Top Vinyl Record Myths Exposed 

Mastering difference's between the vinyl and CD version of the same track can be huge. I have the 7" single version of Stainsby Girls by Chris Rea (a great recording) and bought a CD compilation with the same track on it. The recordings sounded so different that at first I was convinced that the CD track was a poor re-recording, but on checking it wasn't. After that point I stopped replacing my vinyl with CD's !

Good video. Thank you! The only things I might add is that playing a stereo record, the stylus travels in a circular or oval pattern. Conventional mono, the stylus moves side to side. In an old, turn of the century hill and dale recording, the stylus moves only up and down. On the vinyl thickness issue, the thicker the vinyl is, I've found that more of the higher frequencies are dampened or absorbed. With a 200 gram record, the only way they can have the close to same frequency as an original LP is if they are 45 rpm. I found this out with Classic Records re-issues. The 180 gram LP is an all-around good weight for an LP. Some pressing plants discovered this years ago, like RTI, and stopped doing anything heavier than 180g. For years, QRP didn't take advantage of the experience of others, but has finally come around to the virtues of pressing nothing heavier than 180g. Besides, for some reason it is harder to press 200g records. Another lesson learned long ago by Classic Records, is if they wanted to put out a premium 200g LP, it was best to do them at 45 rpm and with those, they only pressed one side per record.

As far as the final myth about the remastering where it was not done properly (or even which ones were considered superior) I would love to see a list of some solid examples of such remasters and see if I have any to compare...

As someone who works in the audio field, can confirm your video is valid, and thank you for debunking silly myths!

This was a great video! Thanks for the great information! Some things I knew, but I always learn more from your videos. Cheers!

Brilliant, as always. Very much enjoy watching your content.

Great video and I think you’ve pretty much nailed it. When I tell people I’m into vinyl records, apart from wondering why I’m not sporting a nice cardigan, they all seem to think it’s because of the nice warm sound they make. The greatest tonal variations in hi-fi are introduced by the switch between kinetic energy and electrical energy. This is why speakers are so variable in their sound and, at the other end of the chain, the same applies to cartridges. The sound of records is not universally warm unless your cartridge is tuned with a rolled off top end. My first system used an Ortofon VMS20E cartridge which was in no way warm and fuzzy. 😂

What I never read in these types of discussions of digital vs analog and the variations in playback equipment is the status of the listener's hearing. I'll be 70 this year and have been listening to rock 'n' roll records and attending concerts for more than 50 years. I doubt that my ears can detect much of the differences under discussion. BTW I've kept all my vinyl but also have a large CD collection; I don't bother with the modern reissues of classic LPs. The originals suit me just fine.

Most of these are fine, but linear arms do not reduce IGD more than high end styli. As you say what causes distortion mainly is the distance per second decline towards the center which causes the waveforms to scrunch up more and become harder to track. High end styli will rectify this better than anything else. A linear arm with a conical stylus will still distort about the same as a pivoted arm.

MANYTHNX! what a great channel

It's ridiculous to assume that reissue records are all made from trotting out master tapes(which really aren't THE masters, but master dups) and going from there. If that were the case, we'd have run through/worn out the tape masters long ago. Properly engineered digital files will perfectly capture what was exactly on the master dup. Digital is a perfect medium for this. You only get into trouble with recording music to digital from a band and trying to make it sound like analog masters. But again, it just takes an engineer familiar with the analog realm to do it. Unfortunately, the trend today is LOUD and to hell with music dynamics. This has nothing to do with analog versus digital, but just mass consumerism.

Great video! Is there a source where one can check the quality of an old release and likewise the rerelease? For example, is it working me getting a 79’s copy of Exile on Mains Street or paying for the new release?

One vinyl myth I would add is the idea that 45rpm produces better sound than 33 1/3 rpm.

all myths are fair explained !

Myth 1: F1 format wasn't never meant to be used profesionally because of higher CRC errors at 16 bit resolution and it has no XLR inputs/outputs. F1 was for domestic or semi-professional use only. Therefore 1610 was used since 1980 (and later 1630), which wasn't used exclusively for CD mastering, it was used also for LPs as well. Also in 1980s it was cheaper to create new production master on a tape than on a 1610/1630 U-Matic cassette, unless the album was digitally recorded, mixed and mastered. Of course, F1 and 1610/1630 formats are playable to this day and there are many studios worldwide, which can transfer those tapes to files. As for labels, commercial CDs, or rather DDPs were used for reissues, but maybe around 2007 to 2012, when vinyl revival started, but not because they didn't care, but because it was easier, cheaper and faster to make vinyls (do you remember when those records cost around 12 to 15 Euros?). And when people complained about the sound quality, then they started to locate original masters and transfer them 1:1 to Hi-res formats and properly master them on vinyl by good mastering engineers.

