The ODD Factor

Posted by: Alex S. on 13 January 2002

Many of us here, including me, go 'Pah!, CD's rubbish compared to vinyl'. Indeed, on many levels it is, but it suffers from a problem which I am deciding is so severe that the benefits are outweighed by it.

Its a simple question of one disc duration or ODD factor. Three things I've been listening to recently are complete performances (I think) and fit on a single CD: Nitin Sawney's 'Prophesy' Porcupine Tree's 'On the Sunday of Life' and Mahler's 2nd (Rattle BSO). All these take up 4 sides of vinyl (with Prophesy at 45rpm) and, no matter how good the overall quality, each performance is totally buggered by having to get up 3 times to change the record. I suspect it is one reason why I found Prophecy so dissapointing.

Now that I've added a black Burndy to the CDS2/CDPS I am less aware of vinyl's superiority and the broken performance factor leads me to choose CDs ahead of their vinyl counterparts most of the time.

Is the ODD factor a problem for anyone else, or am I the odd one?

Alex

Posted on: 13 January 2002 by herm
Help, let me out! 75 minutes!

It's the other way around.

Perhaps it's my pitiable attention span, but I don't think it ever happens I get to sit out an entire CD. The good thing of LP's is they rarely last longer than 20 minutes a side, and that's about as good as it gets in my case.

A start-to-finish Mahler 2nd would simply wear me down. OK, the music is not too subtle, but I'm not going to listen to three Mozart string quartets in quick succession either. I either find myself tuning out subconsciously, or I reach for el remoto.

And I'm talking about classical music now. A Beatles LP, lemme check, Rubber Soul lasts less than 36 minutes. A little goes a long way. It just boggles my mind how Britney Spears or what have you fill a CD that doesn't leave you in a state of suicidal boredom eek

Perhaps it's just me.

Herm

Posted on: 13 January 2002 by ken c
whenever i have time and inclination to play vinyl, i tend to only play particular tracks on each lp --its a "down memory lane" sort of experience. what is remarkable is that in my case, the vinyl experience is far far more satisfying musically -- and i am talking cdsii here. this is since i installed a DV XX2 -- one wonders what it would be with the higher DV's??

paradoxically though, when i play CD, i tend to play the whole CD, but thats probably because i will put on a CD and then get back to my PC for work. i would never do that with vinyl for obvious reasons.

still, i am grateful that i have the luxury to own both systems and to do these largely academic comparisons..

enjoy...

ken

Posted on: 13 January 2002 by Ron Toolsie
I agree that playing vinyl can be a bit 'choppy', especially if the music you listen to requires start-to-finish auditioning. In other instances the act of getting up serves as a brief intermission and is really not that problematic.

There is no doubt that on some pieces, the LP is light years in advance of the CD. The laughable example I can cite is my budget re-re-re-issue of Brubecks 'Time Out' sounds very credibly real... while the remastered-from-the-original-master-tapes/HDCD CD release sounds dull, muffled, compressed and entirely boring. But then I have albums that are equally as grotesque sounding, and are far exceeded by the CD version. With very good analog and digital sources, the defining factor is the quality of the mastering rather than the format.

So, here is what I did on the Brubeck album. I burned it to CD using a fairly cheap ($400) Yamaha audio CD-recorder. I of course had to manually insert tracks as there is too much vinyl noise between tracks for the software to automatically do that. But the results are suprisingly close to the original LP when played back on the CDS2, and leages ahead of the commercial CD release. Hell, when I play back that CD-R on my car system the merit of the LP can be heard in 0.5 seconds. I know that I am not the only one archiving LPs onto CD, yet I see no mention of it here. I have also found out that burning to CD-R (going through the Prefix/52) also allows many of the differences in turntable set up-such as using external Prefix supplies, and should give a pretty good idea of Troika vs Dynavector vs Helikon. Surely someone on the forum would be able to do this, if they haven't already done so.
Volunteers??? I would do it myself, but I need all of those cartridges and some extra Aro arm-tubes, and I don't exactly have them lying around unlike some of our well-heeled forum members.

Ron
Dum spiro audio
Dum audio vivo

Posted on: 13 January 2002 by J.N.
When I load up a disc for the first time and the total time is around 40 minutes, I find that seems to bode well for the musical content.

The trouble with CD's is that it's so easy to end up with a load of 'fillers' and because it takes so long to get to the end; it's been a while B4 I've found the good track lurking up the arse end of the disc.

Posted on: 13 January 2002 by Mark Dunn
Hi Alex:

You have listened to a full 74 minutes and 10 seconds of a CD. You are a man of incredible moral fibre and intestinal fortitude. I salute you Sir!

