[rollei_list] OT: Vinyl and CD's
- From: Marc James Small <marcsmall@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx,rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2009 21:46:12 -0500
At 09:27 PM 3/3/2009, Robert Lilley wrote:
Actually, yes Peter I own and regularly play a
Victoria VV VI. The acoustic fidelity is quite good.
It is interesting to note why vinyl LPs
disappeared rapidly during the mid 80's. It
wasn't because CD were better. They were
not. It wasn't because vinyl was an old,
outdated media. It is argued that like film vs.
digital pictures, vinyl LP's have more data than
the average CD and certainly more than MP3
files. It was because LP's cost more to produce
than CDs and the record industry found they
could make more money selling CDs. What the
industry did was to refuse unsold LP returns
while allowing returns of CDs. Seemingly
overnight, the record stores switched over to
CDs and vinyl was relegated to those like myself
who remember how good music used to sound.
Its not how much better something is that causes
change - its how much money somebody can make if it does.
That is perhaps a marginal stretch but not
totally untrue. I am speaking as a guy who
invested in a really nice linear-tracking
turntable in 1985. Still have it, and it still
works great. Never have had to replace the
cartridge or needle. It just keeps on keeping
on. But it was expired technology when I bought
it, though I did not realize that, anymore than
the folks buying the current production of
2.8FX's realize that they are buying "expired technology".
CD's won primarily because of convenience and the
reality that, with electronic gear, prices
plummet as volume goes up. By 1989, a quality CD
player cost substantially less than did a
turntable, and was a hell of a lot easier to use. That was the prime reason.
The second reason is one to which you
speak. Small recording studios were able to get
into a vast archive of older music -- rock-'n'-
roll, country, classical, jazz, blue grass,
ethnic, and remaster it and then produce it on
CD's you could buy for $6.99. I used to pay $15
or more for a 45-rpm from 1960 but, by 1980, I
could find the tune on SMASH HITS OF 1960 from
K-Tel or Groove Records or whoever.
Still, a quality vinyl album on a quality
turntable and amp and system will give you a much
richer sound with vastly greater frequency
response than will the best commercial CD rig. I
do not have the ear to appreciate this save in a
few quiet places -- on vinyl, you can sometimes
hear the musicians flipping over their scores
during a pause, and that sort of detail just is absent from CD.
This is much like film versus digital. Digital
is convenient but, for years to come, film will
produce better quality even if we are not capable
of recognizing the distinction. But, to me, it
is important that I am producing something that is the very best possible.
Marc
msmall@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Cha robh bàs fir gun ghràs fir!
---
Rollei List
- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Online, searchable archives are available at
//www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
Other related posts:
