ARCHIVED FORUM -- March 2012 to February 2022READ ONLY FORUM
This is the second Archived Forum which was active between 1st March 2012 and 23rd February 2022
ok there are other music formats available to buy but another milestone in my eyes for us deck owners ....
we tend to forget there is more to design than designing.
Ye"s, black is back. And quite rightly so. Even the younger generation are getting fed up with tinny sounding digital music and are starting to appreciate the benefits of vinyl. Good news for restorers of vintage decks and will help keeping more of them out of the skips or scrap heaps.
It will be interesting to see if any of the major electronics companies of not take notice and re-introduce turntables in their range. I'd love to see what B&O could come up with these days.
Dave.
Check this site as a reality check. 38% up from 3% of the total market is still 3%...
Cheers
-g
yes it's never going to surpass or come close to Streaming and whatever format comes after, but with the demise of the CD will Vinyl pick up even more momentum as a percentage of these customers must be driven by owning the physical.
Actually it's 4% :)
I bought 3 lp's last week , perhaps the volume of my purchase has made a global difference.
4 years ago I gave a BM 1900 with P45s to my son (as is from Martin) I told him I would look for a BG for him, no need dad, he told me I only use my Ipod. This year we were visiting him in DK, I had to pick up a BG 1000, to take home to Mexico, My son kept the BG 1000, because more of his friends and he himself, had started buying vinyl. They bought vinyl even without owning a TT, maybe just for the presentation and the often beautiful covers. Now he is the go to, for the friends as a proud BG owner.
As his equipment shows some failures, next step is to send it all to Martin for overhaul, returning, it will blow them away, soundwise.
The increase in vinyl sales is mainly because of the good work of us here on the Beoworld forum (I think)
I myself buy some 2-3 LPs a month
Collecting Vintage B&O is not a hobby, its a lifestyle.
Duels:Actually it's 4% :)
Oops...
I should engage my brain before opening my mouth - or typing.
Dave Farr:Even the younger generation are getting fed up with tinny sounding digital music and are starting to appreciate the benefits of vinyl. Good news for restorers of vintage decks and will help keeping more of them out of the skips or scrap heaps.
Sorry, but I have to take issue with this statement.
It's true, that, it 1983, digital recordings were fraught with problems. The converters were, at best, accurate to about 12 bits. Dither wasn't invented yet (at least, it wasn't being used for audio recordings) so the ADC's were distorting instead of just being noisy. Anti-aliasing filters were implemented in analogue circuity and rang like crazy at about 15 kHz or so - or they didn't work well enough to keep the birdies out the tunes. So, the original claims of "Perfect sound, forever" were rather hyperbolic, to put it politely.
However, a "good" recording done today (whether it's released at 44.1/16 or 96/24 or DSD or any other uncompressed format you like) is a very different beast. The technology of doing a recording 30 years later has changed dramatically. It's like not going out to test drive a new Honda Civic because Ford Model-T's were difficult to start.
Nowadays, if a recording sounds tinny (assuming that everything else in the chain is behaving well) it's probably due to an artistic decision on the part of the recording engineer, the mastering engineer, or some record label rep's desire to compress the dynamic range to 0 dB. It's certainly not to be blamed on "digital" as the pariah of audio.
Of course, that doesn't mean that a release on vinyl and on CD will be the same: they can't be. For starters: vinyl requires that the bass be summed to mono to prevent the stylus doesn't skip out of the groove, so no stereo bass - if you care about such things. The best crosstalk spec you can get out of a stylus is about -40 dB. Surface noise is higher on vinyl. Wow and flutter are orders of magnitude higher than digital jitter - even in the cheapest CD players. So are the TND specs. Interchannel phase varies with location on the groove. Pre-echo doesn't just happen at the start of the track - you get it all the time from both adjacent grooves - you're just hoping that it's masked by the signal of the groove you're in. If your turntable is not up-to-snuff, you can hear 50/60 Hz hum and rumble from the motors and vibrations through the chassis. Finally, unless someone has been REALLY careful, your RIAA filters are not necessarily dead-on in either magnitude or phase response.
In addition, these days (with some exceptions), it's more than likely that a vinyl release is a re-mastering of a digital master recording - it's like using a film camera to take a photo of a digital picture displayed on a screen. There aren't many studios running fully analogue signal paths any more, as Dave Grohl laments in his advertisement/documentary "Sound City" - and those that are aren't getting gigs.
