The Truth About Vinyl - Vinyl vs. Digital

  • Published on Nov 30, 2018
  • Get 2 months of Skillshare for FREE using this link:
    New vlog channel:
    Get your Real Engineering shirts at:
    Narrator/Director: Brian McManus
    Writer: Seán McManus
    Co-Director: Stephanie Sammann (
    Co-Director: Mike Ridolfi (
    Sound: Graham Haerther (
    Thumbnail: Simon Buckmaster forgottentowel

    'Disc Playback Characteristics', Wireless World, April 1956, p. 171.

    Music by Epidemic Sound:
    Future Yellow - Ooyy
    Wear The Crown - Pure Indigo
    A Nifty Piece Of Work - Anders Bothén
    Sunday - Otis McDonald
    Twenty Seconds Later (Instrumental Version) - Tommy Ljungberg
    Thank you to my patreon supporters: Adam Flohr, Henning Basma, Karl Andersson, Mark Govea, Hank Green, William Leu, Jason A., Chris Plays Games, Tristan Edwards, Ken Coltan, Andrew McCorkell, Ian Dundore, John & Becki Johnston. Nevin Spoljaric, Jason Clark, Christopher Lam, Deven Warren Rathbun.
  • Science & TechnologyScience & Technology

Comments • 12 229

    MAEDZ 29 minutes ago

    He sounds like RTgame

  • TheWalkmanArchive
    TheWalkmanArchive 5 hours ago

    This video is really well made. The animations are impressive. It focus on the point and arrives to the same conclusion as anyone who has really dig in this subject.
    But it fails in to key aspects that makes the final conclusion to be very different: the quality of the A/D and D/A conversion, which is plagued of problems.
    Moving from a domain to another ALWAYS causes big losses. Same thing happens when you scan a chemical photo, or print a digital photo on real paper: many details are lost.
    And the quality of mic and line out amplifiers. Most sound cards (specially consumer) has poor amps, while analog equipment is focused in good amps, and that makes a very different listening experience.
    I was blown out when I recorded a cassette in a top quality deck from my 500$ sound card. It sounded better in the cassette than straight form the sound card!

  • Gonna win
    Gonna win 9 hours ago

    no yall cant tell the difference, but to a audiophile like me. the cpu clock gets on my nerves

  • Jerry
    Jerry 14 hours ago

    Allow me to explain without the use of techno babble. Sound is personal. I prefer vinyl and have almost 1000 records. But I also have SACD and DVD-A discs as well as a large collection of flac files and CDs which all sound fine to my ear. My receiver has a sound retrieve setting which allows my MP3 collection to sound decent as well. Now, there are times when digital sounds better than vinyl to me. When idiots want to charge ridiculous amounts for a record, well then the a CD sounds better😜.

    • ReaktorLeak
      ReaktorLeak 12 hours ago

      The more you spend, the better it sounds!

  • iseeolly
    iseeolly 15 hours ago

    Vinyl is shit.....if you like it then OK, good for you...a high bit rate digital stream is are just a bullshit merchant.

  • Trumpty Dumpty
    Trumpty Dumpty 17 hours ago

    I'm 43 and In Cuba all I had was vinyl and tapes. I hate those times. I will never EVER use tapes or vinyl EVER again. Only reason people buy vinyl is cause we live in a hipster society.

  • Nick Dial
    Nick Dial 19 hours ago

    The first commercial vinyl record was not in 1948.
    It was in 1930 released by RCA. How did you get that wrong?
    That raises serious credibility with the information in this video.