What are your thoughts on the "Audio Technica LP120" silver turntable ❓Do you think it's a good turntable to purchase❓ Thanks.

I have always argued that we had 80 years of experience with analog and vinyl and got pretty good at it. It is even remarkable how good some recordings from the 50’s sound (Glenn Gould’s Goldberg Variations, for instance, or many great jazz recordings from that time.) To compare that to the early attempts at digital and cd releases is unfair.

I would like to hear if there today, 2022, is a big difference in the sound and quality between black vinyls and coloured vinyls. I like coloured vinyls and I know that in the earlier days, the coloured plastic ones were very questionable, but my belief is that the quality of today is much better and therefore not a big difference compared to regular black vinyls.. am I wrong?

I noticed most never talk about MP3 files. I HATE most MP3s. So many of them sacrifice quality for smaller files. Not all digital is equal. But then again this can come back to sample rates of any kind......

I think there is also a possible psychological affect that the heavier 180g records have on some listeners, as the feel of the record is much more substantial. In the same way that listeners can often believe the more expensive turntable or speakers they've purchased to replace their old system sound much better but in reality they might just be the same. But beauty is in the eye of the beholder and if it looks and sounds good to the listener then that is all that really matters.

I bought a vinyl box set of Bon Jovi albums and to listen to the records comfortably I need to turn all the bass off and turn the treble on full. The original pressings for the 80s sound fine without great adjustments

The conversion of digital signals to analog waves in an electrical circuit has never included a stair step wave, ever. New systems don't make smoother waves than old ones. They've always produced perfectly smooth waves at the electrical level. Vinyl does not record frequency vertically and volume horizontally, nor the other way around. It records frequency as . . . frequency. The higher pitch the sound is, the more and closer together the bumps on the vinyl. Frequency is recorded as more and closer or less and farther from peak to trough in the bumps. Volume, power, loudness is recorded as bigger bumps. Small shallow bumps are quiet and bigger more prominent bumps are loud. The groove in stereo vinyl is V shaped. Bumps on one side are the left channel and bumps on the other side are the right channel. The stylus actually moves in a nearly circular range. Neither vertical nor horizontal movement are tied to frequency or volume. Speed and distance of movement are what determine frequency and volume.

First off - I'm not a mastering engineer, but a vinyl enthusiast who has engineered and mixed music that made it to vinyl in a previous life. Great video Mark; my only issue is the topic of inner groove distortion is a little confused; the video deals singularly with tracking angle error, while not dealing with what happens when groove modulations become too small for a stylus to reliably track them. This is what the Shibata and Microridge designs are specifically addressing. I think there's been a slight misunderstanding here, and could explain the somewhat lukewarm reception towards smaller stylus profiles. If anything, I found the take on this a little... non specific, as if the source of info hasn't really been "too hands" on with a Namiki microridge equipped stylus (a good starting point is the Audio Technica VM95ML). I've been saying this since 2008, and I can't say this enough - that particular stylus profile makes a miraculous job of giving you clean sounding inner grooves, and reducing and/or eliminating sibilant distortion. So, certainly where microridge/Microline is concerned, not a myth. (Note I did not say" sibilance" - the word "sibilance" is often used incorrectly to describe sibilant distortion. If you are hearing sibilance without the distortion, you are good to go, as sibilance occurs naturally in vocals.)

Myth 4. One issue here is older vinyl's have a wider groove than modern pressed vnyl. So in many cases this will affect the playback sound.

Respectfully, Digital as it's best being done commercially today in it's supposed best forms has its own flaws or distortions as well.

I agree that 180g doesn't sound better than lighter vinyl. But I actually think 180g and 200g is more prone to warping than lighter records. The only dished or warped lps I have are on 180g or 200g

EMI's mastering engineers cut Beatles discs for British release much more conservatively than Capitol's folks did over in the States; Geoff Emerick & the other young staff who put the band to tape with George Martin at EMI's Abbey Road facility were envious of the gutsier Capitol sound.

