The fact that CD sales are behind vinyl is a sign that the world has gone mad.

Not really. It's a sign that Vinyl has turned into a symbol of support for the creative ideals of musicians and romance for a bygone era, while CDs, superior as they are (except in the case of records in good repair being played on high quality turntables), are "just" things that hold digital music. They sold in insane numbers because they were the standard format until streaming truly took over. Sure, Vinyl sales are up to 40 million or so in the US, but the bigger thing is that the 37 million CD sales are down from almost a billion in each of 1999 and 2000.

You're mistakenly thinking people are buying vinyl records for sound quality, and there may be a few misguided people out there, but the vast majority aren't.

For many it's about simply supporting their favourite artists, and getting a cool item to enjoy. I'd say most vinyl record gatefolds often have a load of extra interesting stuff going on compared to a CD jewel case release. It also lends itself to forcing you to be more deliberate about listening, you need to pay attention to flip the record, you need to physically interact with the thing—I imagine the majority that still buy CDs end up just ripping them to another device and then basically never open the case again. Which I'd say encourages entirely different kinds of listening experience. Neither are invalid ways to engage with an album.

I guess that leads onto the other thing to point out, which is most of the modern records I buy come with a code to download FLACs of the album, sometimes even at higher quality (24-bit/96khz) than a CD release (16-bit/44.1khz). This is also more convenient for increasing numbers of people that simply don't have a way to play CDs at all any more, let alone on a hi-fi or something.

I'll agree though that most people are listening with mediocre equipment. But FWIW, there are fantastic quality "ear bud" style IEMs out there (I like Shure's range) that'll blow a lot of non-professional headphones out the water.

Foreword: I only stream my music, from FLAC preferably. I don't own vynils but mostly i don't own CD's anymore either.

CD is dead and should be dead. Rip it and stream it, full stop. No need or reason to keep a degrading digital format when you can just rip it (full quality and store as FLAC) and stream it. That's the whole point.

Vynil instead gives you the experience of listening, with all the associated crap/fun depending on your POV.

So while there is a case for vynil today, but I don't share it, there is zero case for CDs. Just download the bits. Don't waste plastic and shit with a polluting and degrading medium that make no sense today that downloading a full quality uncompressed audio file takes seconds.

My amplifier has all the streaming services available and some of them like Tidal stream at higher bitrates than a CD. CD's are obsolete these days, I don't know anyone who still has a CD player. So obviously sales decline.

Vinyl on the other hand is an (analog) experience by itself. In my experience there is nothing like crate digging for unique samples at the local record shops, sampling them with my AKAI S-1100, the warm dynamic sound of it, the noise floor bringing harmonic distortion, the ticks and cracks that add to the groove.

You're making multiple arguments here and trying to wrap them up into one.

CDs are in every way better than vinyl records. They are smaller, much higher quality audio, lower noise floor and don’t wear out by being played.

Most of these aren't universal positives for most people.

Economy of space is not a big concern for me when it comes to physical media. Playing physical media is a ritual more than anything for most folks, and I want to hold that giant 13"x13" cardboard sleeve in my hands while listening to the music, not toss around a little plastic jewelcase.

On audio quality: that has been debated on audiophile forums for decades now and the most political conclusion to it is that: music sounds best on the format it was mastered for. Not all music was (properly) mastered for digital.

The bit about LPs "wearing out" is overstated to say the least and 99/100 times, that degradation comes from poor setups. Other than that, you're kind of just describing a alluring fault of analog media. The fact that a piece of plastic can change with you over time as you listen to it, at the exact pace you set it to and in an environment you create, humanizes it and helps build a connection in a way that files on a computer don't really do. Let's not act like disc rot isn't a thing, either.

The fact you can rip and stream your own CD media is fantastic because generally remasters are not good

Funny, because CDs were one of the first examples of shitty remasters in the 90s. You can also rip LPs with minimal effort, too.

streaming services typically only have remastered versions, not originals. You have no control on streaming services about what version of an album you’re served or whether it’ll still be there tomorrow. Not an issue with physical media

None of this supports "CDs are better than vinyl records."

On the rest of your post, none of that really supports CD > Vinyl, either. If you're talking about how people interact with their music and the equipment they do it through, there's far more support for analog setups than CD.

With analog, you can actually make real, physical, adjustments to the audio output. On digital, you're effectively just messing with a bunch of 1s and 0s inside a computer. The whole process is much less authentic.

👊🎤

This is 100% correct, but I don't think most people buy vinyls because of the audio quality. I own plenty of vinyls, but I know for a fact that my CDs and even higher bitrate FLACs stomp all over it for audio quality. Records are just kind of fun and nostalgic.

Some of my 25+ year old cd’s appear to have started “rotting” inside and playback has been compromised / ruined in many cases.

