Does Loveless really sound THAT different on vinyl?

Some people say that about every vinyl issue. I always thought this would be a difficult album to master properly on vinyl and I'd be surprised if it sounded a lot better. Never heard it though so I will shut up now.

i heard it on vinyl once. and i thought it sounded a lot better. but obv it was only once and a while ago...i remember thinking there was a lot more sense of space and layering than on the CD.

Did you hear it on CD through the same stereo?

Even on CD this is one of the best albums ever, so I say save your $20 until you have tons of money and can buy the vinyl and tube amps etc.

yeah i've listened to mine on it, i thought it was better (i have a nice stereo overall), but like i said these things are so abstract sometimes how ppl hear things i wouldn't want to say definitely do it.

in fairness i am a vinyl dork kinda so am probably predisposed to like most things on vinyl better

my original uk vinyl sounds great. the songs i have on cd singles that are on the album sound okay too though. i don't remember what the cd itself sounds like. i don't have a copy anymore. i just play the vinyl.

WORST mbv vinyl i had was a u.s. copy of isn't anything. then again, i've never heard it on cd. all i know is my u.k. 12 inch with feed me with your kiss on it is SO friggin' bad-ass and loud and great and the u.s. album version is the saddest palest shadow of that.

here is a 2-minute sample of my vinyl copy (the 2003 Plain Records version), the first part of "Only Shallow. I assume you have the CD so you can compare.

http://www.sendspace.com/file/2bm4pj

Hmm, sounds the same to me but it's encoded to mp3 which kind of defeats the point???

lolz

I've not noticed any real difference between the cd and the Plain reissue, but my turntable's not the best. Useful info in this post: on the Plain Isn't Anything the drumstick-clicking intro to Feed Me With Your Kiss is missing. Why would they do that?

that's like the best part.

anyone who likes good sound, i would say invest in that feed me 12 inch. u.k. pressing. the sound is awesome. the bass on that thing alone...

OK, here, WAV file:

http://www.sendspace.com/file/ff3ujh

recorded on a pretty good system fwiw.

Sorry, but I still don't think it's a meaningful comparison. Wav is still digital! Would have to be side by side through the same amp using multiple disc players and turntables I think.

Even on CD this is one of the best albums ever, so I say save your $20 until you have tons of money and can buy the vinyl and tube amps etc.

-- Spencer Chow, Friday, February 8, 2008 8:14 PM (51 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

^^ this of course is a sensible solution.

even if it's incredible off the money.

Does Loveless really sound THAT different on acid?

Does Loveless anything really sound THAT different on vinyl?

yes!

yes and yes

there's a big difference in the sound of MP3s ripped from vinyl and mp3s ripped from CDs. mp3s from vinyl most certainly do not end up sounding like CDs.

sleeve, how about putting the whole vinyl album up for us?

yeah, sorry whiney, but vinyl sounds a LOT different than CD, no matter what's playing,

stroker, how about you go BUY the record?

i think they still have the reissue vinyl at the record store here, but i'm happy with my old copy. don't think i need a backup.

stroker, how about you go BUY the record?

this.

Huh, based on those samples, it does sound like the issues I have with the sound of the album might be corrected by listening to it on vinyl.

the fact it was digitally mastered in 1991 is surely part of it

yeah that wav file sounds good

wav sounds awesome

I think the analog/digital thing is a bit overplayed upthread - for me at least sometimes I think songs sound better on vinyl because the CD version has been mastered in a way I don't like - maybe overcompression or just shitty 80s/early 90s transfers, rather than an advantage of one format over the other - a wav/192+ mp3 can convey that difference fine.

I mean, I haven't listened to the wav yet and I guess I don't remember thinking the CD sounds bad, but if the objection was, say, it's not bassy enough and the vinyl has been mixed with more bass, that's still going to come through if it's digitised on a decent system.

DON'T FUCK WITH SLEEVE ON THIS THREAD
HE IS A STRAIGHT BALLER
MY SNIPE ON REBORE VOL. 0 THAT I COULDN'T EVEN AFFORD DIDN'T REGISTER DUE TO HIS HEAVY ARTILLERY
BUT THEN HE LOST TO A SWISS DUKE OR SOMETHING
SORRY TO BLOW UP YOUR SPOT DUDE

did you get the boy a fischer price player for his b-day?

hahahaha sanskrit the high bidder flaked so I got it for my original bid!

the seller sent me a note... "it is in excellent condition, is that OK? if not I can send refund."

EXCELLENT IS JUST FINE THANKS

what a series of auctions that was. I got creamed on those OOIOO recs.

OK, derail over.

MY POINT IS
HE RIPPED LOVELESS FOR YOU PEONS
AND YOU THREW CHARDONNAY IN HIS FACE
NOT A GREAT LOOK SPENCE

Surely SC is used to looking like a self-righteous dildo on the internet?

http://www.puppstheories.com/spriterips/dhalsim_fireball_1f.gif

YOU THREW CHARDONNAY IN HIS FACE

lolz

I think the analog/digital thing is a bit overplayed upthread - for me at least sometimes I think songs sound better on vinyl because the CD version has been mastered in a way I don't like - maybe overcompression or just shitty 80s/early 90s transfers, rather than an advantage of one format over the other

otm otm otm otm otm

There's a *big* difference, IMO. On vinyl, it sounds more like a *rock* record ... the drumming and percussion is more prominent, the bass is more powerful and resonant (as opposed to sludgy and murky). There is also more nuance in the vocals. Of course, these contrasts aren't specific to "Loveless" -- they are characteristic of vinyl vs CD in general.

However, I'm not sure where my "preference" lies. The muddiness of the CD enhances this album somewhat, seeing as the whole point of "Loveless" was to create a hazy, blurry fog. OTOH, on vinyl it's easier to hear the separation between the instruments, which gives you a better approximation of how MBV wanted the album to sound. For example, we know from Kevin Shields' interviews (e.g. Mike McGonigal's book) that very few guitar tracks were used, contrary to what most listeners have always believed. Hearing "Loveless" on CD is a big factor in this misconception because the guitar tracks blend together more seamlessly, creating the impression of a denser mixture of tracks. On vinyl, it's much easier to separate the different guitar lines and understand what Shields is talking about.

(btw, my vinyl copy is an original Creation pressing, and not the Plain reissue (which I have never heard))

i've only ever heard it on cassette

I have it on Minidisc (really!)

so who's heard the new vinyl remaster/reissue?

It is a very good pressing, but it reveals nothing new. I've heard every reissue of Loveless and it always sounds like Loveless.

The only proper release of Loveless would be on a wrinkled cassette tape.