advertisement


Digital v Vinyl.

Archivists and copyists are a thing, they are employed to make copies for the rights owner. while the law has been hedged to reflect the reality of making a copy of the rights holder's musics for personal use, no financial profit can be made from its duplication and dissemination, it's quite a well drafted law and its online

http://www.ipo.gov.uk/copyright-guidance-consumers.pdf

The law as intended is drafted for the transfer of digits from one medium to another for specific use, migration laws are not a transfer of licence but an agreement between the purchaser and the rights holder to only make a copy for their own personal use while their remain in posession of the licence.

so no, third party copying services are out because you do not have the rights under the agreement between rights holder to purchaser to make that copy. You can look for wriggle room, unlike government law which is self serving and badly drafted, this is drafted by industry lawyers and retail and IP law is very carefully nuanced... it has been thought through and carefully vetted by various licencing companies.

So, rip a cd ro a server and put that cd in the loft ok
Rip a cd to a server and put that rip on your phone ok
Rip a CD to a server and duplicate that backup is ok as long as it is not used to disseminate to non rights holders for the purposes of playing music

Now this bit is interesting: you cannot create a "greatest hits" from a collection of tracks you already own, you have to buy the "greatest hits" again in order to create a set of files as that LP. There is nothing stopping you from creating a playlist of a greatest hits LP from what you already have though.

Rip a CD for someone, put it on your server and give them a copy and the cd back is a no no
Rip a CD for someone and not put it on your server and give them a copy is ok but no profit can be made from its duplication, technically these "we will rip your CD collection" services are illegal already before and after the law is active in June.

Vinyl is considered as the same as a CD for the purposes of this law.

That's how it was explained to men but I may have it wrong. But that's I think the way the law is drafted, but law does my head in and it's really tricky... There will be no loopholes like the old days.
 
paskinn said:
This thread is presumably supposed to have some point. So what is it? Just that people want to ram their views down the throats of others? Is that it?
Click to expand...

Surely that's the "raison d'etre" for most of today's forums full stop?
 
Max

May I suggest that as your posts and threads are increasingly trolling you may live to regret this one? Credibility is a fragile thing. People will refer you to the TT thread in days to come.
 
Fox, thanks for the heads up on that.

Not clear under which circumstances family members in the home of the original purchaser (rights holder) can legally listen.

In the same room, at volumes not possible to be deemed as broadcasting, with the rights holder present seems the only clear cut situation where it is legal?

What about my children listening to rips of my CDs on my NAS using Sonos in their own bedroom for example?

On their iPhones, out and about, now (as has always been the case, I guess) seems obviously illegal.
 
whatsnext said:
Max

May I suggest that as your posts and threads are increasingly trolling you may live to regret this one? Credibility is a fragile thing. People will refer you to the TT thread in days to come.
Click to expand...

Well every thread by Max Flinn is now treaded as a joke IMO, he just trying to bate everyone obviously, maybe he still hasn't gotten over the embarrassing statements he made about challenging HIFI news in the great USB cable thread :eek:.
Was he actually daft enough to go through with that in the end or did some one slap him across the face with a brace of USB cables and tell him to give his head a shake LOL :D

Alan
 
maxflinn said:
... I think the love of vinyl is due to many factors.

Nostalgia - most vinyl lovers are older and may have been brought up listening to it on their parents systems, or first got into HiFi via a TT. Thus when people remark that vinyl sounds more lifelike they may actually mean that it sounds more like what they're used to, which is vinyl, and rose tinted glasses may play a part as people often think days gone by were better, things were better in general, more honest times, more integrity around, etc.
I do feel that people may subconsciously ascribe these qualities to vinyl without realising why.

The tactile nature of it - I think this leads people to form a kind of emotional bond to it. The ritual of choosing an album, lovingly wiping it clean and putting it on while carefully holding it at the edge. The mechanics of it all as the TT spins around while they wait in anticipation for the music. Some people may see the whole process as more honest or genuine, IMO and perhaps on a subconscious level, and thus they'll often defend vinyl vociferously on fora, seeing it as the underdog being threatened by the ruthlessly efficient, nasty digital :).

pretentiousness - I honestly think that some vinyl lovers see themselves as superior because they get vinyl, like it's some kind of abstract art that a peasant wouldn't appreciate ;). This attitude snowballs on fora where groups of vinyl lovers use all the familiar terminology to describe their vinyl setups - musical, analogue, lifelike, warm, smooth, realistic, etc, while using all the usual terminology to describe the nasty digital that threatens the love of vinyl so interwoven into their psyche, clinical, cold, uninvolving, harsh, etc.

