Grex Music2 Conference

Item 14: |\| | |/| VINYL

Entered by toking on Thu Dec 19 19:03:57 1996:

does anyone know where I can get some NIN on vinyl....
I'm desperate!!!
82 responses total.

#1 of 82 by snow on Sun Dec 22 21:48:56 1996:

sorry....no clue.


#2 of 82 by cyberpnk on Tue Dec 31 02:16:31 1996:

Your favorite music store can't special order it for you??


#3 of 82 by freedom on Sat Jan 4 01:14:09 1997:

Hmmmm, I am pretty sure that several of the music stores around here DID have
NIN on vinyl...I'll check next time I'm in one...it's the smaller stores like
the ones on our OSU campus, etc...


#4 of 82 by scott on Sat Jan 4 01:27:50 1997:

If you are nuts enough to try, you might also be able to roll your own.  I
don't know about supplies, but it used to (okay, several decades ago) be
pretty easy to do.  Les Paul actually built most his first recording lathe
out of car parts.  

Be the most popular dude in your community!  Custom vinyl!  I have no idea
where to start, except maybe Usenet.


#5 of 82 by toking on Mon Jan 6 14:49:24 1997:

the idea isn't to copy onto vinyl....
the idea is to find the 12" single for down in it, the limited edition 
release of pretty hate machine, and anything else that *nails* put 
out on vinyl....hmmm

(sigh)


#6 of 82 by scott on Sat Jan 11 01:48:52 1997:

Oh, like a remix?


#7 of 82 by jiffer on Sun Mar 2 05:05:37 1997:

 i would think its rather hard to find anything modern on vynil.    Good luck,
check your used cd stores, sometimes they might have them, but if its limit
edition, well, bad luck and your screwed.. unless of course youy wait a good
few years and then try


#8 of 82 by frog on Sun Mar 2 06:37:41 1997:

i got tool's undertow and rage evil empire on vinyl, they had lotsa stuff
on vinyl there, i think they hapretty hate machine...


#9 of 82 by scott on Sun Mar 2 13:45:43 1997:

Vinyl did start a slow comeback a couple years ago.


#10 of 82 by krj on Mon Mar 3 20:54:30 1997:

I just glimpsed a headline last week -- in the WSJ, maybe? -- 
reporting that vinyl LP sales are trending up.  It's probably still a 
miniscule part of the market.


#11 of 82 by kewy on Tue Mar 4 19:54:23 1997:

yeah. there is a lot more hype about vinyl, or there has been in the last few
years, not exactly sure why, but i really do think it has something to do with
the whole crazy 70's revival thing.. oi.


#12 of 82 by scott on Wed Mar 5 01:04:04 1997:

Anybody want to buy a used turntable?  I have a spare.  :)


#13 of 82 by raven on Wed Mar 5 02:40:13 1997:

re # 12 How much???  I have vinal I would like to hear again.


#14 of 82 by krj on Wed Mar 5 05:19:00 1997:

I finally convinced Leslie to let me drag my old ugly turntable
stand out of the basement!!  Yay!!  Now I can walk around the living
room while LPs are playing without bouncing the stylus.


#15 of 82 by kewy on Wed Mar 5 19:59:36 1997:

i was very upset when my mom donated my turntable to the salvation army one
day while i was at school... (this was hm, gotta be a few years ago now....
ie.... uhm, maybe 4) that wasn't a very nice thing to do... but i can live
w/o one.. i've lived w/o a tape player since mine broke abt. 2 years ago.


#16 of 82 by toking on Mon Mar 10 21:38:37 1997:

re 8    where?


#17 of 82 by orinoco on Mon Apr 7 01:55:36 1997:

scott--yeah, how much for the turntable?  I'll buy it if I can afford it..


#18 of 82 by raven on Mon Apr 7 03:01:47 1997:

Sold to me already... Sorry dude.


#19 of 82 by lumen on Mon Aug 4 02:10:20 1997:

Interesting.  I have always wondered about the fascination with vinyl.  I read
an article that said that vinyl often had +dB bias at certain treble
frequencies, as compared to tape and CD, so it often sounded *brighter*.  This
puzzles me when I see that the largest demand in vinyl is for recordings by
industrial and garage groups.  Any further insight?