Best Regards,
Mark Dunn

Posted on: 13 January 2002 by ken c
The laughable example I can cite is my budget re-re-re-issue of Brubecks 'Time Out' sounds very credibly real... while the remastered-from-the-original-master-tapes/HDCD CD release sounds dull, muffled, compressed and entirely boring.

ron, an album i have talked about a lot, and used at demos. the cd i have is the 20 bit re-mastered columbia -- it sounds good, but i would be very interested to get the vinyl version if i can. i will look around.

your point about bad pressings is a good one, but even accounting for that -- vinyl reaches parts that CD appears no capable of reaching at this moment.

burning good CD recordings onto CD?? interesting idea. at one point i recorded quite a few of my vinyl onto mini disc -- the results were too far from the original -- and i lost interest in this way of archiving.

enjoy

ken

Posted on: 13 January 2002 by John
Now that I have normalized my ears to vinyl I have very little to no interest in listening to CDs. I recently bought a P9 and was shocked because I now understand what the CD players are trying to achieve. They present the shell of the music but have difficulty with the soul. So many recordings made immediate sense and practically everything is enjoyable. One as an example is the Bill Evans Village Vanguard Sessions. I owned the original CD pressings and the new remasters. I felt there was something special to them but I never connected to the performance. I recently found an LP of the recordings and was blown away by the first listen. Those performances are magic. The most interesting thing is though, the magic to vinyl is not found in the sonics.

I don't understand the laziness of having to change the LP? I am always excited by what is potentially on the next side.

John

Posted on: 13 January 2002 by Ron Toolsie
quote:
ron, an album i have talked about a lot, and used at demos. the cd i have is the 20 bit re-mastered columbia -- it sounds good, but i would be very interested to get the vinyl version if i can. i will look around.

Well I have this album on vinyl, the original US CD release, the Sony/Columbia Gold Disk with Super Bit Mapping and the later Sony/Columbia reissue that is HDCD. Compared to the LP *all* of the CDs sound putrid... far worse than CDs are capable of performing. I know that in the US Classic Records reissued this LP, but it may be onf of those 45 rpm on two disks, and impossible to get hold of.

I also have a Direct-to-Disk LP called 'A Cut Above' by Brubreck and sons... the sonics are astounding and the performances delectable...Now here is a disk worth archiving to CD.

Ron
Dum spiro audio
Dum audio vivo

Posted on: 13 January 2002 by herm
too lazy to flip over?

It's not just laziness. It's also got to do with the emotional rythm of old LPs. So, same example, Rubber Soul's A-side concluded with "Michelle", and then you are a little dreamy and not quite ready for Ringo's corny "What goes on".

Same with classical (admittedly it doesn't apply to mammoth works like Mahler symphonies). Let's say you're listening to a Rachmaninov piano cto ("if that won't do it," said the man in 7 Year Itch) and then it's over. No, wait, all of a sudden a totally different piece of music starts. Unless you're real quick, and manage to locate the remote.

So, having reached an unprecedented level of cerebration - instrumentation in the entire history of the human race, I now avail myself of the Program button all the time, so as not to hear more music than I wanna hear. There something like too much of a good thing, as my mom used to say wink

Posted on: 13 January 2002 by ken c
I know that in the US Classic Records reissued this LP, but it may be onf of those 45 rpm on two disks, and impossible to get hold of.

i will definitely look around -- in fact someone mentioned this LP on this forum while we were discussing this very album, but never got round to searching for it.

i am sure i have 'A Cut Above' somewhere -- will look.

enjoy

ken

Posted on: 13 January 2002 by Philip Pang
Hi Ron

I'm surprised that you find the Columbia 20 bit remastered from original master tapes, HDCD version of Brubeck (red disc) wanting compared to the vinyl version - must be one hell of a vinyl pressing. big grin

Just heard the Brubeck CD over the weekend - and this version sounds absolutely first-rate on the system - I much enjoyed it, the music coming through in all its natural splendour...

Perceptions differ, as usual, but the music lives.
I suppose since you've a number of different pressings for the same Brubeck album, your choice is rather much more informed, but I am too lazy a chap to fiddle with vinyl - just let the convenience and sonics of the CDSII take it all the way...;)

Good listening; the music's still groovin'.

Regards

Philip

naimniac for life

Posted on: 14 January 2002 by Alex S.
Its not laziness. But when two halves of the same movement are on opposite sides of a vinyl disc it usually spoils the enjoyment more than the small sacrifice in quality when listening to the whole movement on CD. Depends on disc and mood though.

Alex

Posted on: 14 January 2002 by Andrew Randle
Alex,

Get your wife to change it over for you! big grin

Andrew

Andrew Randle
The frightening thing is not dying
The frightening thing is not living

Posted on: 14 January 2002 by Alex S.
This would be an excellent idea apart from having to get in the car and drive 5 miles down the road to pick her up first. Nonetheless, many local street corners are populated by ladies who seem very into vinyl. Perhaps I should ask one of them to do the job.