  • Dustin Maki
    Dustin Maki Day ago

    6:00 the Nyquist theorem does NOT say that digital is functionally the same as analog for music recording. It states the minimum sampling frequency for digital to be a functional approximation for measurement of a single frequency. Measuring a thing is not the same as experiencing a thing. Music is much more than a single frequency. We can hear changes in a signal shorter than 1 cycle. Note the digital 'pop' that occurs when a digital signal ends. A sine and square wave of identical frequency can sound very different. This difference is conveniently glossed over in the stairstep representation of a signal. A step change in signal (instant change between samples, or digital pop) contains harmonic content at every frequency. Since digital is incapable of recording every frequency(limited by Nyquist) it is different from the original analog signal which does not contain all those harmonics. A speaker is incapable of reproducing a digital signal exactly because it cannot move in instantaneous steps. Our ear drum cannot move instantaneously either. Those particular distortions help the digital signal to sound more analog. The moving needle and coil in a record player have approximately the same mass as our ear bones so they vibrate in similar ways. The bottom line is that neither Digital or Vinyl are perfect Analog recordings. They are inferior in different ways, but both are good enough. That means there is no scientific choice, just personal preference.

    • ReaktorLeak
      ReaktorLeak 15 hours ago

      @Dustin Maki Any "audible subharmonics" would be within the range of capture (below the Nyquist frequency) and would be reproduced along with all the other content. EVERYTHING below the cutoff frequency is captured. If it weren't, you'd hear nothing resembling music out of any digital audio system. :)
      Have you watched Monty's "Digital Show and Tell"? You can see it in action there:

    • Dustin Maki
      Dustin Maki 15 hours ago

      Oops, DAC.

    • Dustin Maki
      Dustin Maki 15 hours ago

      @ReaktorLeak ADC is trying to produce a step change in output because that is all it can do. Any rounding off of the steps is because it is slew rate limited, not because of some magic interpolation from the original signal. When I said single frequency, I was referring to the upper Nyquist frequency. The original live source has content above that frequency with audible sub harmonics. In order for Nyquist to apply that content is obliterated with a brick wall. Whether the difference is audible is debateable but certainly not proven beyond doubt as you imply.

    • ReaktorLeak
      ReaktorLeak 20 hours ago

      "A speaker is incapable of reproducing a digital signal exactly because it cannot move in instantaneous steps" True; that's why we have digital-to-analog converters!

    • ReaktorLeak
      ReaktorLeak 20 hours ago

      Actually the theorem says you can capture an arbitrary signal exactly with no loss of information, if you sample at > 2x the highest frequency content in the signal. It's not limited to single frequencies.

  • Kevin Broderick
    Kevin Broderick Day ago

    Vinal, analog tube amps, large voice coil speakers.

  • superfragilisticatexpialidoshmur

    Now I have to ask about something related to wireless vs. wired playback. Is there such a huge difference that people will notice between wired and wireless playback?

  • Axel Nussbaumer
    Axel Nussbaumer Day ago

    Dude, do you also have a DBZ channel? You really sound like another channel I listen to. I cant place the name though

  • robert lawson
    robert lawson Day ago

    The key is as he says in the video is "high quality digital recordings" It took years to get there CDs and mp3s were crap. wave files were better but took up way more space. It took compression to make it work and thank you whoever that was.

  • Mark Abel
    Mark Abel Day ago

    Ah the good old days when subsonic rumble damaged your woofers....

  • Aaron Maughan
    Aaron Maughan Day ago

    Dude, you show the signal generation happening in the tonearm counterweight. The signal us generated by the moving bits of the stylus cartridge.

  • Lachie Kollar
    Lachie Kollar Day ago

    And winner is vinyl fuck ya but wait a minute i have none.I feel like a loser. Well but seriously Vinyl records are better you must to be deaf not to recognize it.They have much more natural and smooth sound than digital format. So if you have Vinyl never sell it.I must to get some that is my another dream.Lets hope it will come true.

  • Ser Garlan Tyrell

    Anyone why says an analogue physical storage medium (aka Vinyl) is more accurate hasn't heard of a) manufacturing tolerances b) wear/material degradation or c) inertia.

