I think not...It is generally accepted by audiophiles that vinyls sound better than CDs. However, science has proven them wrong.
Well, through a certain point of view.
If one deems "sounding better" as music that most accurately replicates the original recording, then, sorry to say audiophiles, but CDs does the job better. Before you audiophiles rant and rave, let me give a brief explanation to how vinyls work. Data is stored in the vinyl through grooves that are engraved by a needle. For the "most accurate" sonic experience, the needle that reads the record has to be the exact same shape as the needle that has engraved the grooves. This, however, is sensibly not probable. CDs, on the other hand, encodes the data mathematically. This almost gives an exact replica of the original recording. Therefore, it is safe to say that CDs should be rightfully prized by discerning audiophiles.
Others say that vinyls give a "warmer and fuller sound". However, this claim is probably due to an artifact of harmonic distortion and signal compression. See, what the turntable needle does is that it picks up vibrations of the spinning vinyl and turns them into what I call, "extra notes" in the tune. Then, in this case, the defects are a virtue.
So which is better? CDs or traditional records? Honestly, not many of us have golden and acoustically tuned ears. The minuscule differences between them can't even be picked up by average ears. After all, it all boils down to personal preference. Not to mention the psychological effects that clouds our final decision. If audiophiles believe that CDs can never reach the standards of vinyls, then, to them, this discovery would mean nothing.
Besides, I still prefer MP3s :P
T'ang
(With references from http://www.popsci.com/entertainment-gaming/article/2008-07/are-records-really-better. Image from http://recordbrother.typepad.com/imagesilike/images/big_vinyl_rules_1.jpg)
No comments:
Post a Comment