said he didn't need it, because he'd grown fond of the scratches and skips. Well, OK then...
The difference is that most watch enthusiasts I know don't insist that old mechanical watches are more accurate than modern watches. They understand they're into watches for the aesthetics. In audio far too many people believe they're paying for better sound quality and actually getting far worse or at least something that couldn't be had for much cheaper. That's the Placebo Effect at work.
I use a mechanical watch because I dislike having to replace batteries. Precision is not a concern, I'll adjust whenever I need to. I am more bothered by a watch that stopped than by one that's a few mn off.
Hello, I am an “audiophile” and you are right: what “sounds” better is subjective. However there are some indicators that are not so personal: Background noise is one of them. If you are in a concert hall maybe you will hear people coughing, but not a “white noise” behind (as vinyl) or pops and ticks. Better sound (at least with acoustic music) is the one that represents better the live sound. It makes sense to invest some money in gear to get that. About media, a CD or Tidal will give you less noise than a vinyl. Having said that, the most important point here is to enjoy music, to feel emotions when you listen to it. It is more likely to feel that without noises, right? Congrats for your channel Dave. I followed some of your recommendations and generally we agree!
I have so many classical compact disks and very little space to store them so I removed the cases and put them in archival storage binders. Did I do a bad thing? Someone told me I might have.
I can accept the eccentricity of the audiophile. The guys that drive me crazy are the vinyl fetishists who own cheap stereos but still swear up and down that they can hear the sonic superiority of LPs.
I like my Lps when I listen to jazz or 50's and 60's vocalists. I never wanted to duplicate this stuff because they are recorded at a high enough volume that you don't really hear the noise if you take care of your records. But when it comes to classical, so much is in a quiet to medium range that you do hear every bit of surface noise, so I only listen to the LPs that have never been released on CD and that isn't much.
Yes I agree with everything you have said and couldn’t agree more. I once was an audiophile with an expensive record player but the tax man knocked on the door and the Mrs 40th birthday came at the same time so out went my precious deck and vinyl collection. Now it’s streaming for me and I still get the same enjoyment.
I have had my Linn turntable since around 1985. I have upgraded it several times since. I also have a decent CD player. I like both media. I am not a fan of streaming, but that's because our broadband is erratic. In the UK, some stores (I am looking at you HMV) are charging about £30 for a new release for all genres of music. Therefore the DG Original Source becomes relatively good value. I have only two of these releases, Tchaikovsky 4 Abbado, and Stravinsky Rite of Spring. Both of these are beautiful with genuinely superlative sound and I consider very good value. If you look at the folk who happily buy multiple recordings of Steely Dan, Dire Straits, or Dark Side of the Moon at £200 per LP, then that becomes crazy. Where we are fortunate is that there are many secondhand LPs in charity shops which have been handled carefully and cost £1 - 2 each. When cleaned properly, these are often faultless and can sound better than most new releases. A couple of other points mentioned by Dave: - With a good record cleaner and quality turntable, there is hardly any background noise. I have many early stereo LPs from the 1959-69 era which have no clicks and pops. - Most concert halls in the South of England have abysmal acoustics and you might as well listen at home. At a Mahler 2 in the Royal Festival Hall recently, the "off stage" instruments sounded clearer than on stage. Having defended LPs, if I were starting out now, I would probably stream given the extortionate prices of new LPs and the necessity to spend £1000 plus on a decent enough turntable.
Your mention of "The Absolute Sound" reminded me of an article in Fanfare in the 1980's in which one writer described going to hear Yo-Yo Ma in concert. A friend of his went to the same concert and sat in a different place in the hall, and the two of them had totally different impressions of the quality of the sound based just on where they were in the hall at a live event. He mentioned this to lampoon the whole conceit of The Absolute Sound and its writers that there was some ultimate "truth" about how live music sounded and records should try to reproduce that as closely as possible.
I had what was, and still is regarded as a very good turntable ( Linn LP12). But now completely digital (Flac files). Sadly when I have attended the odd audio show in the UK the demographic attending is mainly guys, with the average age > 50. I don't get it anymore when a majority of vinyl is digital. It seems to be the tactile experience that's always put forward as one of the main reasons for buying it. We listen with ears not eyes and hands. No-one listening in a studio would judge the sound quality by asking the producer to put it on a turntable. Who would want to listen to a live performance of a delicate piano concerto with someone behind munching on a bowl of rice crispies 😂 No one ever mentions scratches which are unable to be repaired. But as you say let the tracking force be with them. Emporers new clothes. Thanks for the content.
I love how Dave’s every mention of vinyl spawns a whole series of reaction videos by vexed vinyl vloggers. Keep up the great work, Dave! Your decades of experience and ever-present humor are priceless - both in 1970s and 2024 dollars! 😄
Many good thoughts here. This coming from an old vinyl owner who has kept a modest collection of black discs to avoid paying for digital duplicates - the cheapskate effect. The good part of being old is not being able to hear some of the black-disc defects. Not that any of that stopped me from designing and building my own custom phono pre-amp. I guess it's all about having fun, and being a music lover who likes good sound and a guy who likes electronics I am indeed enjoying listening to both old vinyl and new digital in my home. BTW, the "guru" was Harry Pearson. Thanks Dave, you made me giggle at myself!
It’s always fun to listen to hardcore audiophiles who aren’t into classical music but have to own a first pressing of Ansermet conducting ballet music (a ‘grail’ recording) in about five different pressings. Often they know the catalogue number off by heart but can’t actually tell you the name of the orchestra.
I am a vinyl junky but a huge percentage of that audience knows nothing about classical music. Sometimes you can get great classical vinyl at record stores for practically nothing, they just don’t know much about the repertoire or the labels
One thing I find amusing is that by the time most people have sufficient disposable income to buy a so-called 'audiophile' system (i.e., when they've reached their forties and fifties) they can no longer hear the higher frequencies they could in their 'teens or early twenties, so anything above around 12kHz is lost on them.
I agree that many audiophiles I know are insufferable. Part of being insufferable is classism framed with snobbery and lust for more and more equipment. I dig some of the equipment... no doubt. If If I can, I will gravitate towards listening on good equipment. BUT...the equipment should serve the music and gift the music lovers. It is comparable to how certain musicians are obsessed with their instruments to the exclusion of saying something meaningful (repeatedly) with it.
@ Thanks for your comment. I agree. I own a lot of equipment. I like having cool “stuff.” I don’t pretend it’s a “hobby” or the equipment does anything special to what’s most important-the music. I find it hypocritical for audiophiles to spend thousands of dollars to get rid of “noise” or “distortion” and complain about compressed music or equalization…but then embrace vinyl, which has all of the above. Then, they talk about how terrible early digital sounded, which Dave has acknowledged. (Some of the Levine Mahler symphonies are ear piercing.) Well, nearly all of my CDs were mastered after 1997. Is that “late” digital enough for them? In the end, as Dave also said, I’m happy money is being spent on classical music.
Black magic markers? C’mon, Dave, that’s ridiculous. It’s GREEN magic marker. Everyone knows that. Black magic marker makes no audible improvement in the sound. 😂
Both colors have been used. Green at first, then black; and now it's purple. It is audible, as certain colors absorb stray scattered cd light. But most people don't know what to listen for. When it's pointed out what aspects of the sound to listen for, many people can hear the suble but clearly audible difference. Some people are astute listeners, and some people are not. Some people's minds get in the way of their perception; if they don't understand or believe how something could make a difference. The current thing that non audiophiles laugh about is getting your speaker cables off the floor by elevating them or buying a calcalated length that they don't touch the floor. The people who get a guffaw, don't understand static fields on the floor or resonances created by cables laying on the floor. Equipment warm up makes more difference than greening cds. By the middle of the 2nd recording I play,, I can hear more space between the instruments, more natural, less electronicy sound sound.and less brightness. Those qualities are important to me, as I just want to hear sounds that instruments really make, not electronic sounds added on, that stereo's make. Sound quality is more important to audiophiles because they realize that it is more pleasant and realistic a listen than. slapping on bright Columbia recordings which will sound bright & screechy often, if played before your stereo is warmed up. Play an average Columbia recording at stereo turn on to the end, and then repeat it, and you will hear it has sweeter and more pleasant sound on the 2nd play. Your stereo is warming up. The sound keeps getting better till after the 4th recording. Usually around the 3 hour mark. If you don't give a care about sound quality, there is nothing wrong with that either. I'm sure we have all enjoyed music even on a transistor radio
I must say that I only listen to CDs on a sony Discman from the 1990s that I got for free at an estate sale and, paired with a quality set of headphones, I am quite happy with it!
There he goes again; Dave is making sense! This is one of the most rational and amusing commentary on vinyl (and, by extension, high-end audio). I'm more concerned about these companies dragging out old original master tapes and wearing them out to feed these audiofetishists instead of preserving them as irreplaceable artifacts.