#20 of 82 by raven on Mon Aug 4 22:45:48 1997:

Well vinyl has a greater dynamic range like 100+ db while CDs clock in at
90 some db dynamic range. Then there is the "warm sound" of vinyl which I
think is a real phenomenae.  The causality of the warm sound is uncertain,
but it could be distortion heard as a posative thing, or it could be that
analog recording processes respresent sound more accuratley than digital
recording processes (this was certainly true for early digital
recordings).  Finally as for garage and industrial these recording are
often on indie labels, and thus they are only available as vinyl
recordings.  Or as they say at NVA "you'll pry my vinyl from my cold dead
fingers. <set pro-vinyl rant=off>
 



#21 of 82 by lumen on Wed Aug 6 07:06:14 1997:

A *greater* dynamic range?  I don't know about that..sub-bass frequencies
weren't really available in recordings (as far as I can remember) when it was
limited to vinyl.  I'd need to have some sort of proof of that.  I read the
specs for one of the stereos in my house, and the sound parameters (on output)
for the phonograph was described as being on an RIAA curve, as opposed to a
frequency range for the CD and auxilary/video outputs.  (Now-- is there anyone
out there who is a sound engineer that can explain this?)  At the very least,
I would say that vinyl does not have a superior capacity to reproduce
extremely high and extremely low frequencies cleanly.
        I'm not sure now if vinyl recordings are brighter or warmer, but what
the _Stereo Review_ article said was that certain frequencies at mid- to
treble range were boosted by a couple of +db.  It is definitely distortion--
accuracy has nothing to do with it.  The vinyl recording *will not* sound like
it was originally hear din the studio. Most recordings that have been
rereleased as CDs have the following statement:

"The music on this Compact Disc was originally recorded on analog equipment.
We have attempted to preserve, as closely as possible, the sound of the
original recording.  Because of its high resolution, however, the Compact Disc
can reveal limitations of the source tape."

Let me also explain the recording code on most CDs where A= analog, D=
digital.
The first letter is the source tape.  An A or a D will indicate whether it
was recorded digitally, or on analog tape.
The second is the mastering process (transcription).
The third, of course, is the copying process.

As to the "accuracy" of digital vs. analog, it's more about acoustical
properties of the sounds reproduced.  Digital processes tend to refine
frequencies and reduce distortion.  However, some sounds are characteristic
for their distortion.  This is whybrass, string, and saxophone sounds don't
sound quite as true to life on digital synthesizers, as compared to analog
ones.  However, analog synths have a tendency to hum.  To circumvent this,
engineers either remastered analog recordings especially for CD, or designed
CD players with digital/analog (D/A) converters, or filters.  However, this
still resulted in a loss of sound, so most newer CD players have a
digital/analog oscillator (instead of converting analog to digital, the player
moves between the two, at a speed that sounds blended to the human ear).
Oversampling technologies are also used in players.


#22 of 82 by scott on Wed Aug 6 13:34:44 1997:

The RIAA curve is EQ applied to the recording on vinyl to reduce bass to
something that won't make huge wide grooves.  The phono preamp on your stereo
reverses the effect.

Some vinyl freaks cite the lack of an explicit low-pass filter as proof that
records must have better high frequency range than digital.  The digital
process requires a filter to limit (a hard limit) frequencies more than 1/2
the sample rate, which is about 21kHz for CD.  Vinyl has no such filter, but
precious little response at that frequency range anyway.


#23 of 82 by omni on Wed Aug 6 20:19:57 1997:

  I have a record that was cut from 35mm film, and it sounds just like a CD
in response. 

  What I mean is that the audio was not recorded on tape, rather 35mm film,
and somehow that makes the recording more brilliant, and a lot clearer
than the rest of my records (vinyl). The recording is Doc Severnson's
greatest hits. It did translate to audiotape very well, and is almost CD
quality sound.
  You can hear the difference when you play a ordinary record of the same
genre, such as Herb Alpert's "Rise". 

  The label that records from film is Command Records. There is also TelArc
Recording, who uses bizarre recording techniques when recording a CD, but they
do come out sounding a lot better than some of my other CD's do.