In other words, if you compare what comes out of a console during a recording to a digital release and a vinyl release, the digital copy sounds more similar to the original than the vinyl copy.
That being said, you might like the sound of a vinyl release of a particular tune more than its digital counterpart. But that doesn't make it better. It just means that you prefer it. And if you do prefer it, you shouldn't place the blame where it doesn't belong.
I have nothing against vinyl and restorers of turntables. I still have my collection of 78's that take up 2 m of shelf space. But I hate it when the innocent are convicted of a crime they haven't committed... at least not recently...
-geoff
Very nice post Geoff, as usual.
I agree wholeheartedly.
Digital recordings where plagued with problems in the early days, only to do worse later on when someone forgot the loudness on.
I very much enjoy the sound of digital music.
Too long to list....
Geoff,
I'm not talking about the quality of the recording, I'm talking about the fact that a lot (not all) of mainly the younger generation still listen to their music via cheap headphones via a mobile device which can sound pretty awful. Not with a pair of H6 headphones though, but you don't see that many people on the move with good quality headphones - mainly ear buds.
At home I use an iPad Air and Playmaker via my BL4000's and love it and have no issues with the sound quality of most digital music. However, a lot of people on the move rely on headphones that cost a few pounds or directly from their phone for example and I'm afraid the sound from these is in no way comparable to a good quality set up of turntable and amp.
It is a reported fact that younger people are starting to re-discover vinyl and appreciate it over some digital music. I'm not sure what you're taking issue over?
As I see it, a good CD recording played through a good music system will on the whole be more accurate to the recorded sound than the same music played through a record player on vinyl. I think you can say that you prefer the sound of vinyl, in much the same way as one can prefer valve sound but the inherent design problems of vinyl reproduction will always introduce distortion into the sound.
I like records because of the ritual of playing them and the fact that they are not instant and need thought. But I don't kid myself that they sound better than my CD5500.
I record my digital music at high bit rates so my iPod classic and Sennheisser HD600s actually sound rather good!
Peter
I'm with Peter.
I suspect the vinyl thing is nought but a fashion.
Ban boring signatures!
edit: This is either a double post or else the stylus skipped!!
Dave Farr:It is a reported fact that younger people are starting to re-discover vinyl and appreciate it over some digital music. I'm not sure what you're taking issue over?
It could merely be a matter of definitions.
When I say "digital music", I mean "music that has been recorded (or transmitted) digitally" however, many people use the term "digital music" to mean "music that has been encoded using a lossy codec" (like MP3, for example).
Many audiophiles claim that LPCM (and therefore "digital") recordings are "tinny" - which is a statement to which I object. However, if we are talking about kids listening to 128 kbps MP3's over a "loudspeaker" built into an iThingy - and the trend that vinyl is making them listen to music over decent loudspeakers or headphones using better gear, then I have no issue with that whatsoever.
If you could only get the same 'young people' to listen to (well recorded/lossless) 'digital' music over the same descent loudspeakers or headphones, I am sure they would ditch the vinyl.
MM
There is a tv - and there is a BV
Peter: As I see it, a good CD recording played through a good music system will on the whole be more accurate to the recorded sound than the same music played through a record player on vinyl. I think you can say that you prefer the sound of vinyl, in much the same way as one can prefer valve sound but the inherent design problems of vinyl reproduction will always introduce distortion into the sound. I like records because of the ritual of playing them and the fact that they are not instant and need thought. But I don't kid myself that they sound better than my CD5500. I record my digital music at high bit rates so my iPod classic and Sennheisser HD600s actually sound rather good!
Agree with you on this, even back in the day with good digital many listening tests were conducted with the master tape, LP, and CD, and the CD was pretty much always, at least in all the tests I've seen, found to be a nearly exact copy of the master. So the system is sonically transparent. Sometimes the sound of the LP was preferred, but if the CD is more accurate to the master tape that means whatever euphonic colorations the LP puts in, which Geoff has described above, it's not accuracy you're liking. Back in the day, Carver did a thing called a Digital Time Lens that introduced some of these LP colorations into CD sound. Did a remarkable job emulating that LP sound, and made a lot of very bad CDs sound much better, but wasn't a big seller. People who really liked LP better usually were of the same camp that could not swallow the idea that it was only a couple of distinct coloration issues with LP that made them sound "better."
Ditto using decent sample rates for MP3/AAC compressed audio. Most people would be surprised at how neutral even 96 kbs VBR can be on a good encoder, let alone 128 or 256.