  • Lysander Hubbard
    Lysander Hubbard 2 days ago

    This video is biased, it seems to favor digital over vinyl by significantly pointing out the drawbacks or inability of vinyl while not mentioning if any, any possible drawbacks or inability of digital, he then tries to hide his favoritism by saying that there is no difference that the human ear can detect if both formats are played on the same equipment. Which of course has been proven to be inaccurate due to the fact that the the two physical products are entirely different, a record of course is pressed from a vinyl puck, a cd is made of polycarbonate, here you have two different substance, so how can they sound identical? They cant, wood doesn't make the same sound as metal when struck with an object, I know that analogy is kinda extreme, so let me use two different kind of metals, aluminum doesn't sound like steel when struck with an object, even different kinds of woods will not sound the same, so digital and analog can't sound the same even the mastering of them are different. Actually whether one sounds better than the other shouldn't even be the issue, because they both have a different sound. We need to stop listening to the talking heads argueing numbers and graphs, and just decide with our ears which one like best if not both, and lock those people who argue which is better in a room so they can argue between themselves while we rock the house with the music we love.

    • ReaktorLeak
      ReaktorLeak 20 hours ago

      It's all about accurately transmitting a signal. What a CD is made of is irrelevant since it's just a data storage medium; it's transmitting numbers to a DAC. You can read the same numbers off a hard drive, SSD, DVD, network connection...with the same datastream they will all sound the same.

  • Dominic Lamon
    Dominic Lamon 2 days ago

    Vinyl with adequate packaging pleases all senses,like owning a precious sculpture or painting that poor people like myself would only be able to admire from a distance,behind a sign saying:'do not touch!'

  • paper toys
    paper toys 3 days ago

    The difference is that the digital 44,000 sample rate is dots, whereas the analog is a line. This in term of mathematics is like going back to the stone age; the amount of information being lost is infinite. There's also the phrase *"connect the dots"* ie to see or in this case hear the truth.
    CDs also have a *capacity issue* which you didnt mentioned, and probably more issues than the one you did mentioned (the dots thing). I mean, one has to wonder: if a typical CD delivers equally good sound with a vinyl record, why on earth dont they make the CD better than it already is? This technology is about 40 years old now, why dont they create a laser disk to deliver pure 100% true sound. Or can't they...

    • ReaktorLeak
      ReaktorLeak 2 days ago

      @paper toys Thanks! One last thing: digital gear isn't perfect--of course there will be differences in quality depending on the design and construction of the A/D and D/A converters, and the filters required for sampling and reconstruction. But after 40 years of silicon improvement, it's possible now to buy excellent and inexpensive digital audio converter chips off the shelf and base a product around them.

    • paper toys
      paper toys 2 days ago

      @ReaktorLeak It surely is a good point to start! Thanx for this polite conversation mate. Take care!

    • ReaktorLeak
      ReaktorLeak 2 days ago

      @paper toys In audio engineering, accuracy = fidelity, which means low noise and distortion. You can compare a recorded signal to the original input signal and measure how accurately it is reproduced. Spectrum analysis will tell you how good the frequency response is (it should be 'flat' from 20 Hz to 20 kHz) and how much total harmonic distortion (THD) there is in the signal. Noise should be low enough not to detract from the musical content. With dithered 16-bit you'd have to turn the volume up to painful levels to hear the noise, so while 24-bit is an improvement it's not really necessary for practical listening. Hope this helps!

    • paper toys
      paper toys 2 days ago

      @ReaktorLeak Dont want to bother you with my ignorance. Just one last question, with a promise to search deeper on this subject: you mentioned accuracy; pls, define accuracy.

    • ReaktorLeak
      ReaktorLeak 2 days ago

      @paper toys I hate to be the one to tell you, but digital _does_ exceed analog in quality. :) Well, to be fair, "quality" is subjective, but digital (even CD's lowly 44.1 kHz/16-bit) is provably more accurate than any analog medium. If you need greater dynamic range, use more bits per sample. If you need higher frequency response, use a higher sampling rate. These are solved problems.