#24 of 82 by krj on Thu Aug 7 07:04:44 1997:

Ken's empirical observations about digital vs. analog:
 
1) LPs, under optimal conditions, can sound more pleasing than CD on their
   outer grooves.  Usually the sound quality of the LP has degraded badly 
   by the inner grooves.
 
2) Avoid classical CDs recorded digitally before about 1987-1988.
 
3) There is a certain kind of bad sound on some CDs which, if I'm 
   listening through headphones, makes me want to throw the headphones
   across the room.  The only new release where I have heard this 
   in the last five years is Emmylou Harris' WRECKING BALL.


4) Many of my friends hated cleaning LPs and their stylii, and they 
   were eager to flee the LP.

5) Loaning and borrowing CDs is as much fun as loaning and borrowing 
   LPs was back in junior high, back before we became paranoid about 
   LP care.


6) I used to lose sleep worrying over LP wear.

7) These days, the hardest part of playing LPs is cleaning the piles 
   of CDs off the turntable.


#25 of 82 by tpryan on Fri Aug 8 00:01:47 1997:

        Oh, so true on 7).  The turntable cover seems to be the 
place to put the CD cases when the CD is in the CD changer.
        Worst parts of LPs:  Life lived in 18-22 minute segments.
That and the "Narp" made when the tone arm lifted from the disk;
particularly by an automatic.

        Ever listen to a good, fresh pressing of Ann Murray's 
"Snowbird" on vinyl?  You might not "hear" the third overtone
of the triangle, but it seems to be perceived--that tone up there
in the 36k-44k range.

        Somehow, my 45 of The Beatles "Please, Please Me" on the
original Vee Jay label seems so much more sonicly enjoyable than
the same track from a CD.

        I am quite thankful to the CD boon in makeing old albums
available new again, thanks to it being collected for this new
medium.   Where else would be be able to find "There Are Fairies
At The Bottom Of My Garden" by Beatrice Lilley but on a CD collection?


#26 of 82 by orinoco on Sat Aug 9 03:06:19 1997:

Two more issues in the CD/vinyl debate.
Cover art:      I am a fanatic of good cover art.  Ever noticed how much better
an LP of Axis: Bold as Love or Sergeant Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band looks
than the equivalent CD?  Bigger art, and none of them damn jewel boxes.
"Feel": Somehow, listening to The Beatles or other 'oldies' on CD just
seems like blasphemy.  I was introduced to them on vinyl, and for me taking
good care of the records, dropping the stylus in the right place, etcetera,
are just as much a part of the 'experience' as the music is.


#27 of 82 by scott on Sat Aug 9 12:54:44 1997:

 What about innovative CD packaging?  I have CD's that look great, and 
would not work as vinyl.


#28 of 82 by orinoco on Sat Aug 9 15:59:02 1997:

True, true.  My complaint is not really with CD packaging in general, but with
the jewel boxes that have become almost universal.


#29 of 82 by omni on Sun Aug 10 04:18:13 1997:

 I like jewel boxes, since they stack easy, they keep the disc dust free, but
the downside is when you drop them on the floor, they can break easily.


#30 of 82 by scott on Sun Aug 10 13:22:00 1997:

Seems kind of dumb that the protective case is so delicate.


#31 of 82 by bruin on Sun Aug 10 14:06:18 1997:

Both Schoolkids Records and Border's Books & Music sell empty CD jewel 
cases for 50 cents to a dollar apiece.


#32 of 82 by lumen on Tue Aug 12 07:05:40 1997:

I think Jim and Ken made strong cases and presentations.  Ken made a point
that I'd like to add to.  If it is true that LPs have a preferred sound over
CDs on their outer grooves, then one must also consider that LPs have a
shorter shelf life.  A CD may have minor scratches and still sound fine. 
However, you'll hear this in an LP.

I realize that there are high-tech phonograph arms, stylus heads, and better
stylii; but in general, it is cheaper and easier to get good sound quality
from a CD.  The entire idea behind CDs was that if a laser replaced the
stylii, it could read the recorded sound more precisely (and on tighter
grooves-- thus making the disc smaller), there would be no parts to wear out
(well, you don't have to replace a laser, but you do eventually have to
replace a stylus), and you would have a disc that would be easier to take care
of.