Jeff
I'm afraid I'm recovering from the BeoVirus.
Hey everybody,
I'm definitely not an expert in the music business but one thing that seems important to me is the quality of the recordings. If you listen to music through very accurate speakers you can easily be disappointed by the rather bad quality of the recording. Old music has been copied to digital sources and maybe meanwhile it has even been remastered. Nowadays cost cutting seems to be pretty widespread not to mention that it requires decent skill to record music properly. If you have a well-done recording on a digital format I think soundwise this is the best one can get. Recordings of Yello and Brendan Perry's Ark are examples that come to my mind. However, not many digital recordings are that well done. From my point of view, money spent on high qaulity audio components is partly wasted when it's already the recordings that are bad. The better your audio system is the more you discover the weaknesses of the recording which doesn't make the experience of listening to the music any more pleasing. Other than the nice feel and look of things when playing vinyl, I have a feeling that many of the original old recordings were much better than the remastered digital ones. And even if playing records adds much more distortion, this can still make listening to certain recordings on vinyl more pleasing to me than listening to the digital equivalent.
Greetings,
Kai
While I have and continue to buy (used) records, I don't understand the fascination with thinking they sound better than CDs. Frankly, with all of the compromises that go into them, it's a wonder they sound as good as they do.
Another compromise that has to be made with records is the fact that because the rotational speed of the record is constant, but the playing radius is not, there is less "groove length" at the inner tracks of the record. Therefore, there may have been dynamic range compression and/or reduction in bass for those "inner" tracks. I've heard that this phenomena has affected the order of songs on records by putting the "quieter" songs on the inner grooves of a record.
I recall reading that there were some early record players whose rotational speed varied with the position of the stylus. Obviously, these players would need specially made records to work properly. CD players incorporate this varying rotational speed so the reading rate is constant over the CD.
At the latest record (and CD) show in my town, I heard something even more shocking than the popularity of records: cassettes are coming back. You have been warned,
D
'Many audiophiles claim that LPCM (and therefore digital) recordings are "tinny"- which is a statement to which I object. However, if we are talking about kids listening to 128 kbps MP3's over a "loudspeaker" built into an iThingy - and the trend that vinyl is making them listen to music over decent loudspeakers or headphones using better gear, then I have no issue with that whatsoever'.
Geoff, that was my point - not clearly made. This topic seems to have taken a wrong turn but a good discussion. As I've said, I have no problem with digital music - I love my iTunes, Playmaker, CDX2 players etc. Listening to 'music' via dodgy headphones or inbuilt speakers from an "iThingy" as you put it was my issue.
I think you should copyrighgt "iThingy", it's catchy and encompasses everything that isn't a phone, tablet or watch. Apple probably have copyright on anything with "i"at the front I expect.
to me vinyl goes past this sound quality discussion, although important.
I seem to cherish and care for my vinyl in a deeper way than I do with my MP3 files, CD's, Spotify or iRadio accounts. Music is important to us all as it can take us to places that cannot be reached by other stimulants, how many times when you have been at rock bottom has music brought you back up. To me pleasure cannot be rushed and having to invest time in cleaning, storing and preparing my music before play offers a greater reward and respect for the artist and music.
we are moving to a do not own society which iTunes clearly showed giving away U2's album and Amazon Kindle's removal of George Orwell's 1984 book a few years ago, maybe this onward growth in Vinyl sales is deeper than we think and can compliment the streaming world
to us music is important or we would not be on this site or own the systems we own and I have total respect for everyone of you for that...
Dave Farr:Listening to 'music' via dodgy headphones or inbuilt speakers from an "iThingy" as you put it was my issue.
Then we agree. Too bad... I like arguing. :-)
And finally from me, I am still inwardly laughing at the radio 4 programme where two recording engineers were extoling the virtues of hi res digital recording and were demonstrating normal and hi-res files - they ridiculed the thought that one could not immediately tell the difference. They were then played two versions of the same recording, a recording which one of them had been the engineer on, and were asked to say which was the hi-res file - no prizes for the result!