If you’re going to preserve the original medium by not playing it, then CDs are the way to go! You can rip them quickly on any computer with a CD drive, and without any loss of quality.
I've offended wondered if the "serious " audiophile people ever go to a live orchestral performance s , and if/when they do are they disappointed in the live sonics? 🤔
I've no issue with what you are saying. The only point I would make is there is a plethora of companies making modern vinyl using the original source for a cheaper price than these DG re-issues. Also, you can buy second hand vinyl in excellent condition and much cheaper in comparison, if you know where to look. As for the music/sound argument, for me it's not possible to appreciate the music fully unless the sound is good. Of course, everyone's ears and expectations will differ in this respect.
The fact that there's (at least in my experience) a significant overlap between audiophiles and wine "conoisseurs" is significant. Both activities with no objective criterion being exploited for social clout.
I'm old enough to remember the kooks in 60s & 70s who claimed that late vintage 78s sounded soooooo much better than LPs...& Invested squillions in specialist turntables & cartridges that played the 4.5 minute per side wonders (adjusting the pitch between sides, of course).
I don't remember that, but I do remember collectors saying that original 78s almost invariably sounded better than the lp transfers of those recordings, which was true except for transfers by people like A.C. Griffith at EMI.
So much I agree with in both parts of Dave's talks here. Just as everyone's ears are different, hi-fi audiophiles & musical appreciation are usually polar opposites within that group. Yes, there are differences between pieces of equipment (yawn!), but I expect nearly everyone out there has settled upon & put together some components to enjoy listening on. My bits & pieces I've had for decades for vinyl except a couple more recent CD players. Apart from loving classical music & other genres at a young age beginning over 50 years ago, I'm also one of those people that handling & listening to vinyl just comes naturally & I really enjoy hearing it that way. I also used to DJ dance music too, so I never really got out of the vinyl habit even as my CD collection grew. Both mediums have their virtues, but I generally prefer analogue sound even with electronic music as it just sounds warmer to my ears. I've never been into buying deluxe editions of anything as even with the extra packaging or other so-called claimed "bonus" luxury materials sonic or otherwise, it rarely makes any difference to the listening experience for me. I've already got many regular vinyl DG issues which are exceptionally fine anyway, such as Karajan's Mahler 5 & 6 & some others, so why would I want the latest editions DG are releasing? I just can't be bothered & I'll save my money for other more worthwhile pursuits!
I loved these two "Emperor has no clothes" videos in a special way more than I love your normal reviews. Thank you! I know a few of the audiophile crazy cultists, and it's true of them that they are obsessed with collecting media and sound equipment and with sound (sort of) -- but rarely with _music_ per se. Fine, good for them. I said "sort of" when I mentioned sound, because these are the physics deniers who claim that a $500 wooden volume control knob makes a difference (and even a significant difference) in the sound -- especially if you have invested in all the other faux anti-physics audiophile scams. Then there are the $500 AC line cords, etc. -- all the scam products that filled The Absolute Sound (is that magazine still around, and still pushing snake oil products?) You don't need a Ph.D. in electrical engineering (which I have) or physics to know that their emperor has no clothes.
Yes. The fancy, beefy power cable especially puzzles me. Do these people believe that the current is somehow created in the socket itself? Just inside a typical home, the current travels a long distance to the socket through 1.5 mm wire, bought at the lowest possible prize by the building contractor.
Agree with you 100% .. I collect vinyl but refuse to get into bidding wars with people trying to buy vinyl on EBay etc. many people misguidedly think that vinyl is an investment and will be worth more as time goes on. In addition you need to invest good money in a turntable, cartridge and phono preamp to hear any noticeable difference in sound between streaming, vinyl and cd
@@DavesClassicalGuide An even better analogy is the watch folks. The cheapest quartz watches have an accuracy of 15 seconds per month, but true watch connoisseurs will wear only mechanical watches, the best of which are accurate to about 5 seconds per day.
Even if we were to accept the inflation argument, full-priced LPs were selling for @ $7.99 when I was a teen in the late 80s/early 90s and that’s only $15 today. But you make a great point. It doesn’t make any sense to look at the price of a record in some prior year and just apply the inflation rate to it to determine a reasonable price in today’s market, because you assume that the item has held it’s value over that whole period, when in fact recorded music has been drastically devalued. As to sound, the quality of the sound is limited by the quality of the source. Better mastering and playback technology can reproduce more of what’s in the source but there’s a limit to how much an old recording can be improved. CDs actually have better dynamic range than LPs.
Interesting, Dave, that you seem to have earned more 'thumbs up' for this video, than almost any other one I've paid attention to. I was one of those who put his 'thumb up'. I would never want to go to vinyl at this point. Far too much maintenance involved.
I don't pay much attention to that childish debate Vinyl vs. CD because they are all wrong: the best sounding format is (talking here just about the analogue period) the MASTER TAPE!!!...Cds & vinyls are mere transfers, so if you were lucky to have a good reel to reel equipment & pay some extra money for a 1st copy, you were on business. Besides how many great recordings were horribly transferred to vinyl (also CD) when were released for first time & in later remasterings (no matter the format, again) have been a complete new revelation in terms of sound quality just because they were correctly done!!?. Most important, let's all go to the concert halls, auditoriums etc, that's where the best possible sound is, & none high-end mega expensive equipment on earth can match!
Excellent as usual. Did make me chuckle. If it works out financially for them maybe in the future they could remaster Herbie's Ring Cycle. And issue it on 78's!
@nyquist5190 yes, you're right...I should I just said tape; everybody agree that out of the 3 standard formats, tape was the best sounding source. The problem is nobody have the money & the time to buy all & compare all. In any case, and digging a bit deeper, it is the recording engineer what it matters to me (eventually you will get a great recording no matter the format, if the transfer is professionally done).
After suffering through the LOUSY vinyl pressings of classical recordings through my early years, returning LPs to the record store and arguing with the sales people to get my money back after hearing the clicks and pops and groove distortion, I am NEVER going back to the crappy LP even if DGG wants to give them away. The collectors who want to pay that kind of price for an outdated, flawed technology are in a word, NUTS.
On the rare occasions I step into one of those audio stores (the type with the dedicated listening room), I more often than not hear a salesman at some point in his pitch to a customer announce he is an Audiophile (said in such a way that the capital A is implicit). I'm able to stifle a chuckle but still eye roll pretty hard. Thanks for this video!!
I've been enjoying my CDs for so long I have no desire to shell out big money for supposedly "better sounding" vinyl records that need to be meticulously cleaned and treated with kid gloves, not to mention changing sides every 20+ minutes or so. I do have many vinyl records but I don't play them nearly as often as my CDs.
Hi Dave, I agree with your arguments. If someone can afford this luxury and enjoys this type of music playback, they should be allowed to do so, even if I am a little envious, as I couldn't afford equipment costing many thousands of dollars. :) But vinyl is not a real alternative, especially in the field of classical music, as both the sound and availability of many recordings cannot keep up with CD or lossless download music. A good example for me is the Solti Chicago Decca box with 108 CDs, which was then offered a few years later on 6 LPs for about 3/4 of the original CD price.
Very well said. I think talking about sound quality/investment/system difference is not a very warm thing in general. It just feels cold and lonely. Like 9/10 of the time I'd spend my time with my beloved ones to do something not related to music rather than listening to music through my hi-end system alone, no matter how good it is.
All the older ladies in my family had that room. It was called a "living" room but it was anything but. I figure I'll be worn out before my vinyl is, so just enjoy it.
Well obviously most people commenting here haven’t seen how sentimental Dave was when he talked about his EMI signature series SACDs (Klemperer’s late Mozart symphonies), describing how deluxe and sturdy the binding was. That video was just released yesterday. In general, SACDs are never as cheap as CDs. The retail price of EMI signature series SACD (Klemperer’s late Mozart symphonies) is around $25, while the equivalent CD is basically half the price. In this video Dave asked why you spend $40 for a LP when you can get the same thing by spending $2 to $10 on CDs if you do need physical products. So same question for Dave: why you spend $25 on SACDs when you can get the same thing by purchasing the much cheaper CDs?
@@DavesClassicalGuide To me, it seems the main obligation of a professional music critic is to describe music performance of recordings rather than the packaging of the albums. Maybe you talked about the music performance of the same recording (Klemperer’s late Mozart) too many times so you chose to talk more about the “non-musical factors” this time? I don’t know. But if the music performance is a priority, a financially “rational”music critic doesn’t bother buying more expensive deluxe edition SACDs just for reviewing the music performance. Much cheaper CDs of the same recording are sufficient to get the job done.