Concerning the LP cover art, I realize that the art is much smaller on a CD.
But you generally get more photos, artwork, and sometimes lyrics in CD liner
notes than you do LPs.  I bought the CD release of Depeche Mode's 1982 album
_A Broken Frame_ and got far more than I would have if I ever managed to get
the LP (I found it at a student radio station).

tpyran also made a good point that LPs have short playing time on each side.
I would also add that they have a short playing time overall (33 1/3 compared
to CD).  If the Super CD is ever introduced to audio recording, the gap will
be even bigger.

You also can't play an LP in a car stereo-- it's just not feasible (of
course).  The advantages of CD in car audio apply to home stereo as well. 
CDs have a higher output than LPs or tapes, so the sound is generally
supported better, especially at low volume levels.  So CDs have great sound
potential even on an amp with a low wattage rating.  Of course, a high-powered
amp will bring out the sound quality even better of any medium.

So, in short, while LPs may have higher sonic ranges, and are big enough to
have more visible cover art, they are not consistent in sound quality
thoughout its length, the output is low, and they are more subject to wear.
CDs generally produce cleaner sound, especially at sub-bass frequencies,
feature more extensive liner notes with more content than a fold-out LP
jacket, their output is high, their recording length is longer, and they are
usually easier to take care of.

Speaking of jewel boxes, there are a couple of alternatives.  There is the
Digipak CD package, invented by AGI Inc., which is generally used with CD
singles (or was, for a time, anyway).  The UK and Europe use a much slimmer
jewel box than our standard for CD singles.  It's really nice and I find it's
not so easy to drop it.


#33 of 82 by bmoran on Tue Aug 12 13:06:34 1997:

In order for more information to be packed into a cd case, the printing
has been reduced quite a bit. As I get older, I sometimes wish my
magnifying glass were nearby. The printing is getting really tiny!


#34 of 82 by orinoco on Tue Aug 12 15:49:49 1997:

I've seen those thin jewel boxes, both for singles and occasionally for full
length albums.  But they still don't solve the main problem, which is that
they break, crack, etcetera, very easily.  Just recently a favorite CD of mine
had two tracks rendered unplayable when I dropped it in the closed jewel box,
which broke and scratched the disk.  Not fun.


#35 of 82 by krj on Wed Aug 13 00:27:48 1997:

That surprises me; usually my experience, with CDs shipped from Europe, 
is that the CD box gives its life protecting the disk. 


#36 of 82 by orinoco on Wed Aug 13 02:54:44 1997:

Well, this was a domestic jewel box.  I've never bashed any of the skinny ones
too hard.


#37 of 82 by senna on Thu Aug 14 20:38:58 1997:

The skinny ones are a bloody inconvenience, if you ask me.  I prefer the
specialized cases you occasionally get with some CDs, such as Vitalogy and
No Code by Pearl Jam (the rest of the liners got kind of annoying, but the
packaging was convenient).


#38 of 82 by orinoco on Fri Aug 15 01:34:55 1997:

The box for No Code is the same style as Vitalogy's, or different?


#39 of 82 by senna on Sun Aug 17 04:53:50 1997:

It's not really a book, but it's not Jewl.


#40 of 82 by orinoco on Sun Aug 17 17:12:55 1997:

Oh...arr...


#41 of 82 by kewy on Tue Sep 16 19:15:28 1997:

and a lot of cd singles have different casing than the skinny jewel cases,
i have quite a few neet ones:)


#42 of 82 by lumen on Wed Sep 17 05:44:05 1997:

Yep-- a lot of companies are using those funky slide-out cases, you know what
I mean?


#43 of 82 by kewy on Sun Sep 28 18:06:17 1997:

yeah, i have some of those, and some cool fold up ones too


#44 of 82 by orinoco on Sun Sep 28 20:13:30 1997:

I just ran across a really funny 2-cd case.  It has the middle piece that
holds a cd on it's front and it's back, just like the normal one.  But unlike
the normal one, that piece is attatched to the right edge of the back, instead
of the middle hinge.  So, it folds out to the right, rather than just being
like a page in a book


#45 of 82 by lumen on Mon Sep 29 04:22:31 1997:

I think I know what kind you're talking about, Dan.