Dom
2x BeoSystem 3, BeoSystem 5000, BeoSystem 6500, 2x BeoMaster 7000, 2 pair of BeoLab Penta mk2, AV 7000, Beolab 4000, BeoSound 4000, Playmaker, BeoLab 2500, S-45, S-45.2, RL-140, CX-50, C-75, 3x CX-100, 3x MCL2 link rooms, 3x Beolab 2000, M3, P2, Earset, A8 earphones, A3, 2x 4001 relay, H3, H3 ANC, H6, 2014 Audi S5 with B&O sound, and ambio
DMacri:I've been concerned that I can't easily tell the difference between a CD and the same song from iTunes played from my Mac Mini. I have a perfectly good stereo system connected to Vandersteen 2Ci speakers. My hearing is still good to 17kHz. Maybe the problem is after a few minutes I just get lost in the music and forget I'm trying to listen critically. Then again, is that really a problem, or the reason I listen in the first place?
My experience as well - and I am not concerned! (Although I cannot hear past 13kHz these days!) Enjoy your listening!
That's only something to be concerned about if you accept as truth the a priori assumption many people make that there is a difference that's easily audible. As I've said in the past here, my experiences with some controlled listening tests, and reading others work, has shown me there are few if any differences that are easily perceived if you use a high enough bit rate encoding on a good encoder, such as Apple's version of AAC. I've seen some alleged "golden earred" audiophiles fail spectacularly to identify even fairly low bit rates as compressed audio. Most don't even know how to really pick a song that will actually stress an encoder and up the likelihood they would be able to tell a difference. When you remove the perceptual bias by hiding what is playing, the encoders are remarkably transparent.
I find that music sounds best when played on a system that is from the same era. To me 60's, 70's and early 80's stuff sounds best on vinyl, mid 80's and 90's is best on CD and later stuff sounds fine coming from a digital device.
beaker: I find that music sounds best when played on a system that is from the same era. To me 60's, 70's and early 80's stuff sounds best on vinyl, mid 80's and 90's is best on CD and later stuff sounds fine coming from a digital device.
Interesting observation, and similar to an approach a good friend of mine uses. He's quite the archivist, he's worked as a studio engineer, and done a lot of field recordings of folk music and storytelling, done editing and remixing work for the National Archives and Smithsonian. He can playback in his studio anything from Edison cylinders up to DAT tapes and beyond, including 3 turntables, 4 open reel machines, 3 high end cassette decks, etc. Even has an 8 track somewhere.
Anyway, his approach is similar, and since he has a lot of very old music he has multiple systems built around age appropriate components, from old radio horns and cabinets, thru a wide variety of different eras. For the older stuff, there really is something to be gained listening on an appropriate system, as it captures the whole feel of the music of the time better IMO. Hearing the original music come out of a system with the colorations present in the systems of the day is a different sonic experience to hearing old music out of a modern system.
Well, imho, there are just too many variables and factors to decide if one sounds better than the other. Badly produced digital music will sound bad no matter what you play it on. I think there is something in the type of music we like that sounds better on different formats and some of it (with vinyl) for example is nostalgia related. I love vinyl and I like the sound of it, but it sounds better in my flat with high ceilings and carpets than it does in my bungalow that has wooden floor boards and low ceilings - both have BM6500 and either Beovox S60 or S45 speakers and good turntables. And that sounds infinitely better than my old Hacker record player which has valves and enough people say that valves sound better. ( although not in a small cabinet with a small speaker and garrard deck immediately about it all)
Sometimes, its the ritual of vinyl on a friday evening with some wine that is great and sometimes the ease and convenience of streaming is better. The only thing that I have noticed making a difference is a DAC between the amp and apple tv. Playmaker has a good DAC by all accounts so probably isn't affected by that.
I'm not sure that I think either agree is the better medium, as it is down to personal preference, the equipment you have, the space the equipment is in and about a million other things.
Anyway, really pleased to see that Vinyl (no matter how small the market) is still with us and growing in popularity and there will always be a time and place for it in my home.
Can you really hear the grass grow?
To me I have never gotten into Iphone and cheap earphones or any kind of earphones. Usually they do not last long.
Being the musician with loud Marshalls and real drums not padded to make less noise for 2 decades or more I can't really tell what sounds the most natural to the real thing. My ears are still hearing very well and not ringing.
Most people can't tell the difference between a medium. Those who slings mud at cassette tapes has not heard a Beocord do the job very well.
My attitude to tapes changed when I got introduced to a Beocord 9000 and also 2000. Then discovered how well they record. My point of view shifted for good.
I am currently listening to the original cassette version of Live Sådan with Gasolin' from 1976 and compared to the cd box it is a little darker in the drum and bass department but still not a tape that is not worth not hearing again.