With respect, I think you are misreading the mood here. I don't think anybody has a problem with producing a premium product, in a sturdy box with nice photographs and an informative booklet. I believe that's what Dave liked about those Klemperer discs and the DG LP boxes (as do I, I personally make a point to avoid the crammed shoebox-style packaging which is so popular right now). But it's a quite different thing to buy these LPs because you have convinced yourself that they sound much better than anything else. (And then perhaps not play them, as you don't want to wear them out.)
@@doctorzingo If sound quality (SQ) is a subjective thing and the perception of SQ differs from person to person, what’s the issue if one is willing to pay for the relatively high premium of the LPs if he believes, or has “convinced”himself that they sound much better? BTW, I stream lossless digital files, but also have a large collection of CDs and vinyl. I do think vinyl sounds better than CD in some cases. Did you watch the whole video? From 6:14 to 7:14, it seems Dave thinks the price of DG OSS vinyl is unreasonably high compared to much cheaper CDs of same recordings. He thinks they are the “same thing”. However, he just uploaded a video yesterday praising his EMI Signature Collection Series SACDs for their superior quality WITHOUT saying anything about their price. Honestly these SACDs are far from cheap compared to CDs of same recordings. Yes, they’re still cheaper than OSS vinyl, but to me there is no substantial difference between the OSS Vinyl and EMI SACD simply because they’re both premium/deluxe products compared to basic CDs. By contrast, I got the impression that Dave thinks his $20-$30 EMI SACDs are just fine but the price of DG OSS vinyl ($40/LP) is far from reasonable.
@@jerrykoo8937 SQ is subjective in the sense that it's happening in our minds; it's not really subjective in the sense that people prefer different things when they aren't victims of The Placebo Effect. There are slight variations due to the variations in human hearing, but by-and-large people's blind preferences are pretty well-aligned. My only issue is that I don't think people being naively affected by The Placebo Effect and convincing themselves of patently false things is good. If people are aware that, eg, vinyl is an inferior medium but like for the aesthetics, the whole ritual of playing, etc. then that's fine; but people trying to claim it has any objective claim to better SQ is just fooling themselves. At best it might can sound as good as anything, but not better.
DG is a basically a budget label of German classical music. If they can now get collectors interested in their otherwise uncollectible catalogue, yes, they are winning, to your point.
My LP thoughts. I have about 500 LPs. I still pull them off the shelf occasionally, especially when I want to listen to something that has never been issued as a CD. Take the Connoisseur Society label. Lots of good recordings there: di Bonaventura's Scarlatti and Barbosa's Beethoven, to name two. But no one has gotten around to releasing the catalog on CD. Maybe the founder is dead or the tapes are lost. Someone in New York has to know. As for DG, last year I found a like-new copy of a 2-LP set of the Koeckert Quartet's recording of Haydn's Op. 20 -- that I didn't know existed until I last year. That may just be my last LP purchase! It amazes me how much stuff we haven't seen as CDs. On other fronts with DG, I've been friendly with a guy at the Eloquence office, and he said he liked my idea of doing a Roberto Szidon box. Szidon recorded a lot of unusual repertoire, so that will be a fascinating box. Lastly, will I buy any of these "Original Source" LPs? No. Well, if DG were to release the Karajan/Mutter Beethoven Violin Concerto, I might get it just so that I can have one of these "deluxe" products as a curio. But none of the current titles interest me.
@ Yes. And you can hear the latest remastering on streaming and compare it with the previous one, and it really does sound better. They really did do some great work with it based on the newer techniques that they didn’t have 20-25 years ago when they released the last remastering. For the people who care deeply about the improvement in the sound and want it in a physical format, I hope they enjoy it. I’m happy with the budget box release of the whole cycle that cost me less than one of the new individual releases. Same goes with the DG original sources. Enjoy listening to them, or enjoy having them sit on your shelf.
@ I know it’s not relevant to the video’s topic, but do know if the current Solti Ring remaster is available in an inexpensive box set? I have the “old” (2012), though admit I've not listened all the way through that box more than once.
After someone told you to watch the videos about the "Original Source Series," I went and watched the ones related to Karajan's Bruckner cycle. I did find the videos instructive about the challenges they faced, and how well they overcame them. I felt the tug but am not going to buy the product. It's just not my niche. The same team mastered SACD transfers of the same recordings only eight years ago, and I am happy to have those in my collection already. To each his or her own niche.
I'm an electronic engineer. I build audio equipment as a hobby. I think as long as you do your math correctly, it will sound good. I prefer cd to vinyl record. But tubes brands or anything along these discussions, I refuse to even participate. I don't have a lot of patience for audiophile mumbo jumbo. And despite having a decent amount of disposable income, I refuse to pay for prestige. Getting screwed is not something I would brag about. I still have my old Atlantic watch from the 70s I don't have the need to buy another one just because. If one want a good analogue media, factory recorded tapes are the way to go. It's more expensive, but it's better than any vinyl are going to be.
I consider myself an audiophile looney, but not when it comes to vinyl, which is and always will be an objectively inferior medium to digital in most all respects except for its oversized album covers/books, but when it comes to speakers. I fully admit you can get a great sounding system for less than $1k and that everything above that, while often an improvement, is diminishing returns. At the same time I'm willing to spend more to get as close to perfection as is possible, and that costs money because large, well-engineered speakers with effortless, distortion-free dynamics and linear on and off axis frequency responses simply aren't cheap, nor are they common. Ditto for beefy amps and robust AVRs... but I recognize that this is, indeed, lunacy. "Perfection is the enemy of the good" as the true saying goes. It's so silly to convert vinyl to digital. If you want vinyl "warmth" just use EQ to add all the warmth and I'm sure you can find filters to add vinyl-like distortion too. To me, the only argument to buy vinyl is to admire the art work and booklets.
Mixed feelings. I do buy into the claim that there is an intangible sound that vinyl has that is appealing. CDs are a better deal as far as cost. I bought the Karajan Mahler 5 original sound it is very nice sounding. It’s hard to say, I was listening to a Harnoncourt CD from the 90s last week that I thought sounded mind blowingly good. Some vinyl records got remastered for digital poorly.
"You worked hard for your money." I did not expect you to paraphrase disco queen Donna Summer here, but both you and Ms. Summer make valid (even rational) points -- basically, that people are well within their rights to spend their hard-earned money however they see fit. If you were a South African billionaire you might choose to fork over $44 billion for a trashy social media platform -- or $250 million to buy the presidency of the United States (a bargain!). Or, whether you possess that kind of wealth or not, you may wish to purchase newly remastered AAA recordings of "classical" music pressed on high-quality virgin vinyl. It is true, though, that German, Dutch and Japanese vinyl LPs have long used vinyl formulations superior to the stuff widely sold in the States. Compare a DG or Philips pressing from the '70s to an Angel or RCA Red Seal record of the same vintage and you'll immediately hear the difference...
Hyperion has recently joined the "Vinylites". A CD of Mendelssohn's two Violin Concertos and the Hebrides overture take up one CD. This disc costs £12.50. The Vinyl recording of this costs £20.00 - without the overture! I for one cannot see the gain (if anything). I have over 4900 CDs and would never go back to Vinyl though I certainly treasure my 1000 or so LPs many of which I bought in my youth, alas long gone.
This rant happened at a time that made it very funny for me, funny as in laughing at myself. I’m a vinylphile audiophile and I just lately found a DAC, made with the old 16 bit TDA1541 chip, that I really enjoy, I find it very musical and very happy I don’t necessarily need to spend crazy money on vinyl anymore. Well, just last night I was listening to something on my DAC that I happen to have on vinyl and decided to give the vinyl a listen, it was so much better on vinyl, back to square one. Yes, we are crazy, but like someone on the big bang said, “what’s life without whimsy”.
I was astonished yesterday when I went into the comments after watching the first video on the topic. It was as if some of the commenters hadn't watched your video at all. I was going to respond to one of them to that effect, but realized that it was a fool's errand. You appear to have deleted the most egregiously stupid ones. But you can't delete the crazy!
I suspect some of the vitriol may derive from them on some level realizing the rationality of Dave's position and trying to convince themselves as much as others. If LPs make you happy, go ahead and enjoy them. I can actually understand the charm in the whole ritual of taking it out of the sleeve, holding it by the edges, putting it on the platter, carefully placing the stylus etc. It's like traditional Japanese tea making - maybe the tea doesn't actually taste that different but the preparations put you in a certain frame of mind. They can absolutely say that they prefer the sound of LP, who am I to tell them differently? But to claim that LPs objectively sound better, taken to mean that they better represent the original recording, is preposterous - an LP typically has a dynamic range of about 60 dB and measures much worse on things like distortion and stereo separation. Of course, these artifacts may sound subjectively pleasing to many people, and I'm perfectly OK with that.
It always reminds me of the New Yorker cartoon of the guy in front of his stereo telling his friend, "What really drew me to vinyl was the expense & the inconvenience."