  • Mastro iTek
    Mastro iTek 3 days ago

    I sometimes use some old vinyl of my father. And the difference between a FLAC file and the vinyl is palpable. Not for sound quality, because actually the vinyl is not in perfect condition any more. But the sound signature is way different, is warmer and more enjoyable.

  • Thomas Walz
    Thomas Walz 3 days ago

    I am a musician, smitten, inspired, by vinyl... yeah, I'm a Boomer...
    I recently acquired a CD of a favorite recording... my only reaction to it was... meh... it was missing something... but since my studio/listening room is under construction, I'll have to wait for the A vs B comparison...
    I wonder if I've become bored with this recording, or is it the format... the stereo I'm listening on.
    So many questions...

  • Clarissa 1986
    Clarissa 1986 4 days ago +8

    But vinyl, as you've just explained, does not like very high or low frequency. So this loudness war is not possible on vinyl. Which means this is the very reason, why vinyl sounds better in fact. Because its mastering has to be more moderate, instead of full power :) This makes vinyl sound more smooth and warm.

  • Quinstar
    Quinstar 4 days ago +2

    I just like it when you can hear that some guy liked his jazz a little too much.

  • Steve M
    Steve M 4 days ago

    Microphone produces analog or digital? Digital???

  • A. Nilla-or
    A. Nilla-or 4 days ago

    in my country when I was a teenager, vinyl records for domestic bands used to cost 5-6 bucks. these days???? OMG! they're all ridiculously expensive.

  • Tommaso Galdi
    Tommaso Galdi 4 days ago +1

    Long story short: Perfection doesn't exist. ;^)

  • Tunç Vidinli
    Tunç Vidinli 4 days ago

    Also I like the hsss dist. behind.

  • djchristian82
    djchristian82 4 days ago

    Why the use of hard words? Propensity etc..?

  • Wojtek Bordin
    Wojtek Bordin 5 days ago

    Unitra MF-105 at 3:14 :)

  • Jim Funicelli
    Jim Funicelli 5 days ago

    My guy, I gotta dock some points for your description of microphones. Microphones are inherently analogous, they're transducers, they don't sometimes produce digital signals, it's always analog. Even the USB ones just have a DAC built in.

  • Ariston Claussen
    Ariston Claussen 6 days ago

    Vinyl sounds better than an mp3 or CD any day. This is the truth. The sales numbers do not lie.

    • ReaktorLeak
      ReaktorLeak 5 days ago

      Oh, you mean these sales numbers?

  • Mike G
    Mike G 6 days ago

    wow i never knew that about amplitude taking up more vinyl space....pretty cool

  • MegaSexfanatic
    MegaSexfanatic 7 days ago

    1. Analog signal will always be one step forward in compare to Digital because Digital signal we made from Analog. I.e. we may make digital signal as close to analog as we can but never exactly the same.
    2. Both formats of recordings digital and analog was made not for our pleasure but for making money by copyright owners. So both Vinyl and CD have much less quality then modern technology allows. That is why we have a lot of shitty music today. Shitty music sounds great on shitty recording formats and on shitty devices. Back then when people can only listen music live music was much more complicated!

  • stoodmars
    stoodmars 7 days ago

    Good video, although I think one of the main concerns people have with vinyl has been overlooked - that being the health implications of owning vinyl (due to ingredients such as PVC etc) Would love to see a video on this topic

  • Federico Varano
    Federico Varano 7 days ago

    In your Analog vs Digital explanation you only mentioned Sampling (that does not introduce information loss if done following the Nyquist Criteria) but you didn't mention Quantization, that DOES introduce information loss, no matter how well you do it.
    So yes, digital is never as accurate as Analog, but is durable and easier to store.
    Anyway, good job with the video.

    • ReaktorLeak
      ReaktorLeak 2 days ago

      "Analog Tape As High-Resolution? No Way."

