In article ,
Paul wrote:
The record companies were in an excellent position to do this as they
could compare the various stages though the process, so could
establish how much deterioration occured when a stamper was made, etc.

Exactly - 'how much deterioration', not whether there is *any*
deterioration. The process is flawed. Why is it that it appears to
'hurt' people to admit it? Why is there a problem accepting a less
flawed alternative to vynil? I must conclude that High Fidelity is not
the goal of many. If people said 'I know vinyl is not High Fidelity but
I prefer it' then I could understand.

It still makes for an interesting discussion, however, as many appeared to
have forgotten just how 'vinyl' actually works.

--
*If a parsley farmer is sued, can they garnish his wages?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.