Until relatively recently, classical music on CD has been selling at ludicrously low prices. Some of the mega-boxes, such as, say, Solti's complete CSO Decca recordings, sold for peanuts! I purchased many of the mega-boxes a few years ago from Amazon and most of them are now out of print and commanding high prices on the used market - more than I paid for them new! Used classical vinyl can be had for very little money, if you know where to look!
Great topic. Can you give an opinion of the actual titles they are releasing and your thoughts on that? I really would like your opinion on the performances they have selected.
The defensiveness is rational enough… Unfortunately, really good stereos sound pretty awful on poor recordings and/or pressings…and they are legion. There are so many disappointments. There are some audiophile LPs that are so well done that they really do knock your socks off, and you can appreciate the money spent to get that result. Sadly, they are often very tedious music. So, if DG really has released great music and performances at $40/pop, it’s a big deal, if you’ve already committed so much to the hobby.
I'm an audiophile, listen mostly to vinyl and I understood perfectly and appreciated what you said. It's great that someone with a love and understanding of music as deep as yours does care about sound quality even of it is not your passion.
Even if we were to grant that vinyl sounds better, which I don’t, how much better does it sound? What’s the marginal cost of that 1.0 or 0.5% improvement in sound? Can these people really hear the difference or are have they simply convinced themselves that the sound is better emperor’s new clothes fashion?
I think you're being too kind, Dave. These collectors are suckers. They are not into music; they are into collecting and acquisition. That's it. And yes, they are very insecure. I don't blame DG for exploiting them. BTW, same exact phenomena is happening with boutique blu-ray/4K collecting. A boutique label like VINEGAR SYNDROME would offer a "special collectors edition" of some very obscure film from the 70s, at a huge price, and collectors go into a feeding frenzy. When they sells out, VS offers the "standard" edition of the same thing. The difference? The "special collectors edition" has a slipcover. 😆 These collectors are, likewise, not interested in the film itself. In fact, I would bet most of the purchased special editions are never watched. They are kept behind plastic in its original packaging.
Your absolutely tight I detest music in all its forms and only collect these expensive editions because of all the clout the bring me. I’m so famous in my neighborhood because of my high price record collection and my parents… oh my parents love it… yes but… I really hate music, most of all classical.
I think that’s a bit too far, but you’re right that people are insecure about it. Yes, it’s a collector’s product. I have a collection, and I enjoy collecting! In that way it’s no different than any other collection hobby, whether that be stamps or coins or Hallmark keepsakes or Beanie Babies. I also enjoy that the things I’m collecting have value to me as music I can listen to, but in the age of streaming when it’s possible to listen to anything for nearly free, collecting is the best reason to continue to buy physical media. Those of us who enjoy that should embrace it as what it is and stop being ashamed of it or trying to rationalize it on other grounds.
Personalmente no compro estas ediciones audiofilas de DGG porque me parecen excesivamente caras y ya poseo las antiguas ediciones originales de los años 60-80 en vinilo. Hay un punto sin embargo en el que creo que la divertida y siempre entretenida argumentacion del señor Hurwitz se equivoca y es el que se refiere a la objetividad de la calidad de sonido objetivamente comparable. Creo que cualquiera -tambien el señor David Hurwitz, por supuesto- que compare en serio una de estas grabaciones clasicas en las ediciones standard de hace mas de 30 años en vinilo (por ejemplo, el ciclo Bruckner de Karajan o la Sinfonia Fantastica de Ozawa, etc.) con sus reediciones posteriores en formato cd tambien standard, siempre en condiciones tecnicas y economicas similares, constatara sin dificultad alguna y con una evidencia apabullante incuestionable la superioridad objetiva del vinilo en todos los parametros musicales relevantes: naturalidad, precision timbrica de todos y cada uno de los instrumentos, espacialidad, dinamica, extension agudo- grave, profundidad, etc. En definitiva, el sonido que transmite un vinilo se parece mas a la realidad de la musica en vivo que el de la misma grabacion editada en soporte CD. Otra cuestion distinta, y esta vez si totalmente subjetiva, es la valoracion que esa diferencia objetiva facilmente constatable por cualquiera le merezca a cada oyente en particular. A alguno, como al señor Hurwitz, le parecera que el sonido Cd es mas que suficiente y que no merece la pena todo el esfuerzo tecnico y economico que requiere la correcta reproduccion de un vinilo para obtener ese resultado superior. Otros, sin embargo, no menos interesados por la musica, conocedores y usuarios de las partituras de los compositores, pueden concluir que la superioridad de sonido del vinilo les permite disfrutar mucho mas precisamente de los detalles sonoros de esas composiciones. Tengamos en cuenta de que la musica, incluso si se trata de 4'33'''' de Cage, siempre es inseparablemente sonido.
I applaud those that support the industry by purchasing premium LPs. It’s a benefit to those that support Classical recorded sound. It’s misguided to assume that LPs will outlast CDs or other digital media. My collection still contains some LPs. And frequently I’ve tried converting an LP to an MP3/or WAV only to find a side has a skip and stops me in my tracks. I have many CDs of similar age that work like new. Back in the day, as the saying goes, a treasured LP would be dubbed on its first playing to a premium cassette tape recording that I’d play thereafter. Maybe that still occurs.
“If you argue with a madman, it is extremely probable that you will get the worst of it; for in many ways his mind moves all the quicker for not being delayed by the things that go with good judgment.”
― G.K. Chesterton
Thank you. This goes a long way towards explaining Ben Shapiro.
It's like most luxury items (wines, watches, clothes), there's a point where you stop paying for quality and start paying for marketing or sophistication. It's fun to study the market and try to find the sweet spot between cost and benefit.
Exactly!
Dave, as someone who has spent a significant amount of time tweaking my sound system, trying to find the best equipment for the right price, who admittedly loves vinyl for a number of reasons, but also has an enormous collection of CDs… you are absolutely right about almost everything here. I love my vinyl, but it IS utterly ridiculous.
I’ve had about 4-5 CDs out of the 5,000+ I own experience some sort of digital corruption even when properly cared for, but that’s anecdotal and a staggeringly low percentage.
Man are you awesome to listen to on a sunday afternoon before an eagles and steelers game. Dave have a great afternoon. No one could have said it any better.
Thank you! As a native of Wilmington, DE, I can only say, "Go Eagles!"
Some thoughts. in the 80ties it was perfectly normal to tape your own LPs on chromium dioxide compact cassettes with dolby to avoid tear and wear to the LPs. This allowed you to listen to the music on the Walkman, on the car and to wake up with the music using an electronic alarm clock. but i wonder why the "original source" LPs are not released on CD as well? Is the process totally specific to vinyl medium by only optimizing the groove density etc. ?
They want you to believe that only analog vinyl as the only true high resolution format is able to reproduce the original analog goodness of the analog remasters. None of this is true, of course, but it adds to the mysticism. Essentially DG here gives their target audience what it wants to believe.
The idiots who want to believe that analogue is better wouldn't buy a CD. The product is targeted at fantasising morons.
Yes, vinyl was the norm but it wasn't very portable. I copied all of them to cassette and that's how I listened to everything until CDs came around. Sounded great to me.
I was relieved when records went away, I thought then forever. Then we had a horrific plague of cassettes but CDs to the rescue. Finally something without scratchy pops or wow and flutter out the butt. Something with some dynamic range and lack of tape hiss. Then streaming, even better, no crappy media or bad mechanical stuff to get in the way of the sound. And then, like the Walking Dead, it all came back. Its like a bad dream. You can't seem to kill these bad ideas. I mean, the horse and buggy went away eventually. The tube console radio is no more. This is the very definition of insanity. Keep doing something over and over and expecting a different result.
$20k gold cartridge$
Air driven turntable$$
Indeed, it’s not rational. This is the same romance some of us are having with mechanical watches, enjoying the cogs and springs of a well-crafted micro-machine when we all know the accuracy of an electronic quartz watch is way better. The romance of interaction with your gadgets in a physical way goes all the way from cars to coffee machines to diamond-tipped cartridges, and long may that be so!
I can't remember what novel I read a long time ago, but one of the characters loved a certain LP recording of Elgar's "Enigma" Variations so much that his copy was scratchy and full of skips. His friend bought him a brand-new LP copy, but the guy said he didn't need it, because he'd grown fond of the scratches and skips. Well, OK then...
The difference is that most watch enthusiasts I know don't insist that old mechanical watches are more accurate than modern watches. They understand they're into watches for the aesthetics. In audio far too many people believe they're paying for better sound quality and actually getting far worse or at least something that couldn't be had for much cheaper. That's the Placebo Effect at work.
I use a mechanical watch because I dislike having to replace batteries. Precision is not a concern, I'll adjust whenever I need to. I am more bothered by a watch that stopped than by one that's a few mn off.