#46 of 82 by orinoco on Mon Sep 29 21:48:36 1997:

Wow...I didn't think that was going to make sense to anyone :)


#47 of 82 by krj on Tue Sep 30 03:19:43 1997:

Is orinoco describing the "slimline" 2-CD case which is just as thick as a
normal single-CD case?  I've found them becoming quite common, especially
in budget classical packages.


#48 of 82 by orinoco on Tue Sep 30 21:47:13 1997:

Right, but there are two kinds of slimline cases.  The one I've seen usually
opens like a book - front cover, CD holder, and back cover are all attatched
to one hinge on the left.  This new one folds out instead, with the CD holder
attatched to the _right_ of the back cover.


#49 of 82 by snowth on Wed Oct 1 22:53:39 1997:

Wasn't the rerelease of the Star Wars soundtrack in that kind? Or maybe it
was book-like, I'm not sure.


#50 of 82 by lunchbox on Sun Nov 9 19:39:56 1997:

look online! telnet://cdnow.com  would probally have it. they carry all
sorts of stuff besides just cd's. i got a NiN wall clock from them! if that
doesn't say diverse.. well.. hmm.. yeah! i've got a bunch of NiN bootlegs on
tape for trading if anyone is interested. well.. not a BUNCH but some good
ones. demos and remixes, welcome to the hate machine, purest feelings,
cleveland '88, etc.. also have manson's selena's true killers, demos and
remixes, and other stuff. bis balt!


#51 of 82 by krj on Tue Jul 28 08:53:58 1998:

Well, it finally happened.  In party, some young whippersnapper
asked me:  "What's an LP?"


#52 of 82 by remmers on Tue Jul 28 13:27:00 1998:

A question whose time has come, I suppose. It's been what, about ten
years since the CD medium took over and record companies pretty much
stopped manufacturing vinyl recordings?


#53 of 82 by goose on Tue Jul 28 16:45:40 1998:

Shoot me now.


#54 of 82 by carson on Tue Jul 28 20:41:33 1998:

(ugh. I admit that I rarely buy LPs these days, but I *do* still
buy vinyl, much more often than cassettes.)


#55 of 82 by scott on Tue Jul 28 21:05:12 1998:

I occasionally buy some used vinyl, but I'd rather have CDs in most cases.
Yes, I still have about 15 inches of vinyl on my shelf from the pre-CD days.
I won't be throwing that away anytime soon.


#56 of 82 by tpryan on Wed Jul 29 00:26:21 1998:

        I have about 15 inches of vinyl in the used vinyl to be reviewed
pile now.


#57 of 82 by goose on Thu Jul 30 00:27:01 1998:

Sheesh,  I have about 6 feet of vinyl, and I wish I listened to it more often
but my current turntable is inconvenient and has a noise problem.  A new TT
is on my must get list.


#58 of 82 by tpryan on Thu Jul 30 02:29:53 1998:

        6 feet long, or shelves up to the six foot mark?  Yes, I used 
to have a vinyl monkey on my back.

        Check out Kiwanis on Saturday  morning for their selection of
Truntables.  Also Acutronics onState deals with working, older 
equipment also.
        Consider the fate of the consumer reel-to-reel.  As cassettes
became the media for music on tape in the 70's, the market for 
lower priced reel-to-reels dropped out.  Then only higher priced,
higher quality r-t-rs remained on the market.  Same has happened
with turntables--no more cheap Gerards around.  Find a good working
Dual (used) or a good new one if you want to still retreive your
music from LPs.


#59 of 82 by goose on Tue Aug 4 19:32:52 1998:

6 feet linear, sorry.  I'm probably going to buy a higher-end model to do
some serious transcription work.


#60 of 82 by tpryan on Fri Aug 7 02:44:53 1998:

        Ha, 6 feet, I got that just in comedy records.


#61 of 82 by orinoco on Sat Aug 8 03:25:43 1998:

Some stuff, though, is still only out there on Vinyl.


#62 of 82 by goose on Tue Aug 11 15:44:55 1998:

Heh, I just added about two feet last night.


#63 of 82 by krj on Tue Aug 11 20:04:03 1998:

So how long will it take you to work through two feet of LPs?
(Argh, I still have several hundred LPs which I bought in the 
1980s which never got played, and some day I should really clean them 
out.)