I've never heard any of these myths. But I also lived in the age when A: everyone knew how to use records, and B: fidelity was important to consumers. It wouldn't surprise me to learn that these are all misconceptions of the mall-record-store vinyl revival generation. By the way, about #9, it's always been true, even before CDs existed, that a sampled wave carries 100% of the frequency information up to the Nyquist frequency. The stair steps don't exist IRL because the frequency range of the D/A converter is finite.

Playback equipment is a huge part of the equation. a really nice cartridge properly installed on a high quality turntable is the key

what model its that technics?

Great video busting so many of these aggravating myths wide open - particularly that digitally mastered vinyl is "pointless", "only a CD cut to vinyl" and a "waste of time", as so many of these militant AAA snobs will insist. In fact, I even see a few closed-minded individuals commenting below who apparently learned NOTHING from this vid, and thus continue to swear by that cute little myth as though it's the Gospel truth! Oh, well. To each their own. For as the saying goes, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink!

Correct -A PRIME EXAMPLE is Atlantic Zed Zepplin 1 Orig Recording done by Page & Friend - Horrific Recording-Zep 2 onward where good with proper engineers

Digital steps would ever be present whatever the sampling rate you use, however it's not important as there is a digital filter which cover this! Some audiophile sound card however remove that filter, because 99% of the dac are not true digital, but digital + filtering, the sound of those dac is way more faithful to digital, and of course without filtering the more you sample the less you would here aliasing/distortion! If analog sounds better is because analog don't require brain computing of the signal, whereas digital with or without filtering, does! So in short when listening to digital your brain does one more thing while listening analog it just listen, that's why is analog support more relaxing and more engaging! Remember that the brains already do a lot of task, so the less you add to it when using senses, the more it can concentrate on the content of those senses! Furthermore digital add quantization errors, processing, convention error, filtering error, well so many error that you can't imagine, as well as the less you sample, the more you filter, and of course the digital filter has it's own error whose are added to the whole thing! A well known fact is that the more you sample the best is the filter and the most important the less you need it, a perfect digital signal is a dac without a filter, which does not produce errors, however the required sample rate for that is beyond your imagination! In summary a 44Khz signal require so much filtering that the end result require too much brain compensation (also know as the aliasing/distortion disease) to really enjoy the content! I know it's difficult to learn, but there is a simple test that you can do to verify the fact (not recommended for people used to lowfi digital), however i let you discover it by yourself!

Blink FFS xD

Processing always leave a trace or veil on the music ...............just like proceesd food , it never has the same tadte as the real thing !

180g vinyl is thicker which changes the VTA.

Keep the analog chain intact and avoid most of these "myths".

you don´t make sense or have been fooled ,one of the best sounding records live is from late 80´s or 1990 ,Dream Syndicate live at the rajii´s, i bought the doble Lp and couldn´t believe how good the guitars ,six string one´s sounded also the bass and the drums and the levels of each in volume this with the voice ,it says in the back "directelly recorded into DAT "it´s a recording machine with cassettes but digital recording ,also have a studio at home assembled in 1971 and improved through the years so i bought the cd because i don´t like all songs from this band but the ones i like are perfect and in the cd had two more songs that were not in the record being one of them played by others a cover from Peter Frampton "that´s what you always say" . Having a very good cd player ,it´s still for sale today and it costs 35.000€ off course i didn´t pay not even half from CEC or chuodenki, the cd sound is horrible ,i still listen to lp records because the cd is a bad sounding format ,not all but most of all ,if the music is rock or analog instruments are in use all bands you know from the 90´s all process of recording was analog the tables ,analog ones are far superior to digital ones, check it, when one owns a studio money don´t fall from the sky and if one can get better sound using what already exists at home ,great, having worked with music in general for 50 years ,i know what is wrong ,mainly the cd format with more than 40 years since it was developed ,the reason why other format isn´t available being better than records is only MONEY ,since 93 i bought maybe 8 records some sound amazing others don´t but at least isn´t the fake sound of a cd and i own thousands, and i do own several recorders the tape is larger and recorded in hi-fi stereo but every studio with millions using old recorders when they receive new ones for free, it´s other pointless myth, why should digital mixing and mastering in digital passed into a record is pointless no other format to show that quality, been foled the myths you talk about make no sense at least 70% of them ,nothing against you ,only mislead, also my turntables never caused a stylus to go against the groove they are perfectelly aligned ,i can do it by hear the stylus passes right in the center of the groove (only a litle point),if those new turntables do that don´t buy them most are only garbage,needles have less than a third of their size originally normally almost 3.000 hours ,now tell how many hours they say it can be used the record is round but the needle is not travelling with the record, it reads in one point ,when they discover again tangential record player with would be a revolution or direct drive with quartz engines, they do tend to change a micro second of the speed if with heavy use for almost 60 years like i own some old garrard and thorens record players, and they do work after serving in a radio station i started, the sound of records if one uses a good amplifier and speakers is complete almost like the band is playing in your house with cd it comes from that or that side pointing to two speakers, no one heard records in the 60´s ,70´s ,80´s or 90´s the sound was full with a cd player the sound is empty

I think none of this matters, given that today's vinyl mass-production is now giving us mispressed, heavily scratched, contaminated, warped and off-centre new vinyl by the batchload. :0/

11:18 #9, nonsense. A 44.1khz sampling rate years ago and a 44.1khz sampling rate today is still a 44.1khz sampling rate. What magic is going on today to make the exact same sampling rate better? Yes, ADC and DAC tech. is better today, but a 44.1khz sampling rate is just that, a 44.1khz sampling rate. I enjoy listening to some of the CD's I own but they are never my 1st choice in terms of audio quality.

I have mixed vinyl dj sets for about 30 years, and it’s my opinion that 12” records speed up a tiny bit once they get closer towards the center. It’s common I pitch back just a bit. I’m sure if I was an audiophile, this would change if I used one of those weights that they put on the platter.

My rule rough of thumb…if it was originally recorded and mastered in analogue good quality vinyl can sound best. If it’s recorded or mastered digitally a DAC or streamer sounds best. I’ve found digitally recorded or mastered content transferred to vinyl provides the worst of all worlds. There are of course exceptions. I’m fortunate to have a nice hifi system/high quality turntable/DAC/streamer. Some of the new high quality analogue remastered vinyl can be spell binding, for example check out Nina Simone, Little Girl Blue, 45rpm from analog productions. As a recent test to the theory I bought Abbey Road’s carefully remastered vinyl version of Brothers in Arms which is from the original digital master tape. I also have a vinyl copy from when it first launched. In either case digital playback via the streamer is preferable to either vinyl copy.

Picture discs sound is terrible? Not always. Singles can be but my 1980s Beatles singles picture discs sound great. What about albums picture discs? Well playback on my my Beatles oldies but goodies picture disc sounds amazing. So there's another myth for y'all 🤗

Is it true that Vinyl sounds better than a CD? Is there any scientific proof to this?

True or false? Colored vinyl records don’t sound as good as black vinyl records. T or F?

😈 P R O M O S M.

Recording Engineer-Mastering Lab-Pressing Plant all must be Perfect otherwise Crap Recordings is the Short Answere-My Collection starts in the 40s & ended in the Middle 90s Mostly Jazz & Rock / Classical all changed over to CDs Big difference as above Quality is followed D.G. are terrible both Vinyl & cd much overrated over the years

I try never to buy a remastered album unless the original analog master was used. Stuff mastered from a digital source is a waste of time. Also I've never seen a paper sleeve scratch a record, including records I've had for fifty years, where did this start?

Put your thumb directly onto the middle of your Stone Roses record 🤦🏻‍♂️

Lots of appeal to authority without knowing what the fresh fuck you're talking about for most of the runtime, and basically every "myth" you debunk is a complete strawman bastardisation of an issue people actually have with the format. I don't care WHY a CD has been used as a source, I'm sure it's the best that was available for them. My issue is that there's then literally zero point in pressing that record when you can just buy the source CD that already exists and will sound objectively better. I don't care if a record can still sound good sourced from a digital mix and master, I care about the fact that I'm being sold a record which is actively degrading the quality of a digital master when I could just be sold a CD, SACD or DVD-A that retains far more of the information, for less money. You did a very nice job reading from articles into a camera though.

but new records, most of them are garbage as new turntables as the price of a good cartridge

2:41 "Vinyl records are pointless if the mixing and mastering is digital" Wrong, vinyl records are pointless. Period.

A lot of this is bs.