Additionally, over 670K albums have been sold in 2009.  The LA Times reports that in one of the most highly populated cities in the world, record sales are growing, more record stores are opening and business is booming with collectors and casual listeners alike as clientele.  All of these record sales are pushing integrators to offer turntables for their clients, which might also help the sales of records in a feedback loop.

While CD sales have been on a consistent decline since the emergence of digital download services like iTunes, vinyl seems to be making up a portion of the CD losses.  A CD cost approximately $14 while a vinyl LP averages around $23.  The music industry has taken notice and is re-mastering versions of their best selling albums complete with the original artwork.

Despite the renewed interest in collecting vinyl records, small record stores may be in jeopardy from competition from Best Buy.  Best Buy, the third largest music retailer, is reportedly mulling a nationwide push to sell vinyl LP's in all of its 1020 stores.  They are running a test across approximately 100 stores and are creating about 8 feet of floor space in all of their stores to hold 200 albums.  Alternatively, their 16 to 20 feet of floor space for CD's holds about 8000 CDs. 

One thing is for sure; vinyl is experiencing a welcome reemergence for a larger audience of music collectors. 

Related AVRev Pages:

Review: Linn Sondek LP12 Turntable

Forum: The age-old question: CD Versus Vinyl

Feature: Top 100 Rock Albums of All Time  

Comments

Add New | Search

Andrew Mondt   |2009-04-30 15:16:09 Bid deal. It's a niche product with a perception of quality. Unless you have a extremely expensive setup in a clean room the quality perception of vinyl dissipates if not immediately but after the first listen when the record degrades. Physical media is about dead. Quality, to me at least, counts but not enough for the majority of the public to hassle with an arcane sentimentalized format such as vinyl. 3   9

Nick Manzanares   |2009-04-30 16:02:03 When vinyl is right, its very, very good, unlike any CD. Better (richer, fuller, more ambience, less fatigue) in many ways than hi-bandwidth digital. But more often it is quite bad. If you can learn to have fun with it, such as finding rare gems for little money, have a record cleaner (though they can be expensive) it can be something very positive in your life. 6   2

DUP  - How bout' 78's   |2009-05-01 03:32:25 What about bringing back rotary phones, B&W DuMont tv's Vinyl LP is obsolte, and a few oportunists are jumping into the frey, to milk a few more dollar$ out of the clueless. Snap crackle Pop, yeah that's the sound of live music. It's so dopey. And I have thousand or more albums on a very good quality TT etc, SACD CD upsampled CD DVD-A runs rings around something from 1962, snap crackle pop. Bring back DDT and Chlordane why not? 2   8

DSM  - It's all in the mastering   |2009-05-01 07:02:59 Most CDs and digital downloads these days are jacked up to maximum volume throughout, and are painful to listen to. CDs have the potential of greater dynamic range than LPs, but that range is so often squashed that ironically LPs have greater dynamic range. SACD and DVD-A discs sound great but there are too few releases and the formats have been all but abandoned by major labels. These, too, are niche products. I have records that are over 50 years old that are not riddled with "snap crackle pop" and sound like they were released last week. Age has nothing to do with it, it's how well you care for things. LPs do require more work; you have to handle them carefully, keep them clean and static free, store them properly. Also you need a turntable with stable speed and a good cartridge/stylus, and it can take a lot of time and patience to get the cartridge aligned properly. However, this need not be expensive. Those that haven't listened to a good LP on a properly set up system are by definition "clueless" as to the potential high quality sound that can come from a vinyl record. 5   0

DSM  - ...continued   |2009-05-01 07:05:56 ...nsive. Those who haven't heard a good LP on a properly set up system are by definition "clueless" as to how good an LP can sound. 7   0

KAW   |2009-05-01 13:14:05 I am from the vinyl generation and thought,years ago that digital media - CD sounded better than vinyl. That was until I hauled out my vinyl that had survived college and was amazed at how it sounded after more years than I care to admit. A nice turntable can be had for $200 - $500 with cartridge and used record stores allow an inexpensive means to build a collection. Ironically, it is the digital generation who has discovered the natural sound of vinyl from parents, dance clubs,etc. A rotary phone does not offer better/ more convenience that a cell. But, vinyl is an old format that can sound better that digital media. By the way, I also own an I-Pod SACD player and a BLU-RAY. So, withhold judgement until you have heard even average vinyl, which can easily be transferred to digital files and has real art work too. 5   0

