>oh yeah, i collect vinyls
>nice, cool to see someone with a meaningful hobby
I got a Sony PS-LX310BT this year to replace my almost 45 year old Sanyo TP 420. I was skeptical of the bluetooth functionality but it's actually very convenient.
>>128089104Vinyl is lame and expensive.
>>128089104this player is very convenient. it comes in a suitcase and has speakers. very cool
Nothing wrong with a Crosley as long you understand that it's shit.
>>128089814The form factor is convenient (and cute) but the speakers are garbage and the mechanism is notoriously shitty. You can get something way better for just $100 more.
>>128089864Crosley is actually overpriced for shit tier chinese quality. You can get something decent for way less . At least get something with a counterweight ffs so you don't destroy your overpriced vinyl you bought at urban outfitters
crosley WILL fuck up your records. the arm is too heavy and there is no weight adjustment.
Hey i got that same one.. its cute...
>>128089104How do audiophiles cope with the historical fact that these suitcase record players sold by the boatload in the days before vinyl was a precious commodity? Imagine the untold scores of used records out there that may have had their grooves ravaged by one of these bad boys.
>>128090234This
>>128090287Audiopedophiles are neurotic lunatics. Mass music was always about convenience. Early MP3s sounded like trash and we loved them and bootlegged shit with them and they were great and many parties were had with absolue trash 64kbps mono mp3s and people still danced to that. Thats how it is.
do you think all those swifties buying 20 different versions of her albums realize they are destroying them every time they play them on these?
>>128089778Sucks to suck, zoomette. I bought my collection for pennies in the based 2000s
>>128090343You are under the assumption that the average person buying a Taylor Swift vinyl is ever going to listen to it.
>>128089104Don't play your good vinyl on these, it'll shred them.
>>128090287>Imagine the untold scores of used records out there that may have had their grooves ravaged by one of these bad boysJust don't be a poptimist or a rockist and you'll hardly ever find groove wear. Most people that had suitcase turntables bought 45s anyway, because LPs were expensive as fuck at the time. A single cost about $5 and an LP was about $35, in inflation adjusted terms
I have 4 ikea Eket cubes full of records. most of which i got for free from a gumtree ad. the person left about 400 records on their porch and i had to go through and pick out the ones i wanted. those were mostly rock and pop with some nice electronic stuff like vangelis and Jarre in there.the rest i picked up from flea markets and thrift stores (jazz, classical and organ/synth)I got my turntable for free (German made Dual CS505. i just had to replace the cartridge and belt.my speakers and amp are Yamaha (NS20m and RX-something) which i paid 15 bucks for
>>128090287Hell, Lennon and McCartney heard Pet Sounds for the first time on Bruce Johnston's suitcase player.
>>128090287>>128089864>>128090025>>128090234Vwestlife already dismantled this retardation. Crosleys don't fuck up your records to any noticable degree. It's a myth
>>128090287>>128090485>>128090334Audiophile tards do not actually care about audio quality anyways. Vinyls sound like total shit if you actually care about how things sound.
>>128090901>Vinyls sound like total shit if you actually care about how things sound.But that's totally fake, anon. Vinyl has much better dynamic range than CDs / digital on average, and the mastering is (usually) superior to other mediums.
Tape > vinyl If you actually care about it being audiophile quality then you would have a reel to reel. vinyl cons outweigh the pros.
>>128091012>Vinyl has much better dynamic range than CDs / digital on average,LMAOread a book nigger
>>128090901This kind of arrogant overstatement of an opinion is the hallmark of someone with very little personal experience in the subject at hand. I have hundreds of records, tapes, CDs, terabytes of FLACs, etc. My preferred format of an album is entirely case-by-case. There are no easy rules to lay down about format vs format
>>128091043Audiophiles can only work in the given environment they are in. If records ceased to exist because gen z and millenials decided to stop buying them, they'd then turn to crowning CD as the best format that has more "warmth" than Flac.
>>128091086Bitch, are you trolling or just retarded? I calculate the DR of everything I listen to; I've seen the charts. LMAO!
>>128090901it's almost as if vinyltards aren't audiophiles, retard
>>128091012>>128091710CD has better potential for higher DR, it just also has better potential for shittier DR. So yes, vinyl currently has better stats, but that's because of the loudness war. CD would brutally mog vinyl in dynamics if sound engineers and record producers weren't fucking mouthbreathers.
>>128091770Or can someone show me a vinyl rip with a DR approaching 20? Probably not gonna happen ever. Getting it past 14 risks physically damaging the material with cracks.
>>128091710>Dynamic Range>CalifornicationThis >>128091770 anon is right. Most modern CD dynamic ranges have been shitted up by loudness wars. In reality it has the potential to be far better if your producer isn't a retard who thinks they still play CDs on shitty speakers.CDs are now the hipster format, records have been diluted by gen z making it trendy. Cash in on the great CD prices before gen z transitions to them next.
>>128091762I wasnt the one calling them audiophiles, braindead autist
>>128091850Where do cassettes fit into all of this?
>>128091770>>128091850I said "Vinyl has much better dynamic range than CDs / digital on average", emphasis on "average". Of course, I know CDs have more "potential" for audiophile quality than vinyl, but in reality, the mastering process completely rapes CDs of that potential. I barely even hear a CD that sounds better than its vinyl counterpart, and it's probably even less common to hear CDs / digital releases with a DR range above 6 these days, aka, the music is compressed to shit.Btw, Californication on vinyl is listenable despite the cooked mastering, while the CD version is complete auditory torture.
>>128092215They're mostly bad in both dynamics and audio quality. Mastering is pretty much inexistent in most cassettes I've played. They do create "atmosphere" for genres like memphis rap or black metal, though.
>>128092381>They're mostly bad in both dynamics and audio qualityThis is another glib statement about a nuanced subject. Not all cassette tapes are the same formulation. Type I ferrous tapes are pretty bad, but Type II and IV tapes sound excellent. Record to chrome or metal tape with NR and you'd be hard pressed to distinguish from vinyl in a blind test
>>128092363but it's not even that "much better" unless all you listen to is rock, metal and rap
i collect reels
>>128097191I give your mother 3.75 inches per second gnomesayin?
>>128097191>10inchDropped
For me, it's 5" full track mono at 1.875 ips.
>>128089104Let me guess, you need more
>>128090891Vwestlife is also a gay man so nothing he does can be trusted.
>>128098008Lmao i just have my telephone bluetooth itself to ediefier bookshlef speakers
>>128089104And it's stupid shit like this.
>>128099421retarded chud
>>128100217it's sorta like an NT's version of a hyperfixation. kinda based desu.