So, just some of my thoughts. Perhaps some will agree, and some won't :cool:.
Click to expand...

I am very much in the 'tactile' camp! Can't beat the size of the artwork on a record and the feel of the 12"s of plastic.

I sort of agree with point one but it's more like I bought vinyl in my teens, and for me that is how I like to 'own' music.

Point three may be true in some cases but isn't for me.

A fourth point is that vinyl has become the medium of choice for some specialist re-releases of a lot of jazz, soul, funk and other generally hard to find rarities.
 
Lots of 'I once heard 'X' and therefore records are best', or 'X once told me that they heard 'Y' and therefore records are best, note decay don't you know'.

My personal observation is that most record players and records I hear are audibly distorting and that their owners don't seem to notice/care. So, setting Steve Hoffman's lathe to one side, that seems to be quite important.

A second observation is that the pleasure I get from handling and playing records I've had for up to 40 years is much greater than that from a new record, especially of an old recording. The latter just seem an exercise in artificial nostalgia. I'd rather have digital copies of the master tapes.

Paul
 
Vital said:
Fox, thanks for the heads up on that.

Not clear under which circumstances family members in the home of the original purchaser (rights holder) can legally listen.

In the same room, at volumes not possible to be deemed as broadcasting, with the rights holder present seems the only clear cut situation where it is legal?

What about my children listening to rips of my CDs on my NAS using Sonos in their own bedroom for example?

On their iPhones, out and about, now (as has always been the case, I guess) seems obviously illegal.
Click to expand...

That's under performing rights legislation and is unchanged. Its cool, to listen at home and home members to listen whole you are out... The rights ownership encompasses household as a concept.... but operate a business like a barbers or a garage or a doctors surgery or a bar or Club etc etc and you need a PRS licence.
 
So could the little sh*ts on the tube with leaky cans be charged with illegally broadcasting copyright material or should I continue to rely on verbal abuse?
 
Guys, I'd had a few beers last night before posting this, and on reflection it does seem a bit provocative, so sorry about that.
 
Alcoholism is both destructive and costs money that could otherwise be spent on speaker upgrades.
 
maxflinn said:
I just wanted to give my thoughts on this.


Digital is technically better. Even the most expensive TT in the world will introduce more distortion than the most basic digital setup.

Plus, you can record the output of a TT on to a digital file and it will sound identical, so there is nothing that vinyl can do that digital can't. Digital can fully encapsulate vinyl.

So, why do many people still prefer vinyl? Is it really because the inherent added distortion helps to create a nicer sound?

I haven't heard a TT so while I can't comment from experience, I doubt the real reason many prefer vinyl is related to sound quality at all.

I think the love of vinyl is due to many factors.

Nostalgia - most vinyl lovers are older and may have been brought up listening to it on their parents systems, or first got into HiFi via a TT. Thus when people remark that vinyl sounds more lifelike they may actually mean that it sounds more like what they're used to, which is vinyl, and rose tinted glasses may play a part as people often think days gone by were better, things were better in general, more honest times, more integrity around, etc.
I do feel that people may subconsciously ascribe these qualities to vinyl without realising why.

The tactile nature of it - I think this leads people to form a kind of emotional bond to it. The ritual of choosing an album, lovingly wiping it clean and putting it on while carefully holding it at the edge. The mechanics of it all as the TT spins around while they wait in anticipation for the music. Some people may see the whole process as more honest or genuine, IMO and perhaps on a subconscious level, and thus they'll often defend vinyl vociferously on fora, seeing it as the underdog being threatened by the ruthlessly efficient, nasty digital :).

pretentiousness - I honestly think that some vinyl lovers see themselves as superior because they get vinyl, like it's some kind of abstract art that a peasant wouldn't appreciate ;). This attitude snowballs on fora where groups of vinyl lovers use all the familiar terminology to describe their vinyl setups - musical, analogue, lifelike, warm, smooth, realistic, etc, while using all the usual terminology to describe the nasty digital that threatens the love of vinyl so interwoven into their psyche, clinical, cold, uninvolving, harsh, etc.