Alex

Posted on: 14 January 2002 by Jez Quigley
Bloody hell I'm shocked, one side of vinyl enough?, can't listen to a whole cd?? Are you guys for real? I thought everyone here listened to music for hours and hours on end. I can't believe you guys spend x k's on systems and have to take it off after 20 mins. Jesus, if I didn't have to go to work, and have a wife who likes to watch corrie, I would listen to it 16 hours a day.

Please tell me I'm not the only one who feels this way.

Posted on: 14 January 2002 by Steve G
quote:
Originally posted by Jez Quigley:

Please tell me I'm not the only one who feels this way.


I'm lucky enough to have my system in a study that isn't used by the rest of the family so I usually manage several hours of listening a day. If I'm just listening then I will often just pick selected tracks of various albums and CD's but most of the time I'm reading or working and then I'll generally listen to the thing the whole way through.

Regards
Steve

Posted on: 14 January 2002 by Tony L
quote:
Is the ODD factor a problem for anyone else, or am I the odd one?

For me things that were originally made on vinyl usually sound right in that format. Blue Note albums for instance just feel right with their usual three tracks a side - listening to jazz sounds wrong on CD, playing the vinyl is part of the experience, as is the record cover. Many rock albums have a very distinct side one and side two, and again just sound wrong played in one solid block.

Stuff that was recorded post CD often suits the medium better, much of electronica or post rock works as one piece, and the additional length does allow more in the way of listener immersion in the music. Often I have bought the fancy multi part vinyl boxes only to become frustrated about the inability to hear the album as a whole. Examples that spring to mind are Leftfield's Rhythm and stealth (4 x 10"), Grooverider's Mysteries of funk (4 x 12"), and Aphex Twin's Druqs (4 x 12"). All these sit amongst the very best sounding recordings I own, but it really is a pain in the arse to get up and cue them after virtually every bloody track.

Tony.

Posted on: 14 January 2002 by woodface
I listen to mostly vinyl but i do find the extra convenience of CD a boon when perusing the sports pages on a Sunday - this always seems to take at least an hour! I then switch to vinyl as I find I generally skim read the various supplements for 20 mins each - perfect! I think the main problem with CD is that artists feel they have to use all 74 mins! I think 40 - 45 mins is the perfect length for an album. I agree with Tony about Jazz though, Imagine KOB without the 2nd act!
Posted on: 14 January 2002 by Alex S.
Rest assured that my system revs up at 6.30am - loud till 8 then slightly less loud 'till 3.30 when I either go home or turn it up to very loud 'till seven.

Alex

Posted on: 14 January 2002 by Todd A
quote:
Please tell me I'm not the only one who feels this way.

I, too, am somewhat surprised at the apparently short listening periods being advocated here, at least as it pertains to specific recordings. I have trouble listening for less than an hour at a time; I move from one CD to the next as quickly as possible. So much music, so little time.

Posted on: 14 January 2002 by herm
and the beat goes on

Jez wrote:

Bloody hell I'm shocked, one side of vinyl enough?, can't listen to a whole cd?? Are you guys for real?

-----------------------

Well, I guess it's the end of the world (as we know it). Still, there's 24 hrs in a day. Today, for instance, I listened to three Webern songs (5'15) four times over, then I switched to Berg songs (didn't like 'em after all) and moved on to Schoenberg op 11, three times. Maybe four, who can tell? This might very well be an hour's listening.

I go to a concert hall, I do what I'm told. But when I stay at home, I call the shots. As long as I'm really listening I don't see a problem.

Remember the way concert programs looked back in Mozart's days? Chop, chop. A little bit of symphony, an opera aria, a piano guy improvising, and back to the next bit of symphony...

Honestly, my girlfriend would be puzzled to hear I don't spend enough time spinning music. I jut happen to think 60 min + of the same kind ofmusic is a bit much (unless you're in the concert hall).

Herm

Posted on: 14 January 2002 by jpk73
I enjoy very much to walk to my LP-shelf, select another LP, walk to my LP12, remove the LP from the platter, put it back to it's cover etc. etc., take out the choosen LP, put it on the LP12 and concentrate on bringing down the arm.

This is kind of ceremony for me! Similar to rub ink before painting chinese characters, this procedure makes me peacefully and prepares me for the music I am going to listen to...

Compare this to the use of a no-naim-CDP: push the open/close-button, the tray will open with a rattle noise of a cheap motor, you bang in the CD and push the play-button... That's why again a naim-CDP is much appreciated: You open the tray by hand, which gives a similar ritual as the LP-ceremony...

Old story, I know... - - Jun

Posted on: 14 January 2002 by Jez Quigley
Lest there is any doubt, I wasn't having a pop at anyone, I was genuinely surprised.