TS: audiophile vinyl lovers vs. music artifact vinyl lovers

which one are you? i def lean to side b, having bought more garbage albums for covers than fresh 180g pressings of old favorites. maybe the audiophiles are mostly FLAC these days? i wouldn't know.

column b for sure.

b

I'm a little of both! I love finding pristine and sealed records, but I'm not extra-picky about what they are. I love opening up a sealed record that hasn't seen the light of day in 40 or 50 years and hearing how AMAZING it can sound! but it could be almost any kind of record. I love good sound and I love finding weird stuff, basically. I won't buy most records, even if they are a dollar, if they are in bad shape.

audiophiles still buy plenty of classical records and soundtracks for big bucks. but plenty of them have gone digital.

the beauty of vinyl being you can have the best of both.

the extremes of col A and col B are both subject to the criticism that the music becomes secondary to something else. if you have a problem with that. but then if you did, you wouldn't be on the "i love vinyl" board.

i don't know that i'd describe myself as an audiophile but definitely closer to a than b

obv i am in that camp that prefers the sound of vinyl to other formats, but i can totally get down with some reasonable surface noise and w/e in the interest of hearing stuff i cant get any other way, which is why i put myself firmly in b

I had to learn to let go of imperfections in the vinyl the same way I had to learn to let go of knowing where every record is.

surface noise.. no big deal. skips & tics do bug me though. :(

the thing that gets me, okay, it drives me friggin' crazy, are the people who don't even check condition before they buy stuff. um, and i'm not picking on my wife, i swear. i don't care if they came from the thrift store or whatever, i...just don't get it. it reminds me of those threads about vinyl on ilm where people will romanticize the "pops and crackle of an olde tyme record". cuz there are loads of records out there. unless you live in the south pole or something, you can find cool clean vinyl.

I just bought a pristine copy of 'Penguin' by Fleetwood Mac .. like, it wasn't sealed, but it might as well have been. Brown 'steamboat' Reprise label. you have to literally look at this thing to see how great it is. 4 bucks

the only pop and click record i can still listen to is the copy of welcome to my nightmare ive had since i stole it from my mom when i was 12 (uh 24 years ago aaaaaggh). pretty much because every pop and click are my fault, so it has this weird sentimental vibe. have a much better copy, but it doesnt feel the same somehow.

I just bought a pristine copy of 'Penguin' by Fleetwood Mac .. like, it wasn't sealed, but it might as well have been. Brown 'steamboat' Reprise label. you have to literally look at this thing to see how great it is. 4 bucks

― Stormy Davis, Tuesday, July 21, 2009 4:50 AM (1 hour ago) Bookmark

HOT STAMPER

Definitely column B. I've bought a lot of warped shit out of the dollar bin because the cover intrigued me or because Ir ecognized the artist/album name somewhere waaaaaaaaaaay back in my mind but wasn't sure why.

ultra-B. I'll inspect records that cost more than $5 but really don't care about the bargain bin. That Tom Jones at Caesar's Palace can pop all it wants, though I might get a replacement if it's a record I love and find a better copy. Skips suck but can make for fun lockgrooves. I have way too much music, collect all formats, and will probably scratch 'em at some point anyway.

B, as evidenced by my shitty turntable

i forsook getting a nice original of in a silent way in order to get the 180g repress, but that was merely a tiding-over while i spend my money on non-reissued stuff. yeah, im a B-dude.

B but I'm getting a lot more picky

B by a mile. My record buying habits are hell on styluses, always have been.

I guess I lean toward "a." I'm not much into first-pressings, or records with perfect sound staging (whatever that is) or (god knows) hot stampers, but I like my records cleaner-than-clean. I'll typically only get something if it's new, or sealed, or, like, a promo that looks untouched by human hands. I'll make rare exceptions for records I MUST have, but then I'll forever be on the lookout for better copies. I can usually walk away from stuff if it's not minty-mint.

ill just never hear all the records i want with that approach!

plus half of the records i wanna hear are not particularly audiophile-friendly

audiophile-friendly = diana krall. a dangerous path.

Don't think I've answered this yet. I would say I lean towards B, but on the other hand I'm more likely to buy the repress - not because of remastering or better quality vinyl, but simply because I don't crate-dig as often as I should and I don't have much cash to buy originals. In the end my ethos is mostly centred on having the object, but having the object to listen to. But yeah, if it's pretty or interesting then I want to take it home almost completely regardless of its condition.

Hey, I just found out my copy of the first Boston album is a "1A-1A double Wally!"

To find out if yours is, check the inner groove and see if it's signed "Wly." If it's a 1A-1A, it will also say "1A" on both sides.

http://www.laweekly.com/music/why-cds-may-actually-sound-better-than-vinyl-5352162

important article IMO, if for no other reason that it reminds us of the some of the historical (and actual) deficiencies of vinyl and why audiophiles welcomed CDs in the first place -- that's a history that's gotten lost in all the "vinyl revival" hype

It's pretty obvious why CDs are better in theory but, again, lots of CDs (of older music) sound like shit. I feel like we've been over this many times before.

oh, i didn't even realize i was posting to ILV.