Hello, I am an “audiophile” and you are right: what “sounds” better is subjective. However there are some indicators that are not so personal: Background noise is one of them. If you are in a concert hall maybe you will hear people coughing, but not a “white noise” behind (as vinyl) or pops and ticks. Better sound (at least with acoustic music) is the one that represents better the live sound. It makes sense to invest some money in gear to get that. About media, a CD or Tidal will give you less noise than a vinyl. Having said that, the most important point here is to enjoy music, to feel emotions when you listen to it. It is more likely to feel that without noises, right? Congrats for your channel Dave. I followed some of your recommendations and generally we agree!
I have so many classical compact disks and very little space to store them so I removed the cases and put them in archival storage binders. Did I do a bad thing? Someone told me I might have.
I can accept the eccentricity of the audiophile. The guys that drive me crazy are the vinyl fetishists who own cheap stereos but still swear up and down that they can hear the sonic superiority of LPs.
Not to mention the damage they cause to that media.
I like my Lps when I listen to jazz or 50's and 60's vocalists. I never wanted to duplicate this stuff because they are recorded at a high enough volume that you don't really hear the noise if you take care of your records. But when it comes to classical, so much is in a quiet to medium range that you do hear every bit of surface noise, so I only listen to the LPs that have never been released on CD and that isn't much.
Yes I agree with everything you have said and couldn’t agree more. I once was an audiophile with an expensive record player but the tax man knocked on the door and the Mrs 40th birthday came at the same time so out went my precious deck and vinyl collection. Now it’s streaming for me and I still get the same enjoyment.
always fun & informative & just the right amount of provocation, thank you Dave Hurwitz
I have had my Linn turntable since around 1985. I have upgraded it several times since. I also have a decent CD player. I like both media. I am not a fan of streaming, but that's because our broadband is erratic.
In the UK, some stores (I am looking at you HMV) are charging about £30 for a new release for all genres of music. Therefore the DG Original Source becomes relatively good value. I have only two of these releases, Tchaikovsky 4 Abbado, and Stravinsky Rite of Spring. Both of these are beautiful with genuinely superlative sound and I consider very good value. If you look at the folk who happily buy multiple recordings of Steely Dan, Dire Straits, or Dark Side of the Moon at £200 per LP, then that becomes crazy.
Where we are fortunate is that there are many secondhand LPs in charity shops which have been handled carefully and cost £1 - 2 each. When cleaned properly, these are often faultless and can sound better than most new releases.
A couple of other points mentioned by Dave:
- With a good record cleaner and quality turntable, there is hardly any background noise. I have many early stereo LPs from the 1959-69 era which have no clicks and pops.
- Most concert halls in the South of England have abysmal acoustics and you might as well listen at home. At a Mahler 2 in the Royal Festival Hall recently, the "off stage" instruments sounded clearer than on stage.
Having defended LPs, if I were starting out now, I would probably stream given the extortionate prices of new LPs and the necessity to spend £1000 plus on a decent enough turntable.
I'm very curious about your sound systems but you are SO smart to leave them out of your videos. It also adds a touch of mystery.
You hit the nail on the head Dave.... Its FUN....the more money you spend to have FUN the more serious the FUN becomes..
As Winston Churchill said to one of his daughters after an impulsive marriage, “You did what you like. Now you must like what you’ve done.”
Your mention of "The Absolute Sound" reminded me of an article in Fanfare in the 1980's in which one writer described going to hear Yo-Yo Ma in concert. A friend of his went to the same concert and sat in a different place in the hall, and the two of them had totally different impressions of the quality of the sound based just on where they were in the hall at a live event. He mentioned this to lampoon the whole conceit of The Absolute Sound and its writers that there was some ultimate "truth" about how live music sounded and records should try to reproduce that as closely as possible.
A frenzy for Historically-Informed Media.
(Ironically, I don’t think any early music ensembles release on vinyl.)
Hey! What about us shellac collectors? Who's making stuff for our niche?
Not fair!
Stop complaining. Pity the wax cylinder crowd.
@@DavesClassicalGuide Wax! Are you crazy? Those guys are nuts!
I had what was, and still is regarded as a very good turntable ( Linn LP12). But now completely digital (Flac files). Sadly when I have attended the odd audio show in the UK the demographic attending is mainly guys, with the average age > 50. I don't get it anymore when a majority of vinyl is digital. It seems to be the tactile experience that's always put forward as one of the main reasons for buying it. We listen with ears not eyes and hands. No-one listening in a studio would judge the sound quality by asking the producer to put it on a turntable. Who would want to listen to a live performance of a delicate piano concerto with someone behind munching on a bowl of rice crispies 😂
No one ever mentions scratches which are unable to be repaired. But as you say let the tracking force be with them. Emporers new clothes.
Thanks for the content.
I love how Dave’s every mention of vinyl spawns a whole series of reaction videos by vexed vinyl vloggers. Keep up the great work, Dave! Your decades of experience and ever-present humor are priceless - both in 1970s and 2024 dollars! 😄
Thank you! It IS fun!
@@DavesClassicalGuide We can tell! Love it!
And even IG stories (short videos) promising their audience they will make such a reaction video as soon as they have the proper time.
Why is the audiophile demographic 97% male? I don't know the answer, but it seems odd.
Most collector hobbies are overwhelmingly male. Except clown paintings and Hummel figures, both of which I find weird.
@@cartologist Yet women do more unnecessary hording than men. They don't throw away anything.
When all is said and done, a fetish is a fetish, regardless of how much it costs😅
Many good thoughts here. This coming from an old vinyl owner who has kept a modest collection of black discs to avoid paying for digital duplicates - the cheapskate effect. The good part of being old is not being able to hear some of the black-disc defects. Not that any of that stopped me from designing and building my own custom phono pre-amp. I guess it's all about having fun, and being a music lover who likes good sound and a guy who likes electronics I am indeed enjoying listening to both old vinyl and new digital in my home. BTW, the "guru" was Harry Pearson. Thanks Dave, you made me giggle at myself!
It’s always fun to listen to hardcore audiophiles who aren’t into classical music but have to own a first pressing of Ansermet conducting ballet music (a ‘grail’ recording) in about five different pressings. Often they know the catalogue number off by heart but can’t actually tell you the name of the orchestra.
I am a vinyl junky but a huge percentage of that audience knows nothing about classical music. Sometimes you can get great classical vinyl at record stores for practically nothing, they just don’t know much about the repertoire or the labels
One thing I find amusing is that by the time most people have sufficient disposable income to buy a so-called 'audiophile' system (i.e., when they've reached their forties and fifties) they can no longer hear the higher frequencies they could in their 'teens or early twenties, so anything above around 12kHz is lost on them.
@@maxhirsch7035 I stand corrected.
“Audiophiles don’t use their equipment to listen to your music. They use your music to listen to their equipment.”
True because they always talk about organ music and marvel at an organ’s dynamic range. Not even classical music lovers like organ music.
@@kenwuesq Speak for thyself.
@@kenwuesq I'm a classical music lover and I enjoy organ music.
I agree that many audiophiles I know are insufferable.
Part of being insufferable is classism framed with snobbery and lust for more and more equipment.
I dig some of the equipment... no doubt. If If I can, I will gravitate towards listening on good equipment.
BUT...the equipment should serve the music and gift the music lovers.
It is comparable to how certain musicians are obsessed with their instruments to the exclusion of saying something meaningful (repeatedly) with it.
@ Thanks for your comment. I agree. I own a lot of equipment. I like having cool “stuff.” I don’t pretend it’s a “hobby” or the equipment does anything special to what’s most important-the music. I find it hypocritical for audiophiles to spend thousands of dollars to get rid of “noise” or “distortion” and complain about compressed music or equalization…but then embrace vinyl, which has all of the above. Then, they talk about how terrible early digital sounded, which Dave has acknowledged. (Some of the Levine Mahler symphonies are ear piercing.) Well, nearly all of my CDs were mastered after 1997. Is that “late” digital enough for them? In the end, as Dave also said, I’m happy money is being spent on classical music.
Black magic markers? C’mon, Dave, that’s ridiculous. It’s GREEN magic marker. Everyone knows that. Black magic marker makes no audible improvement in the sound. 😂
Oh yes! That's right!
Both colors have been used. Green at first, then black; and now it's purple. It is audible, as certain colors absorb stray scattered cd light. But most people don't know what to listen for. When it's pointed out what aspects of the sound to listen for, many people can hear the suble but clearly audible difference. Some people are astute listeners, and some people are not. Some people's minds get in the way of their perception; if they don't understand or believe how something could make a difference. The current thing that non audiophiles laugh about is getting your speaker cables off the floor by elevating them or buying a calcalated length that they don't touch the floor. The people who get a guffaw, don't understand static fields on the floor or resonances created by cables laying on the floor.
