Vinyl/tape wear degradation vs. digital

oldcootstereo

Not wanting to be accused of dragging the "Vinyl Bargain or ripoff" thread too far OT...

The "thing" about vinyl and tape is that there is physical contact between the storage medium and the sensors.  Some tout this as an advantage for vinyl, but this means incremental wear to both the medium and the sensor (record/play/erase heads, phono stylus/cartridge), which must be replaced to maintain original fidelity.  With vinyl, the intention is to minimize damage to the fragile medium, the stylus (and cartridge) being the mechanical wear items.  Consumer-level tape is the opposite, where the tape is intended to wear and be replaced relatively inexpensively, with minimal wear to the heads.  But both records and heads wear out eventually. Obviously higher quality vinyl pressings will last longer, but then the cost goes up.  

Back in the day, my albums were bought new and played the first time to record to cassettes.  The cassettes were used for day-to-day listening, with the vinyl only used when in a serious listening mood or to re-record to replace a worn-out cassette.  

Plus consider all the rest of the precision/complicated mechanisms required to engage/drive the record/tape past the stylus/head and correctly align them relative to the medium.  Rube Goldberg would be proud of the mechanisms/switching in hifi cassette decks. Higher performance tape oxides tend to be more abrasive, so head wear is accelerated.  Vinyl fidelity requires a certain mass/anti-skate force be applied to keep the stylus tracking properly, so it is an endless battle between better fidelity and increased wear.  

Digital eliminates all that, a digital file is not damaged or used up by repeated plays.  Lossless digital has become increasingly practical with cheaper/large-capacity/miniaturized storage and ever-increasing cpu cycles. This trend will continue to improve digital quality and accessibility in the future.  Vinyl and tape have been at their best practically possible quality/wear characteristics for decades, often employing electronic noise-reduction (NR) management (Dolby, etc.) to get the "best' from the format.  Ya, a handful of well-heeled or very devoted vinyl/tape audiophiles may be able to avoid all electronic NR processing, but for the budget-conscious hobbyist it is a necessary evil.  Do I dare mention digital NR or equalization for vinyl/tape?

I think one of the major benefits of buying new pre/amps and speakers over older analog-source-designed gear is that they are being designed to best accommodate the digital "sound".  Just like amps/speakers were designed to get the best sound from the record/tape characteristics of the day.  Now we are seeing amps/speakers that get the best out of the extended highs and lows that digital easily delivers without being harsh or oppressive.  A similar design shift took place on the move from shellac to vinyl, where sonic as well as the stylus/cartridge/mass parameters significantly changed.  Then from mono to stereo, it wasn't as simple as twinning the amps and placing the speakers in opposite corners of the room.  I'll even stir the tube/semiconductor beehive... tube amps didn't emphasize the worst characteristics of the shellac/vinyl of the day, whereas early semiconductor amps did tend to significantly emphasize those flaws.  

Digital audio will continue to improve in quality and accessibility, even the current crop is light-years ahead of the first CD and MP3 tech. Full analog vinyl and tape gear/systems may improve a bit going forward, but the wear issue will never go away unless some improved and reasonable expense materials are found to eliminate record/stylus and tape/head degradation.

BlueWizard

"The LP (from "long playing"[1] or "long play") is an analog sound storage medium, a vinyl record format characterized by a speed of 33 1⁄3 rpm, a 12- or 10-inch (30- or 25-cm) diameter, and use of the "microgroove" groove specification. Introduced by Columbia in 1948, it was soon adopted as a new standard by the entire record industry."

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                LP record - Wikipedia                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        en.wikipedia.org                                                                               
In 1948, you really didn't have many choices. It was grooves cut into vinyl/shellac or nothing. And that remained true up until the invention of Digital Music in the form of the CD in 1980.

But that means there are countless millions of vinyl albums out there, representing a very substantial investment to those who have collected Vinyl over the years, in fact, even for a modest collector, we are talking thousands of Pounds. Should I throw all that away?

Yes, vinyl and tape are subject to wear, but I have albums that are decades old that still sound fine. The trick is to keep them clean and play them on decent equipment. So, the wear is not really that much in the grand scheme of things. Definitely there, but not that significant for most people.

And given that there is something of a nostalgia for vinyl and new issues are being released, for those interested, there is still justification of continue to buy and listen to vinyl.

But no one is forcing you to collect and play vinyl. Clearly CD/Digital has some advantages, and in other ways perhaps less than ideal. But equally no one is forcing anyone to play CDs or other Digital Formats. Each is allowed to choose for himself, and if I happen to choose Vinyl, your life is in not way deminished because of that choice ...so... don't worry about it.

All formats have some place in a modern Music System. I choose Vinyl because I have been buying and playing vinyl for decades, and see no reason to throw those Thousands of Pounds away, or to pay again, to have that same music on CD? But at the same time, I do have new music on CD, and on occasion I Stream music. It is absurd to think that you are only allowed one and only one format in your system. Follow your interest, and within a context, all forms and formats are valid in a modern music system.

So in my opinion, this is a pointless discussion to have - Play what you have - Play what you want - and others who make different decisions are not diminished because of your/my choices.

But then ... that's just my opinion.

Steve/bluewizard

dannnielll

Hi Steve.. no disagreement there at all. However, my suggestion is that if someone has a substantial investment in analogue music , they can potentially ensure its long survival by digitising it. Then when it is digitised, it is suitable for curating, the vinyl gains a much longer lifetime. The argument about limited bandwidth etc on CD, which I don't really subscribe to can be eliminated by digitising to 24 bit 96k or 24bit  192k..which is way beyond anything that MQA will claim.

oldcootstereo

I'm not advocating "forcing" anyone to be on either side of the analog/digital divide... a divide which is rapidly disappearing as the industry adopts digital from the studio to the living room.  Finding full analog recordings will only get harder over time... does anyone do direct-to-disk master recording anymore?  Time and tide wait for no human.  