DUP  - Expert   |2009-05-01 16:58:04 I have used DSD recorders, lotsa SAACD playback, that are incredible sounding, super easy to use, vinyl Lp's are as obsolete as teh Zenith Console that was so wonderful in 1963. DSD recorders from Korg Tascam after you experience DSD SACD etc, LP snap crackle pop, ooops, forgot to run it through the vacuum record cleaner, more work, and what you get out is no where near DSD. SACD smokes LP's DSD live recordings make an LP unlistenable. snap crackle pop. those 1966 Ford Galaxies where, great too right? If your Cd playy back doesn't sound better than an LP, there is something wrong with your stuff simple, is it Chinese? Sum Ting Wong? 2   7

Marcel Croese  - Analog vs digital   |2009-05-04 01:11:08 As long as the big inherent problems of digital are not solved (jitter in the production chain: Digital mixers, digital recorders, digital mastering equipment, digital disc writers, digital, er, digitizers, all cumulative -and not subtractive- jitter sources) digital will never sound as realistic as analog. There is no time smear in analog, at least not in the majority of the audible region, so there is no masking or thinning or smearing out or interference of those nice pure tones. That's why analog is still far superior to digital. It needs a radical shift from semiconductor designers. As if THAT is gonna happen... 1   2

Marcel Croese  - Korg MR-1000   |2009-05-04 01:17:15 DUP: I use the Korg MR-1000 for almost 2 years now. And I agree that it is, for a digital tool, unbeatable and vastly superior compared to any PCM rig (even 192/24), but it's LONG way from being as good as analog. And I have even had to improve it considerably because it -good as it may be- literally is PACKED with major design flaws that impair sound quality big time. But: cd's made from 128FS DSD downsampled by Korg's AudioGate sound MUCH better than any other thing digital, save for (native) SACD maybe. 2   0

DUP  - Expert   |2009-05-04 01:55:14 You mean wow and flutter and other distortions of an analog recording system is pure? Hmmmm, seems like analog is hardly a true recording medium of a live event with it's own problems. And every analog transfer just adds more DISTORTIONS. Analog recording is the incandescent light of the 21st century. You imagine that the glowing inefficient filament is somehow "better" than the much more efficient CFL or LED purely electronic light emisson, SSL is better, more controlled, more efficient, so is DIGITAL recording. Analog tapes are cumbersome, noisy, inconvienent, and just plane obsolete. As the tape oxide wears on every play. Every copy is another degraded copy of the past bad copy. Digitaal everytime and all the time. Let's see a $769 tape unit in analog do what a KROG MR1000 or teh MR2000 do at it's price of well under $2K. they both swamp anything analog. Years ago a Revox Studer recorder at much more money, couldn't touch a current KORG modern digital miracle. If not for SS electroncis and digital systems, nothing would be so cheap and so good. On EBay they have an Ampex 160's or so ANALOG rack system for $12,500 All it's cumbersome outdated ANALOG crap. It's a full sized rack cabinet with gobs of energy wasting noisey hissing tubes, CRAP in a cabinet, hardly hi fidelity. But in it';s time it was considered top end. A portable Korg will smoke it, in hi fidelity noiseless performance. timing errors on an unstable tape machine is better? Slipping unstable motors rubber drive belts, highly unreliable, high maintenance. KORG it baby. MR1000, or MR2000. 21st century, analog is not better, just nostalgic. Snap crackle pop, hisssssssssssssssssssssssss. 4   2

Realist  - Professional Audio Engineer   |2009-05-04 13:32:15 I have to agree with DUP. At 120+ dB below the music, jitter is a total non-issue. Versus wow and flutter for vinyl and analog tape which produce the "smear" Marcel mentioned. Some people do seem to prefer the high distortion and lower resolution of analog. And that's fine. But when pure audio transparency is the goal, no analog medium comes close to the quality of a $25 SoundBlaster sound card in an way one could possibly assess "fidelity." 2   1

KAW  - Where's the love?   |2009-05-05 12:26:07 No matter what the format, music is meant to be enjoyed. I'm always amazed at the vile tone used when defending one's audio equipment/format preferences. I love the natural sound of vinyl, along with all its warts. However, it's hard to play vinyl in my car or when I'm walking. I also own the Wadia I-Transport, which I use with my I-Pod as a music server for "listening while walking/working around the house. I feel well done SACD and vinyl provide the best overall sound when I have the chance to sit and listen - SACD of course without the clicks and pops. As a good friend told me "listen to the music!" 2   0

Write comment
Name:
Email:
Website:
Title:
	Please input the anti-spam code that you can read in the image.

3.26 Copyright (C) 2008 Compojoom.com / Copyright (C) 2007 Alain Georgette / Copyright (C) 2006 Frantisek Hliva. All rights reserved."