Equipment warm up makes more difference than greening cds. By the middle of the 2nd recording I play,, I can hear more space between the instruments, more natural, less electronicy sound sound.and less brightness. Those qualities are important to me, as I just want to hear sounds that instruments really make, not electronic sounds added on, that stereo's make. Sound quality is more important to audiophiles because they realize that it is more pleasant and realistic a listen than. slapping on bright Columbia recordings which will sound bright & screechy often, if played before your stereo is warmed up. Play an average Columbia recording at stereo turn on to the end, and then repeat it, and you will hear it has sweeter and more pleasant sound on the 2nd play. Your stereo is warming up. The sound keeps getting better till after the 4th recording. Usually around the 3 hour mark. If you don't give a care about sound quality, there is nothing wrong with that either. I'm sure we have all enjoyed music even on a transistor radio
I must say that I only listen to CDs on a sony Discman from the 1990s that I got for free at an estate sale and, paired with a quality set of headphones, I am quite happy with it!
Marvellous :)
That's what I use.
@@fuchouchiang5797 good for you. I have one here actually although haven’t used in a while I’m not throwing it out!
There he goes again; Dave is making sense! This is one of the most rational and amusing commentary on vinyl (and, by extension, high-end audio). I'm more concerned about these companies dragging out old original master tapes and wearing them out to feed these audiofetishists instead of preserving them as irreplaceable artifacts.
If you’re going to preserve the original medium by not playing it, then CDs are the way to go! You can rip them quickly on any computer with a CD drive, and without any loss of quality.
There is no reason not to play a CD. It doesn't wear out under the laser beam.
I've offended wondered if the "serious " audiophile people ever go to a live orchestral performance s , and if/when they do are they disappointed in the live sonics? 🤔
I've no issue with what you are saying. The only point I would make is there is a plethora of companies making modern vinyl using the original source for a cheaper price than these DG re-issues. Also, you can buy second hand vinyl in excellent condition and much cheaper in comparison, if you know where to look. As for the music/sound argument, for me it's not possible to appreciate the music fully unless the sound is good. Of course, everyone's ears and expectations will differ in this respect.
Exactly: what does "the sound is good" mean? I agree with the sentiment--I need good sound too.
This is like the business cards in "American Psycho".
The fact that there's (at least in my experience) a significant overlap between audiophiles and wine "conoisseurs" is significant. Both activities with no objective criterion being exploited for social clout.
I'm old enough to remember the kooks in 60s & 70s who claimed that late vintage 78s sounded soooooo much better than LPs...& Invested squillions in specialist turntables & cartridges that played the 4.5 minute per side wonders (adjusting the pitch between sides, of course).
I don't remember that, but I do remember collectors saying that original 78s almost invariably sounded better than the lp transfers of those recordings, which was true except for transfers by people like A.C. Griffith at EMI.
So much I agree with in both parts of Dave's talks here. Just as everyone's ears are different, hi-fi audiophiles & musical appreciation are usually polar opposites within that group. Yes, there are differences between pieces of equipment (yawn!), but I expect nearly everyone out there has settled upon & put together some components to enjoy listening on. My bits & pieces I've had for decades for vinyl except a couple more recent CD players. Apart from loving classical music & other genres at a young age beginning over 50 years ago, I'm also one of those people that handling & listening to vinyl just comes naturally & I really enjoy hearing it that way. I also used to DJ dance music too, so I never really got out of the vinyl habit even as my CD collection grew. Both mediums have their virtues, but I generally prefer analogue sound even with electronic music as it just sounds warmer to my ears. I've never been into buying deluxe editions of anything as even with the extra packaging or other so-called claimed "bonus" luxury materials sonic or otherwise, it rarely makes any difference to the listening experience for me. I've already got many regular vinyl DG issues which are exceptionally fine anyway, such as Karajan's Mahler 5 & 6 & some others, so why would I want the latest editions DG are releasing? I just can't be bothered & I'll save my money for other more worthwhile pursuits!
I loved these two "Emperor has no clothes" videos in a special way more than I love your normal reviews. Thank you! I know a few of the audiophile crazy cultists, and it's true of them that they are obsessed with collecting media and sound equipment and with sound (sort of) -- but rarely with _music_ per se. Fine, good for them. I said "sort of" when I mentioned sound, because these are the physics deniers who claim that a $500 wooden volume control knob makes a difference (and even a significant difference) in the sound -- especially if you have invested in all the other faux anti-physics audiophile scams. Then there are the $500 AC line cords, etc. -- all the scam products that filled The Absolute Sound (is that magazine still around, and still pushing snake oil products?) You don't need a Ph.D. in electrical engineering (which I have) or physics to know that their emperor has no clothes.
Yes. The fancy, beefy power cable especially puzzles me. Do these people believe that the current is somehow created in the socket itself? Just inside a typical home, the current travels a long distance to the socket through 1.5 mm wire, bought at the lowest possible prize by the building contractor.
Agree with you 100% .. I collect vinyl but refuse to get into bidding wars with people trying to buy vinyl on EBay etc. many people misguidedly think that vinyl is an investment and will be worth more as time goes on. In addition you need to invest good money in a turntable, cartridge and phono preamp to hear any noticeable difference in sound between streaming, vinyl and cd
"Lighten up and keep on listening!" 👍
It’s like people who spend fortunes on sports cars when there’s speed limit everywhere…
I was going to mention that...
@@DavesClassicalGuide An even better analogy is the watch folks. The cheapest quartz watches have an accuracy of 15 seconds per month, but true watch connoisseurs will wear only mechanical watches, the best of which are accurate to about 5 seconds per day.
yeah but the car has the potential to perform like a sport car. An LP no matter how expensive it is, still plays like an LP.
Even if we were to accept the inflation argument, full-priced LPs were selling for @ $7.99 when I was a teen in the late 80s/early 90s and that’s only $15 today.
But you make a great point. It doesn’t make any sense to look at the price of a record in some prior year and just apply the inflation rate to it to determine a reasonable price in today’s market, because you assume that the item has held it’s value over that whole period, when in fact recorded music has been drastically devalued.
As to sound, the quality of the sound is limited by the quality of the source. Better mastering and playback technology can reproduce more of what’s in the source but there’s a limit to how much an old recording can be improved.
CDs actually have better dynamic range than LPs.
please do part 3
Audiophiles hot mad and stomping their feet because you didn't give them the flavor pudding they wanted. lol.
Interesting, Dave, that you seem to have earned more 'thumbs up' for this video, than almost any other one I've paid attention to. I was one of those who put his 'thumb up'. I would never want to go to vinyl at this point. Far too much maintenance involved.
But we did have fun, didn't we?
I don't pay much attention to that childish debate Vinyl vs. CD because they are all wrong: the best sounding format is (talking here just about the analogue period) the MASTER TAPE!!!...Cds & vinyls are mere transfers, so if you were lucky to have a good reel to reel equipment & pay some extra money for a 1st copy, you were on business. Besides how many great recordings were horribly transferred to vinyl (also CD) when were released for first time & in later remasterings (no matter the format, again) have been a complete new revelation in terms of sound quality just because they were correctly done!!?. Most important, let's all go to the concert halls, auditoriums etc, that's where the best possible sound is, & none high-end mega expensive equipment on earth can match!
Well, no. You could not buy the master tape but perhaps a copy of it - a transfer.
Excellent as usual. Did make me chuckle. If it works out financially for them maybe in the future they could remaster Herbie's Ring Cycle. And issue it on 78's!
@nyquist5190 yes, you're right...I should I just said tape; everybody agree that out of the 3 standard formats, tape was the best sounding source. The problem is nobody have the money & the time to buy all & compare all. In any case, and digging a bit deeper, it is the recording engineer what it matters to me (eventually you will get a great recording no matter the format, if the transfer is professionally done).
After suffering through the LOUSY vinyl pressings of classical recordings through my early years, returning LPs to the record store and arguing with the sales people to get my money back after hearing the clicks and pops and groove distortion, I am NEVER going back to the crappy LP even if DGG wants to give them away. The collectors who want to pay that kind of price for an outdated, flawed technology are in a word, NUTS.
@@tempo0719
Buddy has a vinyl fetish
Listening is unbearable 💔
New, expensive LP pressings are usually heavier and better than the pressings of the LP era. That said, I'm not drawn to them either.
On the rare occasions I step into one of those audio stores (the type with the dedicated listening room), I more often than not hear a salesman at some point in his pitch to a customer announce he is an Audiophile (said in such a way that the capital A is implicit). I'm able to stifle a chuckle but still eye roll pretty hard. Thanks for this video!!
