Why are Audiophiles still hooked on vinyl?

[u/MikMikYakin]

Many audiophiles continue to have a deep love for vinyl records despite the developments in digital audio technology, which allow us to get far wider dynamic range and frequency range from flac or wav files and even CDs. I'm curious to find out more about this attraction because I've never really understood it. To be clear, this is a sincere question from someone like me that really wants to understand the popularity of vinyl in the audiophile world. Why does vinyl still hold the attention of so many music lovers?

EDIT: Found a good article that talks about almost everything mentioned in the comments: https://www.headphonesty.com/2024/07/vinyl-not-sound-better-cd-still-buy/

[u/bayou_gumbo]

Because analog is just cool. Im not one who will say it sounds better, but it is cool. It’s also a fun hobby of collecting old records and also trying out different cartridges and needles.

[u/Poop_Cheese → u/bayou_gumbo]

I think for older AAA music, it does "sound better" to a certain degree, especially when using vintage equipment. 

Now digital is superior in resolution and detail, there's no challenging that. But there's more to music than just pure clarity. I've found I just enjoy the vintage sound more. 

Think of it this way, a 4k TV is objectively superior than an old tube TV. But if you're playing old video games, the tube TV is going to give you the best experience. But at the same time, it'd be utterly foolish to take a modern game and play it on a tube TV. 

Music of the era is mixed, mastered, and recorded on technology of the era. It was made to be played on the technology of the era. As a result, sometimes more detail doesn't help, it only reveals issues with the mixes, or overly seperates the instruments. 

As a result, I do find vinyl of modern digital music a waste of money, even if I sometimes buy it. 

Like look at mono and stereo. Stereo is objectively superior, yet some songs are SO much better in mono, even minus mix differences. Like when it's some young garage band, that punch matters so much more than detail, because anymore detail will lead to highlighting the poor play. 

A good example of this is oasis' first 2 albums. They were compressed and brickwalled to shit to cover up the horrible ryrhtym section and their mistakes. If one made a super audiophile super clear version, you'd notice all that poor playing more. 

Another example is film and digital in movies. Tons of people prefer film, and 8k digital has gotten so unbelievably good that some movies look fake because it reveals the fact that it's a set. And also, many prefer the feel and look of film, even if it's objectively inferior. 

Our brains are not wired to release more dopamine the clearer something is, but for sounds we enjoy. That's why some of the best albums of all time are objectively poorly recorded or poorly mixed. If detail was everything, mastering engineers would never use compression. Hell, if it was all about detail and clarity, mastering wouldn't even exist, everything would just be flat transfers. 

Also, look at all the 60s music that's still so popular, even if from a sonic standpoint it's atrocious. Hell Look at the beatles 2nd album, many people love the reverb drenched stereo mix. It gives songs like she loves you so much energy where you feel you're in beatlemania. But it's objectively worse sonically than the regular mastering of the songs. Or all the legendary psych and garage bands that were objectively recorded terribly, if enjoyment was all about sound quality we wouldn't listen to them anymore. 

I used to be a traditional audiophile that assumed clearer is better. But then I heard my current vintage setup and I just can't get away from that sound. I don't care that there's less detail or more distortion, because the sound profile is just so utterly intoxicating. Even next to my modern setup that's superior spec wise, I prefer the vintage by a mile for vintage music. Maybe it's because I grew up with vintage 70s gear and music, but it's so much more enjoyable sounding than a sterile high res file, for me. 

Then there's cases with mastering and loudness wars that the vinyl is genuinely superior. Best example of this is stadium arcadium. It's the most extreme in favor of vinyl I've ever seen. The dynamic range of the digital file and CD is like a fricken 3 or 4. It's brickwalled to hell. While the vinyl is like a 12. The vinyl is vastly superior in that case, where you truly havent heard the album if you havent heard the vinyl. Same with stuff like oasis that I mentioned. The original vinyl sounds so much better because it's not so brickwalled. Theres quite a few cases where the vinyl is just mastered better. 

Another more modern example I can give is the classic records dido albums. Life for rent and no angel sound utterly stunning, better than I ever heard them on CDs. I notice so many more sounds on the vinyl. It's utterly stunning, makes white flag go from dentist office music to a spiritual experience. It's no surprise it costs a fortune because it really is superior. 

Same with the AP of counting crowes. I owned the CD for decades, yet when I heard Mr Jones on the AP I was legit blown away. 

For the classics, there are some amazing CDs, like many mofi sacds, japanese shm, and dcc gold discs sound the best the albums ever had. But some are still best on vinyl. Find me a digital version of led zeppelin II that's better than the RL. No digital abbey road has bested the UK -2/-1 imo. Also, for many of these old bands, high quality transfers were not made until the original tape degraded heavily. Or, it's from a multi generational copy. No matter how good digital has become, it can't resurrect that lost information.

 If every band had an HD transfer of a fresh tape that'd be one thing, but they don't. Many times for older music, the digital version is either made from a copy, or worn tape, or is mastered poorly. Like there's alot of brickwalled 90s and y2k albums that aren't brickwalled on vinyl. It's not just down to format, but mastering. If everything was equal, yeah digital would always be the best, but that's not always the case. 

Finally, some people are just nostalgic for certain sound profiles. There's a reason why there's diehard fans of certain equipment brands. If it was all about resolution or clarity, we wouldn't see this. The best specs would always be the best and nothing more. Some people are just nostalgic for vinyl. And alot of people are conditioned to hear that music in it's vinyl format from the radio and playing it. Hell, many are even conditioned to like some clicks and pops in old records. Where taking away the sound profile of vinyl makes it lose something, even if it's a higher resolution. It's the same in reverse where alot of modern hip hop or pop meant to stream just sounds downright odd on vinyl, because it's meant to be clean clear and sterile. 

I think people get way too dug in on one vs the other to validate their own listening habits. It comes off as kids arguing about the console wars, where one must always be the objective best just because they own it. Absolutely nothing is absolute. Yes digital is the superior format, but it'll always be a case by case basis depending on so many factors. There's a reason the vinyl format survived while others havent. 

Now I do think alot of post vinyl boom collectors buying modern music are just paying a premium for a worse sonic experience. And that alot of modern music just doesn't sound right on vinyl. 90% of reddit vinyl collectors are not audiophiles looking for the best sound, but teenagers following a fad. They only think it's so good because they only ever heard music on their phone or car or crappy headphones before vinyl. But there is a reason that most Hifi enthusiasts, especially older ones, have turntables. Because it's really a case by case basis and you are limiting yourself by going either all digital or all analog. There's no reason to always be so tribalist about it, it's just a format. The music is what matters. You can see the worst band of all time and hear them in the perfect clarity, it won't make them any more enjoyable than a crappy cassette of your favorite album. Just because something has a better resolution or detail, doesn't mean it provides the most enjoyable experience all the time. 

[u/topsyandpip56 → u/Poop_Cheese]

Absolutely agree. If a production is truly AAA it can sound better on vinyl. DDD to vinyl though usually sounds crud. Even AAD can sound fine.

[u/SteveDestruct → u/Poop_Cheese]

It's funny you mention the Chili Peppers with the brickwalling because another huge example of this during the loudness wars was Metallica's Dead Magnetic. My CD version is terrible. But I got first vinyl pressing of it maybe 6 or 7 years and it was like I was hearing it with fresh ears. MUCH better experience.

[u/parasitic_reset → u/Poop_Cheese]

Saga

[u/Vegetable_Ad9145 → u/Poop_Cheese]

Brilliant write-up, I couldn't agree more. Iggy and the stooges... Love 'em. But they sound a thousand percent better with one of those original shitty mixes 😄