| Are You Serious? Ha! What has the author of this article been smoking? The "latest" thing in recorded sound is the revitalization of the LP! They are selling like hotcakes, along with turntables, yes I said "turntables." People have decided that they just like to hold something tangible (album cover) and listen to listenable analog sound.
Some listeners even are trying to bring back the 78! Check out this month's Stereophile magazine if you don't believe me: »www.stereophile.com/
--
"Remember, Comrade, people who are willing to destroy an efficient telephone system may not be playing with a full deck." |
|
 BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | said by Alex G Bell:Ha! What has the author of this article been smoking? The "latest" thing in recorded sound is the revitalization of the LP! They are selling like hotcakes, along with turntables, yes I said "turntables." People have decided that they just like to hold something tangible (album cover) and listen to listenable analog sound. Some listeners even are trying to bring back the 78! Check out this month's Stereophile magazine if you don't believe me: » www.stereophile.com/ Yes the LP is making a comeback of sorts, but that has nothing to do with digital that is coming at the expense of CD sales. People that rather not have digital music want LPs not CDs. The author's point is still very valid. peole like me that don't give 2 shits about album art are fine with digital, those that like album art rather see on a 12 inch ALBUM not a 6 IN CD case. |
|
| reply to Alex G Bell
said by Alex G Bell:Ha! What has the author of this article been smoking? The "latest" thing in recorded sound is the revitalization of the LP! They are selling like hotcakes, along with turntables, yes I said "turntables." People have decided that they just like to hold something tangible (album cover) and listen to listenable analog sound. Some listeners even are trying to bring back the 78! Check out this month's Stereophile magazine if you don't believe me: » www.stereophile.com/ I grew up listening to vinyl records and reel-to-reel tapes--from cheap mono to somewhat less cheap stereo, from pristine brand new to scratchy, well, vinyl. As far as "selling like hotcakes" goes, all I can say is "There's a sucker born every minute". The "vinyl sound" is fine if that's what you like, but you are listening to the needle scrolling through the groove, too... not just the music (and some people like that better). CDs are hardly perfect--it's not like they're DAT; the sampling rate is relatively low, but still high enough to give a "just the music" sound superior to vinyl (or non-DAT [tape]). So, if "digital first" becomes the wave of the future for distribution, will the sound quality equal the "lossless CD" sound? I doubt it. (Not that I care... I wouldn't buy or acquire in any way anything from an RIAA member artist. They aren't worth my time or money.) |
|
 tmh
@comcast.net | reply to Alex G Bell
said by Alex G Bell:Ha! What has the author of this article been smoking? The "latest" thing in recorded sound is the revitalization of the LP! Grandpa? Is that you? |
|
KearnstdElf WizardPremium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ | reply to Alex G Bell
the main issue with turntables is can they come down in price? a good one is much more expensive then a good CD player and cant seek to a track.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports |
|
Reviews:
 ·Cox HSI
 ·World Lynx
| said by Kearnstd:the main issue with turntables is can they come down in price? a good one is much more expensive then a good CD player and cant seek to a track. Sure they can! You raise the cue lever, move the tone arm to another location and lower the cue lever! Maybe a tad bit slower than a CD, but still works!  |
|
| reply to Alex G Bell
said by Alex G Bell:The "latest" thing in recorded sound is the revitalization of the LP! Latest? Feh... the "vinyl is coming back" song has been played for the last five years at least. Yes people are buying LP records and turntables. Yes sales are up. No the LP is not overtaking sales for either CDs or digital downloads. No the LP is not the wave of the future. Vinyl is worth having around and has its place, but it will never be the powerhouse it used to be. |
|
 SlidetboneMazin GoPremium
join:2002-11-10
Land O Lakes, FL | Right, but here is the primary reason why LP's made a comback...which are the same reasons the CD will be around for much longer than we think.
The LP analog format captured captured the entire spectrum of the recorded media. So if the engineer did a great job mastering, the LP will reproduce close to 99% of that original master tape. Pair a good turntable with a high fidelity stylus and cartidge and you are good to go.
The statement LP's are better than CD's is true (only for a specific time period) because the LP was created from an analog media. Many reissued CD's made from recordings mastered on analog tape do not capture the entire essence of the original due to sampling and compression. Many studios did not adopt digital recording equipment up until the mid 90's or so. My collection of LP's stops at around 1989. This is the period the LP rules.
One example is Boston's Don't Look Back. Compare the LP sound versus the CD reissue. BIG difference! Remasters have been better than the reissue CD, but not by much. Here the LP is king.
CD's produced from digital recordings are a great blessing! These do not alter the master medium. So it is a good thing.
Audiophiles for the most part do not go for digital downloads because the format is lossy, even if it is an MP3 at 320kbps. For an MP3 to me manageable for downloads, digital "holes" are poked into the file. You lose a lot of frequencies.
A normal listener will not care one way or another.
If I have to create MP3's to carry in my Sansa (no iPUD here...misspelling is intentional) or my car, I create them from CD's and LP's I have bought. As a studio musician, I know where the monies go to on music sales and I want my fellow musicians to get paid too.