#64 of 82 by goose on Wed Aug 12 19:06:17 1998:

A damn long time, but now I have a pretty good classical selection, something
I lacked before.


#65 of 82 by diznave on Mon Oct 19 17:16:55 1998:

Whenever I go to flea markets or the like, I always find myself coming out
with piles of $0.50, $1 and $2 LP's. Its usually music that I haven't been
able to find on cassette or CD. What's funny is that I don't have a turntable
and nobody I know has one either. I'm going to have to go ahead and buy one
eventually, I guess. I have about 70 LP's I've never listened to. 

By the way, just in case you're curious, the first one I'm going to listen
to also happens to be an album I've never heard at all, Joan Baez's self
titled debut album. I'm really excited!



#66 of 82 by anderyn on Fri Oct 23 17:50:18 1998:

I have a turntable. Not the best, but I have one. And even one that
plays 78s.



#67 of 82 by lunatyc on Sat Nov 28 18:47:09 1998:

i have a NIN cd, Sex, Pain, and Rock and Roll, that my uncle gave me.  it is
a live recording, and it came with a small catalog in the insert, with a list
of other cds that Razor Blade Records has.  However, ther is no contact info
for them, so i cant order any more cds.  

Does anyone else know of any info about Razor Blade?


#68 of 82 by lumen on Tue Dec 1 17:44:06 1998:

I don't know, but have you asked local music retailers?  Since they do special
orders, they'd likely have some kind of info.


#69 of 82 by krj on Wed Dec 9 08:23:04 1998:

A web search indicates that Razor Blade Records is a bootleg label.
(I should have picked that up from your description of the NIN cd 
as "live.")  This is why they don't have any contact information.
Most record stores are not going to be able to help you order any 
of these discs, and any that might are probably breaking the law
and would not appreciate any online publicity.
Welcome to the grey market!


#70 of 82 by krj on Fri Mar 23 21:27:22 2001:

Here's an item from a Gannett wire service story about people who are 
clinging to turntables and 8-tracks.  A laser turntable is now for sale:
see the we page at http://www.elpj.com.  All you need is $13,000.
The table is called the ELP.  
 
This is not new technology -- a laser table came to market very briefly
in the late 1980s, which was poor timing because most of the market was
rushing to CDs at that time.


#71 of 82 by orinoco on Fri Mar 23 21:48:19 2001:

Last I was at the Music School library at the U of M, they had a whole bunch
of laser turntables.


#72 of 82 by tpryan on Fri Mar 23 22:08:13 2001:

        How quickly can it 'capture" a side of an LP?  It better have
digital outputs in addition to audio.


#73 of 82 by mcnally on Fri Mar 23 22:59:31 2001:

  (why should it have digital outputs?)


#74 of 82 by krj on Fri Mar 23 22:59:51 2001:

No, on their web page they proudly proclaim that their product has 
no digital signal handling stuff.


#75 of 82 by scott on Fri Mar 23 23:39:48 2001:

There's actually a very recent DJ-oriented turntable with digital outputs.


#76 of 82 by orinoco on Sat Mar 24 01:22:27 2001:

Oh, wait...a turntable that uses a laser to _read_ the record?


#77 of 82 by mcnally on Sat Mar 24 01:52:38 2001:

  Yes..


#78 of 82 by krj on Sat Mar 24 03:10:51 2001:

Dan: what sort of "laser turntables" were you describing in resp:71?


#79 of 82 by orinoco on Sat Mar 24 03:26:57 2001:

Okay.  I've seen ones that look to be laser-balanced.  There's a pattern
printed on the rim of the turntable, and a laser which reads that pattern and
adjusts the speed and tilt of the turntable accordingly.


#80 of 82 by krj on Sat Mar 24 05:46:49 2001:

Never seen those.  Sorry I wasn't more detailed in my original response.
The appeal of a turntable which uses a laser in place of the phono 
stylus is that record wear is no longer a worry.   


#81 of 82 by orinoco on Sun Mar 25 18:46:18 2001:

Nice.


#82 of 82 by eprom on Wed Apr 11 13:29:31 2001:

I'd be really impressed if it played 78's.
hmm..then again I see no reason it shouldn't if it can automatically adjust
the speed...


There are no more items selected.

You have several choices: