What is your primary format?

cmy330go

So I was talking with an acquaintance the other day that does the majority of my electronics repair, and service. We've spent quite a few hours chatting about HiFi, and frankly I've never met another audio enthusiast who seems to share as many of my viewpoints. Yet the other day I was a little shocked to find out that his preferred format is CD. Not that he doesn't appreciate hi-rez digital or vinyl, it's just that the vast majority of the time he spins CDs. This made me wonder what format the 2ch enthusiasts here prefer. No real agenda here, and not looking to start any pissing matches, just curious what everyone prefers. By all means feel free to explain your reasons, yet let's keep this civil.

F1nut

I think your poll is flawed. I prefer SACD to anything, but my CD collection is larger due to the fact that the material has not been released on SACD, so how do I vote? Can I vote both? BTW, both are far superior to vinyl.

cmy330go

F1nut wrote: »

I think your poll is flawed. I prefer SACD to anything, but my CD collection is larger due to the fact that the material has not been released on SACD, so how do I vote? Can I vote both? BTW, both are far superior to vinyl.

You're right. I rephrased it. "Preferred" better defines my question.

cfrizz

I'm with Jesse on this. My SACD/DVDA collection is very small compared to my cd collection. If I could get SACD's for all of my cd's That would be my first choice, but I can't so I have to choose my cd collection.

gudnoyez

I picked EOL as I have a couple thousand or more (would have to count) of selections on Vinyl, CD, Cassette, and now 15 SACD,s which I plan on this format if available on what I'm looking at, got the SACD bug that's for sure.

cnh

I would also say CDs as per Jesse's comment above. They are the most numerous in the collection.

I have some vinyl and I use the format but I find it "old" and cumbersome and time consuming. It's nothing more than nostalgia for me to spin some of my college vinyl. A lot is also not pristine and my equipment is not in the 5K+ range with more tweaks than a turbo charged Racing machine? The high tech tone arms, rarefied cartridges, 50+ lb. platters, etc., etc. I have neither the TIME nor the RESOURCES to dabble in such 'modifications'.

I'm sure that all sounds great but I have no patience for it. But I can understand the members here who have gone all-digital (hi-res) and use servers, DACs, etc. To them my popping CDs into a machine must seem what unsleeving an LP, bathing it in a $1000 record cleaning machine, magic erasing ones stylus, placing it on the platter, and cuing it up seem to me: a lot of time and effort for 18-22 minutes of listening!

cnh

NJPOLKER

I love my MF A5 CDP

A turntable is too much work for me. I need a CDP and a remote for my pre-amp. Funny thing is I am not a lazy person at all however when I am listening I am listening not getting up and down!!

Erik Tracy

My primary format is CD - just from the numbers.

But I prefer vinyl - with two identical releases from the same master - LP hands down.

Moose68Bash

I can't say what I prefer "to listen to" -- because I haven't used my turntable since 1989, when I switched to CDs.

However, digital formats are a lot more convenient, as are SS electronics. IMHO!

On3s&Z3r0s

cnh wrote: »

I would also say CDs as per Jesse's comment above. They are the most numerous in the collection.

I have some vinyl and I use the format but I find it "old" and cumbersome and time consuming. It's nothing more than nostalgia for me to spin some of my college vinyl. A lot is also not pristine and my equipment is not in the 5K+ range with more tweaks than a turbo charged Racing machine? The high tech tone arms, rarefied cartridges, 50+ lb. platters, etc., etc. I have neither the TIME nor the RESOURCES to dabble in such 'modifications'.

I'm sure that all sounds great but I have no patience for it. But I can understand the members here who have gone all-digital (hi-res) and use servers, DACs, etc. To them my popping CDs into a machine must seem what unsleeving an LP, bathing it in a $1000 record cleaning machine, magic erasing ones stylus, placing it on the platter, and cuing it up seem to me: a lot of time and effort for 18-22 minutes of listening!

cnh

This totally hits the nail on the head. I gave up on vinyl several years ago because it was too hard to find room for everything as an apartment dweller (at the time). Since then it's been all about trying to find ways to make digital sound as good as it can. I have gone the music server + DAC route, but again it's just about space and logistics. Finding places for all those CD's and keeping them organized / alphabetized so I could find them was getting to be a full time job. Regarding format, hi-rez / SACD is nice but it is tough to find the stuff you really want to listen to on those formats. When I realized I was buying SACD's just because they were SACD's and had good reviews of the mastering more than because I was genuinely interested in the content, I had to acknowledge I had a problem and pull myself back from the edge.

All that said, I'm a new DSD convert and have started converting FLACs ripped from CD and bought from HD Tracks into DSD format. The Benchmark DAC2 just does such a better job with that format. I've even considered buying an old Sony Playstation to be able to rip SACDs to DSD, cause there's no other way to get the SACD DSD stream to the DAC (ironically... damn Sony's copy protection).

Ultimately at least 95% of what I listen to has come from CD even though I'm not physically spinning the discs. So I guess I'd have to say that is my primary format, but I'm hoping for other hi-rez digital formats to gain traction and become more widely available.

madmax

Vinyl of course.

unc2701

Vinyl.... sorta. Most recent releases (at least in the genera that I listen to) will frequently have two different down-mixes for CD vs vinyl. The CD version has far more dynamic range compression, so the vinyl sounds better. And not in some fuzzy, "Oh, it's got more warmth and just listen to veils removed"... it's objectively and measurably better on dynamic range, despite the far better technical limitations of CDs. What's sad is that I've found a number of SACDs and DVD-A's that are the same way.

SO. I prefer the convenience of digital, but as long as the loudness war keeps going, vinyl is my default choice.

Dawgfish

I run cd, SACD, DVD-A, and vinyl. I prefer vinyl by a wide, wide margin. I too find vinyl to be far more dynamic and resolving when comparing the same album between the 3 formats. Sure it's a heck of a lot more time consuming and cumbersome, but to my ears in my system it kicks the other formats to the curb.

treitz3

F1nut wrote: »

I think your poll is flawed. I prefer SACD to anything, but my CD collection is larger due to the fact that the material has not been released on SACD, so how do I vote? Can I vote both?

I can agree with this. If there was a selection in the poll to reflect this, that would be my vote.

F1nut wrote: »

BTW, both are far superior to vinyl.

Now this is where Jesse's brain has short circuited somewhere along the line. He must have hit his head a little too hard on the top of the bang bus one night. Oh well, everybody has flawed logic here and there....lol

Tom

mantis

My Primary format is CD but I listen to High Rez Downloads , SACD , DVD AUDIO and some Bu ray / DVD concerts.
If I had all my CD's in High REZ downloads I would only listen to that format.

pglbook

I am not not sure how to vote. I guess my primary format is CD. My preferred format is vinyl but, while I much prefer the sound of vinyl to CDs (most of which are overly compressed), I tend to listen to CDs more often due to the fact that my vinyl collection is not as as large as my CD collection (and also for convenience). I just started getting back into vinyl about a year ago and only have approx. 100 records compared to hundreds of CDs.

I usually set aside one day on the weekend to spin some vinyl. It does take more time and more of an effort and that is about the only time I can find to do so. But the time and effort are well rewarded because most vinyl sounds so much more "natural" than CDs. However, having said that, I listen to CDs more often than vinyl as a matter of convenience and also because my vinyl selection is much more limited than my CD collection.

cmy330go

treitz3 wrote: »

I can agree with this. If there was a selection in the poll to reflect this, that would be my vote.

So to clarify...Do you mean that your "primary" format is "both", or are you saying that your "preferred" format is "both"?

treitz3 wrote: »

Now this is where Jesse's brain has short circuited somewhere along the line. He must have hit his head a little too hard on the top of the bang bus one night. Oh well, everybody has flawed logic here and there....lol

Tom

Haha. Didn't notice that comment until you pointed it out. Honestly curious if he's serious. Are you Jesse?

treitz3

Hello, cmy330go. To clarify, my preference is vinyl and the higher formats of digital. Depends on the best recording I have available, otherwise it's RB to enjoy. Yes, Jesse is serious. He's not a big fan of vinyl and there is nothing wrong with what he stated. I was simply razzing him.

Tom

hochpt21

I listen to vinyl, cd, sacd and MOG on the squeezebox.

I mostly listen to MOG on the sqeezebox, when I am wanting to check out a new release.

I mostly listen to cd or sacd when I am beat and don't have the energy to get up for the vinyl.

I have by far the most vinyl as a physical medium, and prefer that for listening.

leftwinger57

I have no clear cut way of answering this. My 2chl Adcom 555, Onkyo P-301 pre, JVC-QL-A200 TT and I'll throw inthe Denon 1940ci cdp. But like I have said many times before I like variety and running through the Yamaha affords this variety. I get i-net radio, i-pod w/ dock, FM radio and tv all going through the audio out of the Yamaha to the tuner section of the Onkyo so I get all sources playing through my 2-chl. Also w/ my swithcher if I'm in the East Coast mood I'll put on my ADC 303ax. So variety it is until I get another amp/pre and can seperate the systems but w/ only 1 room that's highly unlikely. The cdp has both analog RCAs to the Onkyo and HDMI up to the Yamaha

pitdogg2

cfrizz wrote: »

I'm with Jesse on this. My SACD/DVDA collection is very small compared to my cd collection. If I could get SACD's for all of my cd's That would be my first choice, but I can't so I have to choose my cd collection.

F1nut wrote: »

I think your poll is flawed. I prefer SACD to anything, but my CD collection is larger due to the fact that the material has not been released on SACD, so how do I vote? Can I vote both? BTW, both are far superior to vinyl.

must agree with both here. On the other hand I do have some DVD-A's that will give SACD a run for the money as I have copies of both. As both said above I have an extensive CD collection and would switch out the CD for SACD at the drop of a hat.

bluesfusion

I use Apple lossless (ALAC/m4a) ripped from my CDs. The digital format is convenient to stream lossless music using airplay. I still keep the hundreds of CDs and cassette tapes around for when the mood strikes me.

kquail

I really can not use your poll ! I have over 4000 cassette's , 1500 albums, 1000 cd's, 60 reel to reel tapes, 200 8 tracks, 2500 45's
not to mention over 1,000,000 songs in digital format music, but my favorite is the analog!!!!!! I play cassettes more than anything else i have 100 cassette decks in my collection including the famous dragon and the tandberg 3014

pumpkinman

Vinyl always
Nothing more to be said

P-man

mhardy6647

mostly CD and vinyl - I own (far) more licorice pizzae than examples of the little polycarbonate disc, but the convenience of the CDs trumps rekkids for me most days.

As I type this, though, I am listening to an LP (Thriller, and, no, I wouldn't admit that just anywhere!).

I do have a terabyte of lossless digital stuff on a dump-find computer, but I cannot take it too seriously.

Jhayman

Vinyl all the way..
While I do have more CD's I never really liked the CD sound probably because of an inferior system..and the only option I had at the time..
I have never owned a SACD so I cannot comment on that format I'm sure it's quite good..
I don't think taking an extra minute or two to get your vinyl ready to play is to much to ask a music lover..
After all with all the tweaking and upgrading of gear and the fun if doing what's an extra minute or two..
And the beauty of vinyl is you get to discover songs you never heard before because on CD you could just press the next button and not give it a chance..
Personally I have found many new songs this way..

Oldfatdogs

CD's for me, I have a nice small collection of the music the wife and I like. One of these days I might try Vinyl,but that's another rabbit hole.

voltz

But Today's Vinyl isn't cheap...The Door's 1st album on 2 45 rpm LP's press on 200 gram vinyl will cost you $50

compared to $30 for the SACD!

but hearing the song "The End" on 45 rpm vinyl is worth it

billbillw

Equal Opportunity for me. 1000's of redbook CDs, a few hundred GB of digital files, several hundred vinyl records. I gave up on Cassette tape though. I also enjoy FM frequently. NPR Jazz really sounds nice sometimes as does Good Morning Blues on WRFG.

tonyb

Most of mine is done with lossless files these days. Mainly because most my listening has become casual. Rarely sit down for a critical session anymore but when I do I'll occasionally thrown in those redbook cd's. Vinyl is just too time consuming even though I do like it the best. One album may only have 2 or 3 songs I like that means after every song I have to pick up the needle and move it. Forget that, gave that up long ago. At least a cd you can skip right to the song you like in a flash, digital files, even better. It's a matter of finding that balance of sound quality and convenience for me.

Jetmaker737

Preferred is CD because I prefer the sound through my Jolida.

FLAC is nice due to convenience.

Hi-Rez's are things of beauty when done right. Too few of them though.