    • paper toys
      paper toys 2 days ago

      @ReaktorLeak Master tapes (high speed, reel to reel)

    • ReaktorLeak
      ReaktorLeak 7 days ago

      Any time you transfer a signal from one medium to another, you will introduce noise, whether analog or digital. 24-bit digital has a noise floor so low, the quantization noise is practically unmeasurable compared to analog tape (which is about 3dB per dub). 96 kHz sampling offers a frequency response well beyond any studio master tape. So in terms of noise and distortion (how you measure fidelity) there is no analog medium as accurate as a high-end digital system.

    • Federico Varano
      Federico Varano 7 days ago

      @ReaktorLeak right, but a digital signal has some noise on its very source.
      All other systems introduce noise after the original signal, which is already corrupted if digital.
      Even more, digital is not capable of having all the frequencies that an analog signal can, but only a (very large) subset.
      Your point is correct on the side of the systems AFTER the signal, but you can never say that the digital signal itself is more ACCURATE than its analog counterpart, since it loses a whole lot of information.

  • Dhanar Putra
    Dhanar Putra 7 days ago

    I still have music CD as my collection. I've ripped them tho. I still like physical form of music production.

  • Kool MaDa
    Kool MaDa 7 days ago

    I'm sure this is one huge butt hurt for all those audiophiles out there.

  • MrSerendipity01
    MrSerendipity01 8 days ago

    I sometimes think vinyl enthusiasts are like flat earthers.

  • MrSerendipity01
    MrSerendipity01 8 days ago

    At 4.33, absolute bullshit. That's the counter weight at the back of the tone arm you idiots. What is described takes place inside the cartridge at the opposite end where the needle/stylus is. You obviously don't know anything about disc reproduction.

  • ZantherY
    ZantherY 9 days ago

    The love of booming base today may be a bit hard to translate to vinyl...

  • Chrollo134
    Chrollo134 9 days ago +4

    “Edison designed” Lmao 😂

  • PrimiusLovin
    PrimiusLovin 9 days ago

    The Truth About Vinyl vs. Digital: just try to organize, sort and search a few hundreds of vinyls, either for playing at home or to play at gigs and tell me how it usually goes compared to doing the same thing with digital music... it wasn't superior digital quality that almost killed vinyl, it was practicality!

  • Avery Kucan
    Avery Kucan 9 days ago +1

    Nyquist Shannon proves that digital audio is identical to the pure analog audio, provided your microphone doesn't have infinite bandwidth.

  • antares686
    antares686 9 days ago

    Ok, here's what is different for me. When listening to digital music compared to analog, I personally hear an extra pitch that is very low and hurts my head on a majority of digital music. Only recently the higher sampled stuff actually isn't as bad, but it's almost like someone put paper over my ears and the noise is muffled but extremely piercing. That's why I preferred analog. Found the same issue with TheXvid videos. I always felt it was the compression of the digital sound, but never experimented to find out. Wondered if that is the same reason other audiophiles were running into.

  • Dénes Tandary
    Dénes Tandary 10 days ago

    Aaah but if 44.1 already overrules my ears, why so many play 88.2, 176, etc frequencies? Why so much fuss if its mathematically and physiologically proven?

  • Ron Edwards
    Ron Edwards 10 days ago +1

    CD’s early on sounded brittle. The converters and tech has advanced so much that vinyl sounds terrible compared to high end formats of digital recordings.

  • flat eman
    flat eman 10 days ago

    Why does vinyl sound better to some people its because analogue is a continuous source of noise as for digital it is a chain of on and offs which omits gains or drop offs it is like analogue being a old braking system where you brake the pads stay binding to the discs but digital is abs brakes that pulse the pads 20 times per second to the disc leaving gaps of doing nothing

    • ReaktorLeak
      ReaktorLeak 10 days ago

      No, it is nothing like that. Watch Monty's "Digital Show and Tell"

  • Cat Keys
    Cat Keys 10 days ago

    One thing that's missed here is that the dynamic range heard from a record playback is also attenuated, for the same reasons mentioned for the need for RIAA equalization. The 1st thing I noticed when CDs first came out was that the difference between the softest brush sounds on a snare drum and the loudest rim shots is much more like it is in real life as opposed to the compressed sounds on vinyl.