The thing is I could change from 1981 Beosystem 6000 and 1991 Beosystem 6500 to the latest B&O for audio and would not really notice the difference! I am just happy with what I got for now.
This is probably the best, most 'real' and most interesting debate that i've ever read on BeoWorld.
I guess that i've been lucky that i've experienced using ALL formats and all were superb in their own way! I loved the portability of cassettes and now my iTunes library in my iPhone AND I love vinyl in the club were the DJ does the 'scratching'. Pioneer now regarded as the best manufacturer in the world for DJ and studio use have last month released a TURNTABLE based on the 'soul' of the Technics 1210!
Serato have a 'special' record that always you to connect your MacBook to a turntable to actually play your MP4s through vinyl! For that warm hands on sound!
GQ Magazine had a nice editorial last year on vinyl and concluded that 'it was too much hard work to maintain and recommended a trip of nostalgia by listening to vinyl on YouTube'. Not too accurate as YouTube is 192Kbps max but there are some great vinyl fans out there including this guy who owns one of the nicest makes of turntables ever and still built in the UK - REGA!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6W94HZy6ntc&list=UU0lbCZWeqAbuhML4F6O8brw
Anyway great debate!
In another thread I wrote about a 180 gram vinyl album, I had bought.
A 180g album means 2 dics/four sides - and that you have to get up from your chair 4 times for that single album.
That is probably the best thing about vinyl - it keps you fit 💪
Millemissen: That is probably the best thing about vinyl - it keps you fit 💪
Moving 2 m of shelf space worth of 78's in a Honda Civic was also a workout - for me and the Honda. I had to make multiple trips because the suspension in the car couldn't handle the weight.
Geoff Martin: Millemissen: That is probably the best thing about vinyl - it keps you fit 💪 Moving 2 m of shelf space worth of 78's in a Honda Civic was also a workout - for me and the Honda. I had to make multiple trips because the suspension in the car couldn't handle the weight. Cheers -g
That physical interaction with vinyl records is a big part of the attraction. It provides an end-user with an attachment to the music (and artist) that you don't get with digital. That physical action of getting up to put on the record is also a pain that made those of us from that era long for the convenience that digital media now provides. However, once digital music became the norm...we want our vinyl (and cassette tapes) back. I am glad both options are available. I often listen to my music via my digital sources. It is too convenient not to. All of the music I grew up with is from the vinyl heyday though and that is my preferred media type to listen to when I am able to sit down and just listen to some music.
It is fun to listen to the arguments from both sides (analog and digital) going on and on trying to claim one is superior to the other. But in the end it comes down to personal enjoyment by the listener, so the only right answer is the one concluded to by each listener. For me, as long as vinyl records and record players are around during my lifetime I will be happy.
-sonavor
the only thing I miss are the Album sleeves.
for the rest: since 1985 digital rules................. first cd's then DVDA & SACD, then ripping everything to lossless; now also downloads of hires.
All new produced record are from a source, which in some production stage has been in the digital domain; therefor the end result, the record, can't be better than the in between format of the digital domain!
I think digital downloads like iTunes and such could go a long way towards making the digital experience better by improving what comes with the digital tracks. Right now all we get is a postage stamp image of the album cover. Make it higher res, and alter say the iTunes iPad app to let you pinch to expand the view, scroll around, so you can see the artwork in better detail, Also include all the original liner notes and other artwork. Wouldn't add that much to the size of the file, and would make up for not having the album cover to hold in your hands I think.
Jeff maybe this will be the answer from Apple! A new format on its way!
http://www.macrumors.com/2014/09/18/apple-u2-music-format/
@Jeff
Many (or some) albums already have albumart, liner notes etc on iTunes.
---
I don't miss a paper sleeve to hold in my hand.
My iPad and the internet gives me any posibility to explore the music I am listening to - including different versions of the albumart (which very often is the case), background knowledge of the artists and producers, engineers....
In fact it gives me much more than a simple album cover could ever give.
Hello all, hardly ever come to BeoWorld now as B&O isn't something I tend to have much to do with any more (although I still love my 7000 system!) Good to see a thread like this discussing something I have a particular passion for!
Vinyl is full of problems, and it can sound absolutely dreadful when not done properly. CDs are better in terms of out and out sonic performance, yadda yadda. This is all true.
Why do the records often sound better then? It's the mastering. I have a number of albums which I own on both Vinyl and CD, and generally it's the modern releases which tend to come out better if you listen on vinyl.
