On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 07:45:47 -0700, Arny Krueger wrote
(in article ):
"Scott" wrote in message
On Jul 27, 4:48=A0am, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:
"Scott" wrote in message
On Jul 25, 2:49=3DA0pm, bob wrote:
Occasionally, during one of our long threads about
vinyl vs. digital,someone suggests the invention of a
"vinylizer," a knob that can dial in any amount of the
various distortions characteristic of vinyl playback.
Well, it isn't that simple yet, but technology finds a
way:
http://www.izotope.com/products/audio/vinyl/
Too bad this one completely missed the mark. It would be
a good idea if it were done right without the cyncism.
Maybe somebody who gets vinyl will make something that
will actually do the job.
What is "getting vinyl"?
Understanding the sonic aesthetic virtues that can be
found with vinyl.
The facts about vinyl in approximate order of importance
to most people:
Sorry you don't get to speak for most people.
Not only most but the vast majority of people have long since forgot about
vinyl. The RIAA market share data makes that quite clear.
Yet enough people DO value vinyl that records are still pressed and hundreds
of manufacturers still make turntables, some costing a small fortune,
Cartridges are still available at all price points from $20 on the low end to
tens of thousands on the high end with new ones being introduced all the
time. Not to mention a myriad of phono preamps available, again at all price
points, as well as recently introduced preamps and integrated amps that have
phono stages either built-in as standard or available as an option.
Again, rumors of vinyl's demise is greatly exaggerated.
Especially given your well documented prejudices on vinyl.
What prejudice of mine is that? Is it not true that my comments about vinyl
have been 100% factual, and backed by published, peer-reviewed technical
papers, statistical evidence from reliable industry sources and decades of
personal experience?
Your facts are not in question here. Your obvious and oft stated disdain for
vinyl is what gives away your prejudice.
This product misses the mark IMO.
But you don't say why in a detailed, convincing way. In fact, you've
presented no evidence that you've ever actually listened to it. Could it be
that your opinions of it are based only on prejudice?
I am speaking as an
audiophile who is interested in the aesthetic value of
sound
Given that you have presented no first hand information about the sound of
this product...
Wouldn't the fact that this "Vinylizer" introduces wow, flutter, tracking
distortion, ticks and pops automatically disqualify it from serious
consideration by ANY music lover? People who listen to vinyl, at least in my
considerable experience, still listen to it because of two distinct and
different reasons. One faction holds that LP sounds "better" than digital,
and the other faction sees LP as just another source of music (that's the
faction to which I, mostly, belong), like CD, FM radio, tape, downloads from
the internet, etc. Neither like warp wow, eccentric records, ticks or pops,
mis-tracking, Inner-groove distortion, or any of the other ills that can
plague vinyl playback, and most, if not all vinyl listeners strive to avoid
those things. The fact that this "Vinylizer seems to re-introduce these
unwanted artifacts to digital playback is missing the point. Now if it made
digital SOUND like a well recorded, well pressed vinyl record WITHOUT those
unwanted artifacts, then he'd have something.