So, just some of my thoughts. Perhaps some will agree, and some won't :cool:.
Click to expand...
your digital means CDs or those computer playback files?
CDs or those computer playback files or vinyl is very subjective. however vinyl will grow upon you. especially when you are into jazz and rock genre
 
Thanks Fox for the detailed explanation in regards legal stuff. And thanks Merlin for the offer !
Still got a couple of hundred lps and 12"'s from the eighties... Most of them of varying quality and taste. Haven't had a turntable for over 15 years !!! Seems a bit daft to keep them.
When John Westlake finishes the the Mdac2 I'll certainly be interested in the comparison. I,ve got loads of cd's like the Foo Fighters which are so bad ! Would love to start replacing these
 
I know this sounds daft but if you really are pissed off with vinyl, try an online service like Quobuz Lossless or Spotify at 320kbps and just listen, put all prejudices on hold and listen. then do a cost benefit analysis, compare the cost and time and faff of ripping and so on vs say £20 or so a month on a couple of services and see what the amortisation costs (the how many months would it take for me to get my monay back on my prior purchases back) is like; if you have thousands of LPs and if you are happy with streaming and if you are happy with non-tactility then just pack it up, store the LP spinner away and get a streamer and be done with it.

The maths and economics of large record collections don't stack up if you can be happy with streaming a library that may be incomplete but has more than what you owned.

But that's a conditional and very very big if.

My 5c
 
maxflinn said:
I just wanted to give my thoughts on this.


Digital is technically better. Even the most expensive TT in the world will introduce more distortion than the most basic digital setup.

Plus, you can record the output of a TT on to a digital file and it will sound identical, so there is nothing that vinyl can do that digital can't. Digital can fully encapsulate vinyl.

So, why do many people still prefer vinyl? Is it really because the inherent added distortion helps to create a nicer sound?

I haven't heard a TT so while I can't comment from experience, I doubt the real reason many prefer vinyl is related to sound quality at all.

I think the love of vinyl is due to many factors.

Nostalgia - most vinyl lovers are older and may have been brought up listening to it on their parents systems, or first got into HiFi via a TT. Thus when people remark that vinyl sounds more lifelike they may actually mean that it sounds more like what they're used to, which is vinyl, and rose tinted glasses may play a part as people often think days gone by were better, things were better in general, more honest times, more integrity around, etc.
I do feel that people may subconsciously ascribe these qualities to vinyl without realising why.

The tactile nature of it - I think this leads people to form a kind of emotional bond to it. The ritual of choosing an album, lovingly wiping it clean and putting it on while carefully holding it at the edge. The mechanics of it all as the TT spins around while they wait in anticipation for the music. Some people may see the whole process as more honest or genuine, IMO and perhaps on a subconscious level, and thus they'll often defend vinyl vociferously on fora, seeing it as the underdog being threatened by the ruthlessly efficient, nasty digital :).

pretentiousness - I honestly think that some vinyl lovers see themselves as superior because they get vinyl, like it's some kind of abstract art that a peasant wouldn't appreciate ;). This attitude snowballs on fora where groups of vinyl lovers use all the familiar terminology to describe their vinyl setups - musical, analogue, lifelike, warm, smooth, realistic, etc, while using all the usual terminology to describe the nasty digital that threatens the love of vinyl so interwoven into their psyche, clinical, cold, uninvolving, harsh, etc.

So, just some of my thoughts. Perhaps some will agree, and some won't :cool:.
Click to expand...

If you are ever in Glasgow, come & listen to vinyl with me.
 
I think all of the above is the correct answer, at least for me. The recording format and delivery method shouldn't limit what you want to listen to.

I have preferences, of course, but a CD of a recording I would like to hear is much better subjectively and objectively than is an LP I can't get, find or buy.

Joe
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top