"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Rob wrote:
No vinyl system can ever sound as good as CD - as a principle.

Nonsense - there is no *universal* principle of 'sounds as good'

There is to some - and that includes me.

Well that's not a universal principle, it's a personal principle, and that's
an opinion. And I have one too - not right or wrong, an opinion. And let's
face it, in the scheme of things, preferring a particular type of sound is
not usually a problem ...

That is that the recording should
sound as close to the original as possible. And neither LP or analogue
tape comes near good digital in this respect.

My only experience of the original is clubs, concerts and festivals. I've
never heard any domestic stereo come close to that sound - which in many
ways is a good thing, although reproducing the sound levels would be, for
me, amusing if not exactly necessary. Still, I take your point, it's a valid
measure of 'good music reproduction'.

You may well like the degradation that LP or tape introduces. That's your
choice. Many prefer their widescreen TV to distort 4:3 pictures to fill
the screen too. And consider that 'better' ;-)

Well, here we have it! I don't consider LP reproduction necessarily
'degradation'. Some LPs sound terrible - they were just recorded that way.
As do some CDs - a few remastered CDs I have sound compressed.

I was listening to a Nina Simone CD last night, and it generally sounded
superb, except her voice (pretty important!) - quite harsh and sibilant. On
LP, same track, her voice sounded as I imagine it should - hard, driving,
but not harsh and unpleasant. 'I imagine' is indeed my particular
preference, and I have to concede to a lot of people that'd be distortion -
her voice has been distorted and degraded. Perhaps you're right - I like
that distortion and remain defensive about calling it that.

There's just something very 'New Labour' about this argument - apparent
consensus and cod science equals fact. Any challenge to that 'fact' takes me
full circle - concensus is fine to a point (there's a lot more to digital
music's advanatages than sound quality) and I don't understand the science.
So I can't prove anything, and you within a universal frame of reference
(the science) can. All I can say (!), and going back to the OP, is give LP a
try.

Rob


--
*Marriage changes passion - suddenly you're in bed with a relative*

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

In article ,
Rob wrote:
That is that the recording should sound as close to the original as
possible. And neither LP or analogue tape comes near good digital in
this respect.

My only experience of the original is clubs, concerts and festivals.
I've never heard any domestic stereo come close to that sound - which
in many ways is a good thing, although reproducing the sound levels
would be, for me, amusing if not exactly necessary. Still, I take your
point, it's a valid measure of 'good music reproduction'.

No - I mean the original electrical signal, ie the output of the mixing
desk or microphone.

Reproducing the exact original sound is a totally different matter down
the expertise of the balance engineer - and indeed may not be required.
You'd certainly not like the exact sound you heard acoustically in a
studio - although with a 'live' type recording you might with certain
types of music.

--
*I feel like I'm diagonally parked in a parallel universe.

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