It IS instructive to those (re)entering the vinyl scene to understand the basic realities of contact-media, which us old-timers take for granted.  The myth that vinyl always sounds "better" than digital and even is the epitome of home sound reproduction is demonstrably untrue.  Those who promote this should be confronted as often as the claim is made.  Certainly vinyl can be very good, even excellent, but the cost and effort to achieve that level is far greater than vinyl promoters let on.  

I get that vinyl promoters are trying to increase the market, so more titles will be (re)pressed at reasonable quality/price.  I remember the RSO re-presses and they SUCKED, the records were thin, easily warped/damaged and the grooves were visibly shallower. The sound suffered to the point those represses, no matter how cheap, were not good value.  Hopefully modern represses are better.  

I fear this latest resurgence at best will be a brief reprieve, especially as digital and the systems to record/play it through continue to improve as has been seen.  Knowing that, many novice vinyl adoptees may soon look at the cash they spent getting vinyl gear/records and wish they had simply bought better amps/speakers and lossless media.  A decent-quality smart phone can be the only device needed to provide a lossless source for a home stereo.  I use my old iMac to feed my stereo.  Wifi makes this strategy even more convenient.  My nearly-30-year-old kids have TVs/game-consoles/computers but no dedicated stereo gear.  They like to listen to mine when they visit, but have no plans to spend on digital-sourced stereo hifi, let alone vinyl.

Sure decades-old, meticulously cleaned/stored records might sound "fine", but at what point do they begin to lose the unprocessed, finer, warmer sonic texture that is the reported major advantage of vinyl over digital? Impossible to tell, as the changes are so slight but accumulate and accelerate with use. Newbies need to understand contact media is not a buy-once proposition in the same way as digital media usually is.  CDs do eventually break down, but digital files do not in normal circumstances.  

I was an early adopter for what was considered good quality vinyl listening against the overwhelming backdrop of so many crappy Gerrard record changers and ceramic cartridges.  I bought new (and still have) a late 1960's Thorens TD-150 I later fitted with the 160 arm, Shure V15-III then later a MicroAcoustics 2002a cartridge.  Ya, no where near the top audiophile pile even back then, but WAY better than most consumer stereo available at the time.  The cost/effort to refurb/upgrade my vintage vinyl gear and then find/buy new records will get me a lot of lossless digital files.  Which I purchase at a mouse-click.  

So I'm not coming at this as someone who hates vinyl or even tape, but I can't see how pure analog can compete with lossless digital going forward, except as a very small sub-niche of the larger hifi stereo niche market.   

To rejig an old racing aphorism, "Quality sound reproduction costs money, how much can you afford to hear?"

dannnielll

Very well put.. my sentiments exactly. In my case the record deck in the mid 1970s was a Garrard 86. ,With  some Shure cartridge . Later I played with cassettes, and earlier with the reel to reel ,but when Phillips produced a CD player,  and the pristine clarity,I never went back. We had rumble filters on amplifiers for a reason.
I have absolutely no problem with anyone enjoying Vinyl or whatever .. ( that sounds kinda  sleazy) , it is just the inherent dishonesty of claiming that it is the gold standard

gibbsy

I had a Garrard deck as well. I feel aggrieved now.

That got changed for a Technics set up, my last 'tidy' deck. Early 1990s saw me buy my first CD player, more for the wife as it was far easier for her to listen to CDs than mess around with vinyl when she was busy working from home. Pointless then buying vinyl and CDs of the same album and eventually I even ended up buying CDs to replace vinyl titles.

I'm still using CDs that I bought then. I have a couple of hundred vinyl albums locked away in the attic and they haven't seen the light of day since the last century. Now, with surround sound and all that extra power and processing that requires I simply don't have the room for a deck anymore.

Is it better than vinyl or the other way around. Does it matter as long as we all enjoy our music. I do have to agree with the OP that the simple physics of dragging a diamond tipped projectile across a large piece of plastic has to be detrimental to that bit of plastic and as such it can never be kept in pristine condition.

Digital reproduction is getting better, I'm absolutely blown away by the quality of the audio from my new Denon SACD player. Even highly compressed albums on redbook is beginning to sound better. Perhaps the biggest complaint should not be about on what type of media that we listen on but direct our ire on those artists and studios that think louder is better. Crap in, crap out.

musicphil

Unless we spend a few quid on a SACD player and its expense medium, then digital (cd) is really a compressed medium. Vinyl is not compressed youll hear the lot.
Never really listened to tape at home except taping for the car - I always used the vinyl for listening at home back then..... Linn LP12 IItok arm and AT 9 MC cartridge and it did sound very nice.
For all the problems of using vinyl, there is something about the feel about it, the art work and reading lyrics etc.
Some vinyl still sounds fresh today 30 years later eg John Lee Hooker the Healer is fantastic using my vinyl, but abit dull when i play the cd version.
I use both mediums but i still have a preference.....

gibbsy

Is that really true with the titles that are appearing in supermarkets. Many come from the same mix as the CDs and are victims of the loudness war. If you want the very best recordings then you are really relying on firms like MoFi and those 180g albums are just as expensive as the SACD version.

musicphil

Yes that is very true regarding newer vinyl that is not produced from analogue master tapes.
i was really advocating older vinyl, hence my comment regarding the Healer album.
Those that wish to still buy new vinyl need to stay away from albums produced from digital media, or just by the CD version!
180g vinyl in the supermarkets are really just a marketing gimmick....just my opinion!
There are fantastic new albums out there but at a cost.....

larkone