Below are some graphs. Left to right is time, and on the vertical axis is level. Three plots are drawn on each graph, the highest (blue) is the 'peaks' or the highest levels in the audio signal, the second line (white) is the average level as a dumb computer would see it, and the bottom line (yellow) is the average level but with less bass (to over simplify somewhat).
Here's John Grant's Pale Green Ghosts on Vinyl:
And then the same album on CD:
I've adjusted the level of the CD rip to bring it to the same (perceived) level as Vinyl level. Normally the CD plot would be peaking at a fraction of a dB below the '0' line.
Here's another, Massive Attack's Paradise Circus on Vinyl:
And the same again but on CD:
The CD versions of both albums are completely squashed; all the peaks and 'dynamics' of the music have been eradicated (or 'limited' by a limiter which is what is used in mastering to remove peaks). This has a VERY audible effect on the sound - to the point where I'd say the CD version sounds rather poor while the Vinyl sounds fantastic. All the attack and 'snap' of the drums are back, the Vinyl sounds spacious and 'three dimensional' while the CD sounds cluttered and 'flat', almost un-exciting in comparison!
What these graphs don't tell you is the tonal balance, which is also quite different between Vinyl and CD. The Vinyl is (to my ears listening back on ATC speakers which are EXTREMELY neutral and accurate) more natural, warmer (I hate this word!), much bigger and rounder at the bottom-end and more sparkly/bright, while the CD version sounds dull at the top-end, constrained and 'small' in the bass and very 'pushed' and aggressive in the midrange. The CD version almost leaves me wanting to turn the volume down and with somewhat 'used' ears - I need a break after listening. The Vinyl version however sounds great at all volumes but especially when played loud (which is fun every now and then)!
Why is this? The Vinyl has a MUCH higher 'noise' level than CD (although bass rumble contributes a lot to this in measurements but in reality is far less audible than midrange noise which is actually still a good 50 dB down on vinyl, although this isn't great compared to say 90-93 dB on CD). Vinyl is (as Geoff says) full of limitations - too much treble and most styli/cartridges can't track it properly, pressings can go wrong (I have a number of records which are off-set so they slow down and speed up every time the record rotates!) and it can also degrade quite quickly if your turntable isn't set-up correctly! So full of issues!
The answer is simple (although the solution is incredibly complicated). Artists, labels and listeners tend to prefer things when they're louder. Heck most audiophiles prefer things louder too. The problem is CD has a theoretical 'maximum' - it's a bunch of numbers all strung together to plot points on an audio waveform. If you keep making your recording louder and louder, at some point it will reach the maximum numerical value and simply get chopped-off (which is actually '0 dB' as we work from 0 downwards in digital audio world). In the digital realm this 'clipping' of the waveform is deeply unpleasant, so a Limiter is used instead which is like a super-fast compressor and uses all sorts of techniques (none of which I really understand or have any interest in to be honest) to make this 'chopping-off' of the waveform less obnoxious. Ultimately though, these peaks which end up getting completely annihilated in most modern recordings are very important. Even listening back on my laptop speakers the difference between the CD and Vinyl versions is large.
CDs and digital downloads tend to be the same release/master, and they're both going to be played alongside other artists' music in Stealify/iTunes/whatever other digital platform you choose to listen in. If your music is quieter than the previous guy's song, most people nowadays (distant relatives of the ape but with a shorter attention span) will tend to think it sounds worse. In reality you just need to use your volume control - turn the quieter tracks up, because they'll sound WAY better!
The vinyl version will NEVER be shuffled - it will NEVER be skipped through and it will NEVER be squeezed onto an iWatch and played through earbuds while you're on the bus.
If you want to hear it the way the mastering engineer (and mix engineer) both want their release to be heard, the reality is Vinyl is most probably the best option with the way the industry is releasing material at the moment.
There are a whole load of releases I have like this by the way, too many to list but here's a number of artists whose albums I'd include I'd include:
Feist (all her albums)
Stevie Wonder
The War On Drugs
Grizzly Bear
The Beatles (yes!)
Talking Heads
David Byrne & St. Vincent
The Antlers
Radiohead
Iron & Wine
etc...
I wish I could post the audio clips for you guys to compare because the difference is VAST! I think there are probably too many laws I'd be breaking to do this.. hmmm...
@Killyp: Nice posting! Thanks!