I've been enjoying my CDs for so long I have no desire to shell out big money for supposedly "better sounding" vinyl records that need to be meticulously cleaned and treated with kid gloves, not to mention changing sides every 20+ minutes or so. I do have many vinyl records but I don't play them nearly as often as my CDs.
Hi Dave, I agree with your arguments. If someone can afford this luxury and enjoys this type of music playback, they should be allowed to do so, even if I am a little envious, as I couldn't afford equipment costing many thousands of dollars. :) But vinyl is not a real alternative, especially in the field of classical music, as both the sound and availability of many recordings cannot keep up with CD or lossless download music. A good example for me is the Solti Chicago Decca box with 108 CDs, which was then offered a few years later on 6 LPs for about 3/4 of the original CD price.
Very well said. I think talking about sound quality/investment/system difference is not a very warm thing in general. It just feels cold and lonely. Like 9/10 of the time I'd spend my time with my beloved ones to do something not related to music rather than listening to music through my hi-end system alone, no matter how good it is.
All the older ladies in my family had that room. It was called a "living" room but it was anything but. I figure I'll be worn out before my vinyl is, so just enjoy it.
Well obviously most people commenting here haven’t seen how sentimental Dave was when he talked about his EMI signature series SACDs (Klemperer’s late Mozart symphonies), describing how deluxe and sturdy the binding was. That video was just released yesterday.
In general, SACDs are never as cheap as CDs. The retail price of EMI signature series SACD (Klemperer’s late Mozart symphonies) is around $25, while the equivalent CD is basically half the price. In this video Dave asked why you spend $40 for a LP when you can get the same thing by spending $2 to $10 on CDs if you do need physical products. So same question for Dave: why you spend $25 on SACDs when you can get the same thing by purchasing the much cheaper CDs?
Because I have a professional obligation to describe these things to you.
@@DavesClassicalGuide To me, it seems the main obligation of a professional music critic is to describe music performance of recordings rather than the packaging of the albums. Maybe you talked about the music performance of the same recording (Klemperer’s late Mozart) too many times so you chose to talk more about the “non-musical factors” this time? I don’t know. But if the music performance is a priority, a financially “rational”music critic doesn’t bother buying more expensive deluxe edition SACDs just for reviewing the music performance. Much cheaper CDs of the same recording are sufficient to get the job done.
With respect, I think you are misreading the mood here. I don't think anybody has a problem with producing a premium product, in a sturdy box with nice photographs and an informative booklet. I believe that's what Dave liked about those Klemperer discs and the DG LP boxes (as do I, I personally make a point to avoid the crammed shoebox-style packaging which is so popular right now). But it's a quite different thing to buy these LPs because you have convinced yourself that they sound much better than anything else. (And then perhaps not play them, as you don't want to wear them out.)
@@doctorzingo If sound quality (SQ) is a subjective thing and the perception of SQ differs from person to person, what’s the issue if one is willing to pay for the relatively high premium of the LPs if he believes, or has “convinced”himself that they sound much better? BTW, I stream lossless digital files, but also have a large collection of CDs and vinyl. I do think vinyl sounds better than CD in some cases.
Did you watch the whole video? From 6:14 to 7:14, it seems Dave thinks the price of DG OSS vinyl is unreasonably high compared to much cheaper CDs of same recordings. He thinks they are the “same thing”. However, he just uploaded a video yesterday praising his EMI Signature Collection Series SACDs for their superior quality WITHOUT saying anything about their price. Honestly these SACDs are far from cheap compared to CDs of same recordings. Yes, they’re still cheaper than OSS vinyl, but to me there is no substantial difference between the OSS Vinyl and EMI SACD simply because they’re both premium/deluxe products compared to basic CDs. By contrast, I got the impression that Dave thinks his $20-$30 EMI SACDs are just fine but the price of DG OSS vinyl ($40/LP) is far from reasonable.
@@jerrykoo8937 SQ is subjective in the sense that it's happening in our minds; it's not really subjective in the sense that people prefer different things when they aren't victims of The Placebo Effect. There are slight variations due to the variations in human hearing, but by-and-large people's blind preferences are pretty well-aligned. My only issue is that I don't think people being naively affected by The Placebo Effect and convincing themselves of patently false things is good. If people are aware that, eg, vinyl is an inferior medium but like for the aesthetics, the whole ritual of playing, etc. then that's fine; but people trying to claim it has any objective claim to better SQ is just fooling themselves. At best it might can sound as good as anything, but not better.
I can listen to classical music on anything! Hi fi or not! I'm surrounded by live music all the time, some of it produced by myself!
DG is a basically a budget label of German classical music. If they can now get collectors interested in their otherwise uncollectible catalogue, yes, they are winning, to your point.
Huh? I assume you are being sarcastic.
DG actually is now a major label, owned by Universal Music Group
Indeeeed! Made my freaken day 🫡
Your crazy aunt story is so hilarious. It made my day, Dave. Thank you for triggering me to guffaw and chortle with such delight.
My LP thoughts. I have about 500 LPs. I still pull them off the shelf occasionally, especially when I want to listen to something that has never been issued as a CD. Take the Connoisseur Society label. Lots of good recordings there: di Bonaventura's Scarlatti and Barbosa's Beethoven, to name two. But no one has gotten around to releasing the catalog on CD. Maybe the founder is dead or the tapes are lost. Someone in New York has to know.
As for DG, last year I found a like-new copy of a 2-LP set of the Koeckert Quartet's recording of Haydn's Op. 20 -- that I didn't know existed until I last year. That may just be my last LP purchase! It amazes me how much stuff we haven't seen as CDs. On other fronts with DG, I've been friendly with a guy at the Eloquence office, and he said he liked my idea of doing a Roberto Szidon box. Szidon recorded a lot of unusual repertoire, so that will be a fascinating box.
Lastly, will I buy any of these "Original Source" LPs? No. Well, if DG were to release the Karajan/Mutter Beethoven Violin Concerto, I might get it just so that I can have one of these "deluxe" products as a curio. But none of the current titles interest me.
Decca did this too with the newest LP release of the Solti Ring. Deluxe packaging too.
They also released them on SACD.
@ Yes. And you can hear the latest remastering on streaming and compare it with the previous one, and it really does sound better.
They really did do some great work with it based on the newer techniques that they didn’t have 20-25 years ago when they released the last remastering.
For the people who care deeply about the improvement in the sound and want it in a physical format, I hope they enjoy it.
I’m happy with the budget box release of the whole cycle that cost me less than one of the new individual releases.
Same goes with the DG original sources. Enjoy listening to them, or enjoy having them sit on your shelf.
@ I know it’s not relevant to the video’s topic, but do know if the current Solti Ring remaster is available in an inexpensive box set? I have the “old” (2012), though admit I've not listened all the way through that box more than once.
@@cartologist It’s not available in an inexpensive physical form yet but it’s on streaming.
After someone told you to watch the videos about the "Original Source Series," I went and watched the ones related to Karajan's Bruckner cycle. I did find the videos instructive about the challenges they faced, and how well they overcame them. I felt the tug but am not going to buy the product. It's just not my niche. The same team mastered SACD transfers of the same recordings only eight years ago, and I am happy to have those in my collection already. To each his or her own niche.
I'm an electronic engineer. I build audio equipment as a hobby. I think as long as you do your math correctly, it will sound good. I prefer cd to vinyl record. But tubes brands or anything along these discussions, I refuse to even participate. I don't have a lot of patience for audiophile mumbo jumbo. And despite having a decent amount of disposable income, I refuse to pay for prestige. Getting screwed is not something I would brag about. I still have my old Atlantic watch from the 70s I don't have the need to buy another one just because. If one want a good analogue media, factory recorded tapes are the way to go. It's more expensive, but it's better than any vinyl are going to be.
I consider myself an audiophile looney, but not when it comes to vinyl, which is and always will be an objectively inferior medium to digital in most all respects except for its oversized album covers/books, but when it comes to speakers. I fully admit you can get a great sounding system for less than $1k and that everything above that, while often an improvement, is diminishing returns. At the same time I'm willing to spend more to get as close to perfection as is possible, and that costs money because large, well-engineered speakers with effortless, distortion-free dynamics and linear on and off axis frequency responses simply aren't cheap, nor are they common. Ditto for beefy amps and robust AVRs... but I recognize that this is, indeed, lunacy. "Perfection is the enemy of the good" as the true saying goes.
It's so silly to convert vinyl to digital. If you want vinyl "warmth" just use EQ to add all the warmth and I'm sure you can find filters to add vinyl-like distortion too. To me, the only argument to buy vinyl is to admire the art work and booklets.
Mixed feelings. I do buy into the claim that there is an intangible sound that vinyl has that is appealing. CDs are a better deal as far as cost. I bought the Karajan Mahler 5 original sound it is very nice sounding. It’s hard to say, I was listening to a Harnoncourt CD from the 90s last week that I thought sounded mind blowingly good. Some vinyl records got remastered for digital poorly.
