Or, people may listen to vinyl records because they already have large record collections . . . and don't want the expense of converting everything to CD's.
Yes, this is perfectly valid.
One of the things that some of us might not get is the ritual involved with records. I still have a large record collection, although I don't use it anymore, and I remember some of the pleasure in that aspect of the hobby. It is probably something like the pleasure some derive from a Japanese tea ceremony, where the preparation and presentation enhance the actual consumption of the tea.
Yes, this is also perfectly valid.
---
[Now addressing everyone.]
What I think many people fail to understand is that I have nothing against people liking vinyl, in fact it is perfectly valid to say, "I don't know what it is exactly, but I just prefer its sound. It seems more real and musical to me".
[But it is important to understand that preference and accuracy are not the same thing.]
This is analogous to saying "I prefer chocolate ice cream to strawberry". Yes, that's valid too, but you cross a line when you say, "Vinyl renders a more faithful, i.e. higher fidelity reproduction of the studio master tape, than CD."
Nope. Sorry, but accuracy is something we can measure and it isn't up for debate or personal taste. This is one of, if not
the most important concepts in audio, a field I've worked in passionately for decades, and I try to explain this concept in my signature.
Just because we usually, as consumers, don't have direct access to the studio master recording doesn't suddenly mean everything goes out the window and suddenly it is a free for all where everyone gets to define what level of bass and treble, and everything else, tickles their fancy as being "accurate". Scientists who invent our music formats do have direct access to the studio masters and both by electrical measurements
and listening tests we know that digital beats vinyl in regards to fidelity, even price no object phono rigs, hands down, not just in some categories [like the proper replication of the levels of bass and treble] but in every single known metric there is:
- flatness of frequency response from 2Hz to 20kHz
CD wins by a big margin.
- speed accuracy
CD wins by a big margin.
- wow
CD wins by a big margin.
- weighted wow
CD wins by a big margin.
- flutter
CD wins by a big margin.
- weighted flutter
CD wins by a big margin.
- rumble
CD wins by a big margin.
- weighted rumble
CD wins by a big margin.
- susceptibility to audible ticks, pops, or clicks due to a less than perfect surface or scratches
CD wins by a big margin.
- distortion
CD wins by a big margin.
- pre-groove echo
CD wins by a big margin.
- hum
CD wins by a big margin.
- channel separation
CD wins by a big margin.
- hiss
CD wins by a big margin.
[I'm probably forgetting some but those are what comes to mind at the moment.]
So in what audible categories is vinyl better than CD?
None.
But why do some people say it sounds better to them? Well for one reason they (usually)
don't have direct access to the master so they can only
guess as to how it sounds. Give them access and suddenly many will realize: "Wow, you're right. Vinyl is different from the master, beyond just the added pops and ticks, whereas CD is a nearly perfect, indistinguishable copy."
We also know that records are often "fudged". Since they have trouble with loud, sustained, deep bass at say 20Hz or lower they try to give the illusion of deep bass by boosting it at a higher frequency of 200Hz, or so, instead, where they don't have so much difficulty. This adds warmth but it is not faithful to the master and of course we could also add that same 200 Hz boost to CDs if we wanted to.
JJ Johnston, co-inventor of MP3 and other important technologies, believes that the added low level distortion of vinyl is perceived as added loudness and we all know the old audio store trick of bumping the sound up by half a dB to fool the customer that the sound is "better". [This is largely why we have the dreaded loudness war, by the way. You can't easily talk people out of perceiving this illusion that louder is better. It's just not happening.]
Consumers also have been indoctrinated by the same people who have indoctrinated Neil Young. "Watch out for those digital stair steps! Only analog holds
all the sound. It's all in there! Digital throws away 85% of the music, ya know. . . blah, blah, blah"
Some people are also of the mind that CDs are more convenient than vinyl and that, I suppose,
is a matter of opinion. But I'm only here to discuss the science of the format as a sound reproduction medium: I'm an expert in the field should anyone have any technical questions. Please ask.