"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"David Looser" wrote in message
...
"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"David Looser" wrote in message
...

I really don't see why - my views don't change...??

No, your views don't change, but your debating points are as
insubstantial as quicksand.


No idea what that means.

I believe you.

Sure, these days 'quality' items tend to be the 'hand crafted' low
production run or even one-off stuff.

Wrong! Those aren't "quality items" they are snob-appeal items.


All of them? You know this or are we just looking at another OSAF here..??

Try learning what the word "quality" means. It does not mean "hand-crafted",
"low production runs" or "one-off".

I'm afraid you are the only one up a gum-tree he I never mentioned
'better fidelity' - you did, read it again!

I know you didn't, you said "good". but since we talking about an object
whose only reason for existance is to deliver an audio signal it's
"goodness" is essentially it's ability to deliver a high fidelity audio
signal.


More guesswork. You are applying your own criteria to the music-buying
masses. One of the things that crops up frequently with vinyl noobies
coming away from MP3s is that they are tickled by being able to physically
hold the *music* while in the same breath CDs are described as
'throwaways' - like being only a 'carrier' to get the music onto their
iPods or whatever.

Why not offer them shellac to hold rather than vinyl? More to hold, more to
store, even more outdated. Should make one of your "noobies" even more
tickled. (better still a cylinder, now there's a *real* object!)

Streuth, work it out for yourself! The fact that so many people download
music (at CD prices?) demonstrates clearly that those people don't
consider it worth waiting for the physical CD. If the physical CD was
worth it and they *cared* they would buy the frigging CDs, wouldn't
they?

Savvy? :-)

I see. What a *really* strange way of looking at things. Why would people
care about the physical CD?, it's what's on the CD they are buying, not
the physical object.


Again, you are applying your own criteria to others - lots of others.

Hang on, above you said that even those who are "tickled" by being able to
hold an LP regard a CD as "throwaway", now you are saying that the idea that
people don't care about the CD as a physical object is just my criteria.

And since we know that music buyers are deserting physical media for
downloads we can safely conclude that the majority of music buyers actually
want to buy music, not physical objects.


An LPCM 44.1/16bit download *is* a CD as far as audio
quality and content are concerned.


In *your* opinion - probably nobody else's!

That's not my opinion, it's a fact. Did you not notice the phase "as far as
audio quality and content are concerned"?


What's changed? The music that is available depends on what music gets
bought. In the past most record sales were to kids with Dansettes,
nowadays the kids have iPods (which, incidentally, deliver far better
audio quality than the Dansettes ever did).


I doubt that.

Which bit do you doubt? That most record sales are to young people with
low-quality players, or that the iPod delivers a far better audio quality
than a Dansette? Because again both are simply verifiable facts.

David.