"You worked hard for your money." I did not expect you to paraphrase disco queen Donna Summer here, but both you and Ms. Summer make valid (even rational) points -- basically, that people are well within their rights to spend their hard-earned money however they see fit. If you were a South African billionaire you might choose to fork over $44 billion for a trashy social media platform -- or $250 million to buy the presidency of the United States (a bargain!). Or, whether you possess that kind of wealth or not, you may wish to purchase newly remastered AAA recordings of "classical" music pressed on high-quality virgin vinyl. It is true, though, that German, Dutch and Japanese vinyl LPs have long used vinyl formulations superior to the stuff widely sold in the States. Compare a DG or Philips pressing from the '70s to an Angel or RCA Red Seal record of the same vintage and you'll immediately hear the difference...
Hyperion has recently joined the "Vinylites". A CD of Mendelssohn's two Violin Concertos and the Hebrides overture take up one CD. This disc costs £12.50. The Vinyl recording of this costs £20.00 - without the overture! I for one cannot see the gain (if anything). I have over 4900 CDs and would never go back to Vinyl though I certainly treasure my 1000 or so LPs many of which I bought in my youth, alas long gone.
This rant happened at a time that made it very funny for me, funny as in laughing at myself. I’m a vinylphile audiophile and I just lately found a DAC, made with the old 16 bit TDA1541 chip, that I really enjoy, I find it very musical and very happy I don’t necessarily need to spend crazy money on vinyl anymore. Well, just last night I was listening to something on my DAC that I happen to have on vinyl and decided to give the vinyl a listen, it was so much better on vinyl, back to square one. Yes, we are crazy, but like someone on the big bang said, “what’s life without whimsy”.
What indeed?
In re, "Lord Peter Whimsey"?
(Or, should that have been "Whimsy"?)
I was astonished yesterday when I went into the comments after watching the first video on the topic. It was as if some of the commenters hadn't watched your video at all. I was going to respond to one of them to that effect, but realized that it was a fool's errand. You appear to have deleted the most egregiously stupid ones. But you can't delete the crazy!
Rob, I didn’t bother either
I suspect some of the vitriol may derive from them on some level realizing the rationality of Dave's position and trying to convince themselves as much as others.
If LPs make you happy, go ahead and enjoy them. I can actually understand the charm in the whole ritual of taking it out of the sleeve, holding it by the edges, putting it on the platter, carefully placing the stylus etc. It's like traditional Japanese tea making - maybe the tea doesn't actually taste that different but the preparations put you in a certain frame of mind. They can absolutely say that they prefer the sound of LP, who am I to tell them differently? But to claim that LPs objectively sound better, taken to mean that they better represent the original recording, is preposterous - an LP typically has a dynamic range of about 60 dB and measures much worse on things like distortion and stereo separation. Of course, these artifacts may sound subjectively pleasing to many people, and I'm perfectly OK with that.
It always reminds me of the New Yorker cartoon of the guy in front of his stereo telling his friend, "What really drew me to vinyl was the expense & the inconvenience."
Crazy is fine. Persnickety not so much 😊
Until relatively recently, classical music on CD has been selling at ludicrously low prices. Some of the mega-boxes, such as, say, Solti's complete CSO Decca recordings, sold for peanuts! I purchased many of the mega-boxes a few years ago from Amazon and most of them are now out of print and commanding high prices on the used market - more than I paid for them new! Used classical vinyl can be had for very little money, if you know where to look!
Great topic. Can you give an opinion of the actual titles they are releasing and your thoughts on that? I really would like your opinion on the performances they have selected.
Good point!
The defensiveness is rational enough… Unfortunately, really good stereos sound pretty awful on poor recordings and/or pressings…and they are legion. There are so many disappointments. There are some audiophile LPs that are so well done that they really do knock your socks off, and you can appreciate the money spent to get that result. Sadly, they are often very tedious music. So, if DG really has released great music and performances at $40/pop, it’s a big deal, if you’ve already committed so much to the hobby.
Bravo!
I'm an audiophile, listen mostly to vinyl and I understood perfectly and appreciated what you said. It's great that someone with a love and understanding of music as deep as yours does care about sound quality even of it is not your passion.
I, as a vinyl looney, am suspicious of re-digitalising old recordings. As soon as I see that term on the cover of a reissue , I'm loath to buy.
Even if we were to grant that vinyl sounds better, which I don’t, how much better does it sound? What’s the marginal cost of that 1.0 or 0.5% improvement in sound?
Can these people really hear the difference or are have they simply convinced themselves that the sound is better emperor’s new clothes fashion?
You can't separate vinyl from the system you play it on. So in my view, it's often a self-fulfilling prophecy.
My secret agents tell me that Putin has an audio system retailing for $500,000.
I think you're being too kind, Dave. These collectors are suckers. They are not into music; they are into collecting and acquisition. That's it. And yes, they are very insecure. I don't blame DG for exploiting them. BTW, same exact phenomena is happening with boutique blu-ray/4K collecting. A boutique label like VINEGAR SYNDROME would offer a "special collectors edition" of some very obscure film from the 70s, at a huge price, and collectors go into a feeding frenzy. When they sells out, VS offers the "standard" edition of the same thing. The difference? The "special collectors edition" has a slipcover. 😆 These collectors are, likewise, not interested in the film itself. In fact, I would bet most of the purchased special editions are never watched. They are kept behind plastic in its original packaging.
Well, I'm a bit less cynical, but you're certainly right about the more extreme manifestations of this particular mania.
Your absolutely tight I detest music in all its forms and only collect these expensive editions because of all the clout the bring me. I’m so famous in my neighborhood because of my high price record collection and my parents… oh my parents love it… yes but… I really hate music, most of all classical.
I think that’s a bit too far, but you’re right that people are insecure about it. Yes, it’s a collector’s product. I have a collection, and I enjoy collecting! In that way it’s no different than any other collection hobby, whether that be stamps or coins or Hallmark keepsakes or Beanie Babies. I also enjoy that the things I’m collecting have value to me as music I can listen to, but in the age of streaming when it’s possible to listen to anything for nearly free, collecting is the best reason to continue to buy physical media. Those of us who enjoy that should embrace it as what it is and stop being ashamed of it or trying to rationalize it on other grounds.
Frankly I think it's about bragging rights.
Personalmente no compro estas ediciones audiofilas de DGG porque me parecen excesivamente caras y ya poseo las antiguas ediciones originales de los años 60-80 en vinilo. Hay un punto sin embargo en el que creo que la divertida y siempre entretenida argumentacion del señor Hurwitz se equivoca y es el que se refiere a la objetividad de la calidad de sonido objetivamente comparable. Creo que cualquiera -tambien el señor David Hurwitz, por supuesto- que compare en serio una de estas grabaciones clasicas en las ediciones standard de hace mas de 30 años en vinilo (por ejemplo, el ciclo Bruckner de Karajan o la Sinfonia Fantastica de Ozawa, etc.) con sus reediciones posteriores en formato cd tambien standard, siempre en condiciones tecnicas y economicas similares, constatara sin dificultad alguna y con una evidencia apabullante incuestionable la superioridad objetiva del vinilo en todos los parametros musicales relevantes: naturalidad, precision timbrica de todos y cada uno de los instrumentos, espacialidad, dinamica, extension agudo- grave, profundidad, etc. En definitiva, el sonido que transmite un vinilo se parece mas a la realidad de la musica en vivo que el de la misma grabacion editada en soporte CD. Otra cuestion distinta, y esta vez si totalmente subjetiva, es la valoracion que esa diferencia objetiva facilmente constatable por cualquiera le merezca a cada oyente en particular. A alguno, como al señor Hurwitz, le parecera que el sonido Cd es mas que suficiente y que no merece la pena todo el esfuerzo tecnico y economico que requiere la correcta reproduccion de un vinilo para obtener ese resultado superior. Otros, sin embargo, no menos interesados por la musica, conocedores y usuarios de las partituras de los compositores, pueden concluir que la superioridad de sonido del vinilo les permite disfrutar mucho mas precisamente de los detalles sonoros de esas composiciones. Tengamos en cuenta de que la musica, incluso si se trata de 4'33'''' de Cage, siempre es inseparablemente sonido.
I applaud those that support the industry by purchasing premium LPs. It’s a benefit to those that support Classical recorded sound.
It’s misguided to assume that LPs will outlast CDs or other digital media. My collection still contains some LPs. And frequently I’ve tried converting an LP to an MP3/or WAV only to find a side has a skip and stops me in my tracks. I have many CDs of similar age that work like new.
Back in the day, as the saying goes, a treasured LP would be dubbed on its first playing to a premium cassette tape recording that I’d play thereafter. Maybe that still occurs.