  • Cat Keys
    Cat Keys 10 days ago +1

    4:30 - strange animation, showing the stylus at one end of the arm, and the magnet in the back end of the arm. At least that's what the animation looks like to me, but this is not how any record player commercially made ever worked, or ever COULD work, actually. Imagine all the mass and inertia of a mechanical system like that - all the harmonics and resonances that would occur. In reality, the stylus is actually mounted to a small CARTRIDGE at the end of the tone arm. Everything is kept as tiny and light as possible, of course- the less the mass, the less the inertia, and the less the distortion.

    • ReaktorLeak
      ReaktorLeak 7 days ago

      @MrSerendipity01 You and about 5,000 people before you. ;)

    • MrSerendipity01
      MrSerendipity01 8 days ago

      I have just commented on this as well.

  • Akanaro O.O
    Akanaro O.O 11 days ago

    People who think vinyl somehow has better quality are silly sheep. Take away the crackling and other quirky sounds produced by vinyl players and a lot of times you actually have a lower quality recording. It seems people get all nostalgic for the quirky noises though and then go around claiming "superior quality". There, I saved you 14 minutes of your life.

  • Eaglecreeker 49
    Eaglecreeker 49 11 days ago

    Amazing that description of this video is comparing just one aspect of analog while using digital,,so real engineering is comparing a plastic disc to a completely modern form of handling soundwaves LOL,,,Vinyl VS Digital,, right away I question if they even know what they are comparing. Had they used a more correct title it would have read Analog VS Digital but that would open up a big flaw in this video concerning a major fact in that most recordings still use analog master tapes due to their high quality reproduction. one thing is absolute,ask anyone who owns a quality turntable if they can hear the difference,,,,,lol so simple,,they are not even close in terms of the many differences , a totally new to vinyl listener can hear the difference. Its about so much more than what this video claims, the convenience is really the only upside to digital,,,but today's music gets so much negative additives that its hardly even the real recording by the time it gets reworked with bass boost or loudness,, its just ridiculous to even compare raw tape or vinyl to most digital due to terrible quality control standards used in the music industry today and to enhance that add in bad quality devices the majority use compounds this further,,,crap gear produces crap music period,,of course the majority have nothing to help them understand just how much better the overall experience can be,,, CDs can be very good when the gear is high quality,,again the majority choose lower quality devices playing lower fidelity MP3s. Sacrificing quality for convenience is the norm in all things nowadays.

    • ReaktorLeak
      ReaktorLeak 11 days ago

      Most studios use digital mastering, not analog. The storage and editing costs alone justify that.

  • W0Y4K
    W0Y4K 11 days ago +1

    Vinyl wins for collecting. No question there.
    Digital is objectively superior in terms of reproducing sound. Vinyl-tards need to stop spreading BS. No shit an MP3 you ripped from TheXvid isn't as good as vinyl. From an *objective* standpoint, digital is superior. No surface noise... More dynamic range... No physical limitations... Some vinyl-tard is probably gonna refute this with pseudo-science BS and talk about how they can hear ultrasonic frequencies above 20kHZ that's probably just noise, but that's not *objective.* If you're hearing above 20kHZ, you're either under 5 years old or lying like one. Or super-human.

  • Noah Meier
    Noah Meier 11 days ago +1

    The diagramm at 7:55 is also wrong, because usual Vinyl records have a horizontal groove, not a vertical one.

