omniphile12

Thank you all again, I'll look at the Music Direct site more thoroughly. It looks good. At some point I will attempt to digitize my LP's especially the ones that do not have a hirez or decent CD counterpart. I'll probably need to upgrade the turntable, get a tube preamp, and get a external soundcard. I experimented with a Griffin iMic and Audacity, and the results were not bad. This will be down the road, I have a decided lack of space to work with. It would be nice to have a new MAC computer with up to date technology as well. The ASUS will do. For my needs Audacity is fine. If it's free, it's for me. I'm sure that the professionals use the more expensive stuff because it is more stable?? I don't know. I mentioned Blu-ray in my intial post, and I've been getting a lot of responses about television picture quality. This is all well and good , but my question was about sound quality issues. I watch too much TV, but I'm not particular about video right now. I'd rather go to the movie theatre to catch a film. It's a habit... I guess I'm an analog kid in a digital world !

Thanks all for the comments. I must be an old fogey , because I like the ritual of vinyl, and I think it IS Cool. I like the large artwork, the liner notes the labels.So I will hold on to it as long as I can. The problem I have is it's becoming expensive to maintain. Cartridges are expensive, cleaning stuff is expensive and hard to find. I don't have expensive equipment; I had a nice Denon turntable, but that gave up the ghost a long time ago. I'm using an old Kenwood direct drive, 70's vintage. I have a solid state Radio Shack pre-amp connected directly to tiny BOSE speakers due to lack of space. If I had space, I would use my Technics reciever, with Infinity bookshelf speakers, old equipment. But it sounds good . But it's not audiophile certainly. I'm not an audiophile.I can't afford it ! But I am dismayed by the sound of mp'3s , aac's and CD's. For instance, I bought the last Crowded House on CD ( USA, Concord Music), and the mastering was compressed, too loud. I have a friend who makes me 24/96 vinyl rips. He ripped the vinyl I bought; It was so much better. The bass was firmer, the sound not too compressed, more open.( it was a straight rip, no tinkering, no compression added, pops and clicks intact) I can't believe that a friend using Audacity freeware can produce a better sounding version than the official CD. I'm glad there are forums like this one. I think the more information we have, the more discerning we can be. If the future is music through the computer, then the sound has to better than we have now certainly??

Thank you very much for your comments.

Thank you esldude & jsmith, for your response. My impression of the "Cd's are so obselete' thread was that there is still a lot of confusion over what format is best. There was a lot of discussion about bit rates and such. There were people who only will buy hi-rez downloads, but not much discussion on what should be standard. A lot of technical jargon being bandied about, but no explanation why vinyl continues to survive, more than sixty years since LP's became standard. I suppose that once Apple jumps on the bandwagon, then 24/96 or whatever resolution they decide, then will become commonplace. But is it really better than what we have? I'm wary of switching over to a new format, only to find out five years from now that there is something better or the adopted format is inferior. Neil Young released his back catalog on Blu-Ray which is 32 bit. 24/96 could be the standard, but I see 24/192, 24/88 etc on HD Tracks. I'll hold on to my vinyl for now. Say what you will about dynamic range , bit depth, all that, but vinyl hits the sweet spot to my ears. As for CD's, I'll probably spring for hi-rez if it's a record I really love, or an artist I want to support

Vinyl? CD? DVD Audio ? Blu-Ray? 24 bit or 32 bit? 24/96 ? 24/192? Compressed or Un-compressed? WAV or FLAC ? AAH! So many choices. No agreement on what is best. I honestly do not know which way to go. I love the currency of music. I have been collecting music for most of my existence. I am not rich, and I don't have access to the latest expensive toys. I don't have a lot of space to set up speakers , amps, pre-amps etc. I have an old iMac g3 , which is my main computer. I use a Seagate firewire external hard drive to store music files. I have obtained an ASUS net book which has a faster processor than the iMac. I run Ubuntu on the ASUS , with a Seagate Flex external hard drive. I'd like the make the ASUS my main computer until I can get a new main computer. I have an old direct drive Kenwood turntable with an Audio Technica cartridge. I have a nice selection of vinyl. You can make any arguments you want, but the vinyl sounds generally great, and I like the aesthetic of vinyl; the artwork, the liners, the label on the record. But it's a pain to store, clean, maintain etc. and buying new releases is so expensive. I think the general consensus is that CD's are not that great, and mp3's and aac's sound lousy. So what is the format that will be better than CD ? Can I find a format that has the warmth of vinyl with the convenience of downloading. Is 32 bit better than 24 bit? Is there a real difference ??. Do you need to buy expensive equipment to really enjoy this technology, of will it be accessible to the budget conscious music fan? What to do? Any help you can give me will help.

Ok . I did create a Data disc with the Burn Software but my DVD player does not access the files when I pop the disc in. I use the player to play music; I do not have a monitor attached. If I had one, I think the player will play data files, once I access the mode that plays data files. The way I'm making them now will have to be the way until I can afford more equipment. I need a monitor, a DAC to play off a computer. I have all of my files stored in my seperate hard drive. I can play them with a VLC Player or something similar, but I need a DAC and better speakers. I'll add it to my wish list...

Thanks Julf. I'll experiment with my software and DVD player and see what happens...

I use Burn software.I burn DVD-Video discs. I create DVD-Audio using the Audio function. I thought I could use the wav files, but the software would not allow a burn of the files. ( perhaps I should use the data function?) But the FLAC files do burn to the DVD fine. I have a Philips DVD Player that plays these DVD burns. I have many FLAC file downloads; most are 24/96 , some 24/192. As long as there is no loss in quality , then what I get should be equal to the WAV's I downloaded??. I've been reading some posts on this site, with some saying that FLAC is not perfectly lossless, that having the WAV file is better and more natural sounding. All I know is these burns are sounding better than CD's for sure. Warmer , more detail etc. But is vinyl still better ?? I have modest equipment. I'll never afford high end stuff, but I like good sound. What I find funny is that there does not seem to be any consensus on what is the format, bit rate etc. that will be the standard format going forward. I think this is one of many reasons why the music industry is in the state it's in. I think the goal is Master Tape Quality, and if it is possible to obtain it now, what are they waiting for ??? A conundrum for a different discussion...

I recently bought the wav download from Kates site.The wav files are very large , I had to download them one at a time. I have very modest equipment,(old iMac g3, PowerPC) so I had to convert the wav to FLAC using XLD, then burn to a DVD disc. (The wav files would not work by themselves, my software couldn't handle conversion to DVD disc, but the FLAC files did work) Anyway, Even with conversion and all that, the DVD disc sounds a lot better than the regular CD. Even on my modest system I can tell the difference... It's a wonderful, strange weird album. In other words it's Kate ! I can't wait to afford better equipment so I can hear the wav files without performing conversions. I wonder if I will hear a difference.