Who told you vinyl is superior to CD?

Like many teenagers who grew up in the 1970s, several of our team were obsessed with music and amassed vast record collections. In those days there wasn't much competition for their attentions. No mobile phones, no video games, no on-demand TV, and you only got to see the latest films if you went to the cinema (yeah .. no VHS or DVD!).

Despite the fact that they couldn't afford record players capable of retrieving all the information from their precious records, they became accustomed to the sound of vinyl. It was the norm.

And then CD happened. They complained that CDs sounded too bright and harsh (hi-frequencies are difficult to cut to vinyl and are therefore rolled off during mastering). And all the Hi-Fi mags declared the superiority of vinyl. You must understand that the hi-fi critics all had hi-end Naim amps and Linn Sondek turntables and the like (think £1000 worth of gear), and had a great deal of investment to protect. It's also true that early CD players weren't the best (it took several years for DACs to improve). However, no-one could deny the sound quality improvements CDs delivered such as the lack of wow and flutter, consistency of quality throughout an LP, low noise, wide dynamic range and increased frequency response.

As the record companies began to re-release old albums on CD, those who knew professional musicians and artists were aghast to see them throw out their record collections en-masse and replace them with CDs. Why would they do that? They'd spent a lifetime collecting them, and didn't vinyl sound better?

What they knew, and we didn't, was the simple fact that CD sounded much, much closer to the mix masters they created in the studio, even if these masters were  analogue (2-track 1/2"). They knew that vinyl was always a compromise and disappointment.

Of course, none of this evidence means that the audience isn't allowed to like vinyl. It has a sound that can be pleasing to many. But unless an album is mixed specifically for vinyl, it will not sound the way the creators intended when they mixed it.

We listen to vinyl every day, and love it. But we would never claim that it's sound is technically superior. Here are some of the technical problems ..

* compromised frequency response - you can't cut deep bass and hi treble to vinyl
* compromised dynamic range - you can't cut loud to vinyl, and too wide a dynamic range means much of the sound will be spoilt by noise
* distortion - as the needled moves towards the centre of the record that angle of incidence increases, and the speed of rotation slows, and distortion increases (this is why the last tracks on albums are often ballads with sparser arrangements)
* wow and flutter - its hard to spin an object in perfect motion
* noise - it's OK to like clicks and pops but they're not exactly intended

The electro mechanical problems associated with vinyl are huge and it is inferior to digital in almost every way. It is true that because vinyl lacks hi-end detail, deep low end, and adds harmonic distortion it may seem to add a "warmth" to the sound which many like, but it cannot faithfully reproduce the quality of most studio masters. 12" 45rpm vinyl produces the best quality but it still falls short of CD quality digital.

So let's enjoy both mediums, but remember that when someone tells us that vinyl is superior, they only mean they prefer it.

Thanks for watching and reading.
FairFax