    • Peter Kese
      Peter Kese 10 days ago

      Educate yourself here:
      Although the diagram is just as correct even for horizontal modulation - in both cases the moment of the needle & head assembly may not be able to follow the track.
      BTW, although the horizontal groves are better than vertical ones, there is a bigger limit on max signal amplitude - if the signal would be to large, the needle might bounce to the neighboring groove. Therefore vinyl can't encode very much bass and need the RIAA frequency spectrum transform).
      Mostly what they do is to turn bass frequencies into a single (mono) channel that in the end turns into vertical movement of the needle, and limits the probability of horizontal skips.
      Actually, there's a lot going on in the editing process to circumvent the problems of vinly media. It is very interesting that after all that, it still sounds that good.

  • John Edwards
    John Edwards 11 days ago

    The only detail missing from this video? Who did Edison rip off to get this particular invention?

  • RedRN
    RedRN 12 days ago

    What's your opinion on new Hi-res standard, which often have audio files that have sample rate up to 192KHz and bit depth up to 24bit?
    If theoretically 44.1KHz is accurate enough considering that human cannot perceive waves that have frequency higher than 20Khz, than how would increasing sample rate and bit depth, which allows for recording of frequencies higher than 20KHz, help improving sound quality? Are wave that have frequency higher than 20KHz contributing to the general feeling of the music even though human generally cannot perceive them?
    I did test on my Sony-Z7 + NW-WM1A + balanced cable with some hires files(192KHz/24bit) and some normal CD-quality file(44.1KHz/16bit, sampled down from the hires files), and found out that I do actually distinguish between Hires files and normal lossless files, so I think it's not due to mental factors, at least on my case.
    And what about DSD files, which use 1bit sample depth (1 and 0) and much higher sample rate (up to 22.5792 MHz). Although the high sample rate do introduces a lot of background noises, many people reports that they prefer the warmer sound of DSD files. So one of my hypothesis is that the distortion to the sound made during the production of the sound media(like in the case of Vinyl and DSD files) warmer the general feeling of the sound and thus attract people?

    • RedRN
      RedRN 12 days ago

      @ReaktorLeak I agree, I used to think that higher sample rate and depth provides a better regression for the sound wave, until this video mentioned that 44.1KHz is accurate in producing 20kHz waves. I'll do some research on the reproduction of waves and digital audio formats to see if I can get more info on this.

    • ReaktorLeak
      ReaktorLeak 12 days ago

      No one would deny that hi-res has better specs than CD (greater dynamic range + frequency response) but that's not necessarily sufficient for better quality sound. Lots of claims that it's higher quality, but no good evidence.

  • Henry A. Thurman Jr.
    Henry A. Thurman Jr. 12 days ago

    Good a little fast to keep up with in some ares...techinically speaking...but that can be addressed on your next video hopefully...for us who are learning from the bat.

  • lopezb
    lopezb 12 days ago

    Universal allowed their master tapes to burn up, so we can NEVER recover the original quality, no matter the technology...

  • Chris Carson
    Chris Carson 12 days ago

    Bullshit, pure and simple.

  • Tim Murray
    Tim Murray 13 days ago

    No, I am not going into what you or I prefer but as a true engineer, but I have not seen an explanation of vinyl v. digital that was so well done, and the graphics make it easy to understand the issues. It's nice to hear from someone -- and from someone kind of young (relative to me) so I have hope for the future -- who does not think Nyquist is something you take when you have a flu and can't sleep. BUT . . . I would like to hear about tape. Yes, I know that every time it's played there is a wee bit of desegregation, but I must say I miss my uncle's Wollensak tapes.

  • Nothing Nothing
    Nothing Nothing 13 days ago

    I’m just a music freak honestly I love all music and wanna listen to as many ways as possible except modern music like music past 2009 sucks ass for rap rock after 2003 sucks blues well idk if anyone even plays that anymore pop died after Jackson died so 2007 country sucks after Florida Georgia line came around but yeah I like vinyl my favorite record is either Led Zeppelin 2 or sticky fingers actually I can’t pick