I do not see the demise of red book CD's. And like Alex said here, listeners like to have a tangible item...to read credits, to look at the album art, to get an autograph, to know things about the recording. |
|
 Combat ChuckToo Many CannibalsPremium
join:2001-11-29
Erie, PA | reply to Alex G Bell
said by Alex G Bell:Ha! What has the author of this article been smoking? The "latest" thing in recorded sound is the revitalization of the LP! The LP is coming back in the same way fiesta ware and the accordion camera are coming back. It's a cult following; mainstream consumers aren't buying LP's.
--
Come let us reason together. |
|
Sammer
join:2005-12-22
Canonsburg, PA | reply to Slidetbone
said by Slidetbone:CD's produced from digital recordings are a great blessing! These do not alter the master medium. So it is a good thing. Audiophiles for the most part do not go for digital downloads because the format is lossy, even if it is an MP3 at 320kbps. For an MP3 to me manageable for downloads, digital "holes" are poked into the file. You lose a lot of frequencies. A normal listener will not care one way or another. While digital masters can be a good thing many Rock / Pop CDs made in the past decade have terrible mastering with little or no dynamic range. People who mostly listen to mp3s probably don't notice or care but audiophiles will. Maybe if the CDs produced in the past decade were of better quality many more people would have noticed the audio deficiencies of the mp3. |
|
CorydonCultivant son jardinPremium
join:2008-02-18
Denver, CO | reply to Alex G Bell
The latest in audio technology... |
|
DesdinovaPremium
join:2003-01-26
Gaithersburg, MD | reply to Kearnstd
"...and cant seek to a track."
If you believe that then you haven't been paying attention... 
»www.laser-turntable.com/Turntabl···able.htm |
|
DesdinovaPremium
join:2003-01-26
Gaithersburg, MD | reply to Slidetbone
There are some very compelling arguments about vinyl STILL being superior to CDs (though to achieve that level of quality is problematic to say the least).
LPs have a much wider frequency response than CDs (once again assuming a playback system with a quality stylus, proper tracking weight, good pre-amp, amplifier, speakers, etc. I'm also excluding some of the audiophile formats such as SACD). While it's true that CDs capture the range of audible tones (for humans), there are frequencies beyond human hearing (in the ultasonic) that can radically affect the transmission and shape of the lower (audible) frequencies. This "natural" distortion can play a huge part in creating an immersive, authentic playback environment.
However, most listening environments preclude such critical and balanced playback, not to mention the inconvenience factor, so the benefits for the average listener are pretty much nil. I remember reading several white papers on this published in Japan about ten years ago.
Still, since the subject of theoretical quality was raised... |
|
| I think (? ) the real point is that CDs were never designed to provide the best sound quality possible. They were simply meant to solve/simplify a manufacturing and distribution problem/process. Digital is just as capable as analog of producing the "ultimate" sound quality short of live performance (especially with cost being a factor). (Is it live or is it Memorex?) CDs were simply the result of decisions regarding how to provide a superior combination of sound, simplicity, and "life" (vinyl and tape wear out with use) at an acceptable price (or more accurately, profit). CDs were a means to an end; "digital" is capable of much higher quality than that which CDs deliver. |
|
DesdinovaPremium
join:2003-01-26
Gaithersburg, MD | No arguments here! I should have been clearer about what I meant when I said "CD"; I was referring to the red book standard of the 44.1 kHz sample rate and not the potential for digital signal collection on an optical disc. Digital has the potential to collect an analog waveform with 100% accuracy, but the file size (depending on the signal length being collected) would be quite large and completely inconvenient for consumer use!  |
|
 BIGMIKEPremium
join:2002-06-07
Westminster, CA | reply to Corydon
1877 - Thomas Edison invents the phonograph, the first medium for recording and playing back sound. It used cylinders instead of discs
1887 - Emile Berliner invents the gramophone, the first flat record player
1900 - Eldredge Johnson perfects mass duplication of pre-recorded flat record discs
1906 - RCA Victor introduces Victrola model record player, which had variable turntable speed control that accommodated the wide range of records produced at the time
1908 - Columbia introduces the first double-sided phonograph records
1912 - Disc recordings become more popular than cylinder recordings
1924 - Electrical records replace acoustic discs
1928 - The 78.26 rpm speed becomes standard for all phonograph records.
1946 - German magnetic tape recorders are copied for commercial use by AMPEX
1948 - The 33 1/3 LP is introduced by Columbia
1949 - RCA Victor introduces large-hole 45 rpm records. It became the preferred medium for singles
1952 - The Recording Industry Association of America is formed.
1955 - 12" LPs become more popular than 10" LPs
1962 - Multi-track analog tape recording begins in recording studios
1963 - Phillips develops compact stereo tape cassettes and players
1982 - The compact disc is introduced. The first CD is released in Japan. It is Billy Joel's "52nd Street."
1983 - The first CDs are released in the United States
1986 - CDs overtake LPs as top-selling medium in the United States
1999 - Recordable CD-R discs become available
2000 - Napster is created. This is also the first year that recording sales declined, and the recording industry blames online music sharing.
2001 - Napster is slapped with a lawsuit by the RIAA. In October, Apple introduces its iPod portable music player.
2003 - Apple introduces its online music store iTunes, offering free music downloads at 99 cents per song.
2006 - In February, iTunes sells its billionth song.
2007 - Just over a year later, in July, iTunes crosses the 3 billion songs sold mark.
- Media Management Group |
|
|
|