I mean, if we're just talking high bitrate digital audio then yeah, convenience and sound wise digital beats the pants off of analog any day. CDs in particular though? Nah. Gimme that solid state no moving parts convenience I get from packing 50GB of flac, aac or vorbis rips onto my phone and a Chromecast audio to plug into my sound system.

Kind of late to the party here, but I'm going to offer my take anyway.

You're right, and you're wrong. CDs are better than vinyl records in terms of sound quality, but CDs are absolutely pointless. Instead of a CD, go to Bandcamp, send some money to your favorite artist, and download the audio files in FLAC format. You own the media (albeit digitally) and it can never be taken away from you as you make sure it's saved to a safe location. You may even be getting better quality audio than you would on a CD.

On the other hand, while I recognize that CDs are better quality, I am an avid collector of vinyl records, at least for a few specific genres. I've spent thousands of dollars on my HiFi setup, built my own tube amplifier, and I can say as a point of pride that there are absolutely no solid-state components in the signal path between the record and my speakers. While owning your own media makes sense in the era of streaming, owning physical media is in no way practical, but it's just fun. When I want to listen to a record, it's an event. I'll remove the record from its sleeve, maybe take it over to my record cleaner if it's a bit dusty or has some static charge. At the same time, I've just switched on my isolation transformer, and the tubes in my preamp and power amp are warming up. Then I'll place the record on the turntable, start the motor, drop the needle, and sit back in my recliner to enjoy the music.

If I'm sitting at my desk working, I'll put on some bluetooth headphones and play some music from my phone. But I'm not listening to music, I'm working and putting on music to pass the time, help get me motivated, whatever. If I want to listen to music solely for the joy of listening to music, I'm going to play a record.

Have you not heard of FLAC? You can get files at higher bit rates and sampling frequencies than CDs. That being said I much prefer vinyl collecting. No it doesn't always sound the best but I feel more in touch with the album. No ability to skip tracks, having to flip it over or change disks is more engaging than just pressing play.

Lol

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loudness_war

I'm doing my part!

I can easily get equal or higher quality than CDs online.

I'd rather support artists by buying a nice vinyl so I can appreciate the artwork.

I listen to 128.kb mp3's on my phone speaker.

Did you just wake up from a coma that started in 1985?

CDs are better than vinyl for every reason that MP3s are better than CDs. That’s not news to anyone.

Vinyl is not “better” by any of the metrics you mentioned, but I prefer it because if I feel like buying a physical medium for the purpose of collecting music, I want my music to actually be physical. I don’t want a collection that boils down to 1s and 0s, I want one that more closely replicates the original source of the music.

That’s the reason I like vinyl, even if I do listen to digital music far far more.

If I'm going to listen to digital music, it may out may not come from a CD. Vinyl provides a different experience that digital provides. CD's are just a way to distribute digital content.

Yes, but vinyl is fun.

CDs are boring.

When I'm buying vinyl, I'm not buying it to listen to - I'm buying it cos I want to support the band or want a souvenir from a concert. I own a few dozen albums, none of which have been played more than a handful of times; if I want to listen to one of them I'll stream it, either from a paid service or off my own machine using versions ripped from elsewhere

The fact that CD sales are behind vinyl is a sign that the world has gone mad.

I mean... CD sales are only behind vinyl because vinyl has become collectible, while CDs offer no practical advantage over stored files on a hard drive or high-quality streaming.

And before you say, "but what about compression?", the fact is that even lossy compression is good enough that most audiophiles can't tell the difference. Audiophile publications started doing blind comparisons back in the 90s, and it quickly became clear that somewhere around 192kbps MP3 the ability of humans to statistically discern the compressed vs. uncompressed versions started to disappear.

I'd say nostalgia is a big factor in what keeps technically inferior sound quality in the market

I think most vinyl purchasers nowadays buy it for the novelty and as collectibles rather than quality. The ones who would die on a hill arguing that vinyl is superior quality are a minority. As for the second point, a lot of people can’t afford high quality audio gear, and some are not tech literate enough to know that Beats by Dre are cheap junk on the inside.

However, you also have to remember that music nowadays is mixed with the lowest common denominator in mind, which is cheap audio gear. Competent sound engineers know to make sure to test that their mixes also sound good on mid-low tier audio gear, which is the vast majority in the market. Unless you’re Christopher Nolan who insists mixing his movies for high tier cinema equipment only when most people will watch them on a tv and maybe with a soundbar, so it sounds terrible.

People who listen to vinyl enjoy the sounds of distortion and static. It's a much "warmer" sound, they claim. They are buffoons. Lossless audio files are the best way to ensure a quality, clean audio source.

Yes and you can get all your calories and nutrients from a processed paste, that's much more dense than regular food so you don't need to eat as much and can fit into a small tube so is much more convenient than regular food.

The fact people prefer normal food to Hugh density nutrition paste is proof the world has gone mad.