Mr.T wrote:
"Rob" wrote in message
...
My take is that they PREFER the so called "euphonic distortions",
Prefer the sound, OK. I think you just have to take a deep breath,
relax, and get over it.

And IF they did, these debates would have finished 25 years ago.
Some people still listen to wax cylinders, without needing to "prove" they
are better than CD

but can't
possibly accept the fact that they may PREFER something not actually as
technically accurate.
I don't think 'they' know or care, in general.

And the ones that don't DO NOT post their opinions here obviously.


Mmm. Not sure what you mean. I know that I generally prefer the sound of
vinyl. I don't know why it sounds better than, say, CD. And I post here.


They then have to come up with stupid explanations
plausible to themselves,
Really? Again, generally people just prefer the sound. The 'why' isn't
particularly important. Knowing why might be interesting, but it's
hardly requisite.

Sure it is when they are claiming to the world that their *preference* is
technically superior, when all proof is to the contrary.


I don't think anyone on this NG (or elsewhere, come to that) has the
ability to *prove* the inherent technical superiority of one over the
other. It depends on your definition of 'technical', and the
significance of that definition when it comes to the sound. I think.

Rob

In article ddlCi.2291$sf1.250@trnddc01, Karl Uppiano
scribeth thus
So do I. OK, so that precludes anything on vinyl because any recording on
vinyl is by definition not well recorded. No skin off my nose.

I'm not sure I would go that far. I have been harping on the theoretical
advantages of digital audio since 1976. But I have some LPs dating back to
the early 70s that I would say are very well recorded, and provide the same
level of enjoyment as a well recorded CD, even if there is the occasional
tick or pop. Here are some of my favorite LPs:

- Toto IV - Toto (Columbia)
- Abbey Road - Beatles (Mobile Fidelity)
- Capriccio Italien from the 1812 Overture LP - Tchaikovsky (Telarc)
- Aspen Gold - Kingston Trio (Nautilus)
- Their Greatest Hits 1971-1975 - Eagles (Asylum)

To name a few. Some recordings, such as Rumours by Fleetwood Mac sound
better on the LP. The 1982 CD remaster simply falls flat - not the
technology, but the implementation. On the other hand, the Mirage CD from
the same era sounds great.




I remember several years ago being demonstrated some vinyl replay at
the home of Derek Scotland of Audiolab fame. I was very surprised by
just how good it was then!. All down to a very good MM pre-amp stage, he
spent a lot of time getting that designed right!. Good replay system
Audiolab and ESL63's, and most important of all there wasn't one single
pressing from the UK!. All were from Germany or the USA and specialised
suppliers at that!.

I remember his opinion of anything to do with any plastic pressing or
moulding process in the UK as,

...."all we're capable of is making children's **** pots!"......

Meaning sadly amongst many other things that the UK doesn't have such
people as plastics engineers;(....

and this was before the days that record producers had the notion that
CD's should all be the "radio edit" versions!....
--
Tony Sayer

In article ,
Rob wrote:
Mmm. Not sure what you mean. I know that I generally prefer the sound of
vinyl. I don't know why it sounds better than, say, CD. And I post here.

You like the added harmonic distortion. Rock guitar players do too. Others
will find it pleasant enough on some material but very objectionable on
others.


They then have to come up with stupid explanations
plausible to themselves,
Really? Again, generally people just prefer the sound. The 'why' isn't
particularly important. Knowing why might be interesting, but it's
hardly requisite.

Sure it is when they are claiming to the world that their *preference*
is technically superior, when all proof is to the contrary.


I don't think anyone on this NG (or elsewhere, come to that) has the
ability to *prove* the inherent technical superiority of one over the
other. It depends on your definition of 'technical', and the
significance of that definition when it comes to the sound. I think.

Parameters to measure an audio signal have been around and accepted for
many a year - and by the very people who make both the equipment and
sources you listen to. And vinyl doesn't measure well. Of course you can
fool yourself that those parameters aren't important. Provided you are
very selective about which ones.

--
*Speak softly and carry a cellular phone *

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

In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
I remember several years ago being demonstrated some vinyl replay at
the home of Derek Scotland of Audiolab fame. I was very surprised by
just how good it was then!. All down to a very good MM pre-amp stage, he
spent a lot of time getting that designed right!. Good replay system
Audiolab and ESL63's, and most important of all there wasn't one single
pressing from the UK!. All were from Germany or the USA and specialised
suppliers at that!.

I've no doubt he was also careful to select the sort of music which either
masks the inherent distortions or is 'enhanced' by them.

--
*Work is for people who don't know how to fish.

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

"Mr.T" MrT@home wrote in message
u...

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message
ups.com...

Here's your challenge, Arns. Give us the percentage of newly or
recently-produced media that passed through at least one tube device.
Let's exclude instrument amplification, as that will hugely skew the
numbers up.

Yes, unlike many of the posters here, most professional guitarists I know
actually accept that there is a difference between musical *production*
and
music *reproduction*

Too subtle a concept for many it seems.

Way too subtle for a subintellect like ****R.

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
"Keith G" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
"Keith G" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
"Keith G" wrote in message



My take is that now that the DJ-driven demand for vinyl is falling
off, and
sales are already dropping preciptiously, the hype will trail off.

No Arny, you've got that all wrong (unless you are
*distorting* again which, of course, is highly
likely) - it's CDs that are disappearing rapidly.

Not in terms of sales percentages.

No? I would have thought a fall in sales revenue of
19.8% in just three months was a pretty good indicator:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6933632.stm

OK Keith, so you can't tell the difference between a
sales percentage for vinyl, and an indicator of an
ongoing transition from one form of digital media to
another form of digital media.

Not my problem!

I think it is, unless you are deliberately
obfuscating/distorting or, as others imply, failing to
read properly or grasp the meaning of my post - my point
was that it is CDs which are disappearing and I provided
evidence.

I reproduced my OP on the topic above, and it doesn't even mention CDs.
Therefore Keith, your attempt to introduce CD sales, given that CDs are a
form of media that I didn't even mention, is an obvious example of a red
herring argument. It's just another one of your an intentional attempt to
mislead the discussion from its origional intent.

AFAIAC and in context, my CD comment was a perfectly valid counter to the
immediately preceding remarks concerning vinyl.

Repeating an intentional distraction doesn't make it less of a distraction.

"Mr.T" MrT@home wrote in message
u...

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

No Arny, you've got that all wrong (unless you are *distorting* again
which, of course, is highly likely) - it's CDs that are disappearing
rapidly.

Where the hell do YOU live?

Keith seems to spend a lot of time in some other universe - one where there
are actually a signficiant number of people who care about tubes, vinyl,
noisy microphones and tinny-sounding speakers.

But I note you do NOT claim vinyl sales have even reached the most
minuscule
percentage of CD sales, or availability.

Letsee, RIAA statistics show that several hundred million CDs were sold last
year, and Keith thinks that they are "disappearing rapidly"?

You've got to wonder what's in Keith's blood besides blood!

It's amazing what you can do with statistics though. An Audio rag recently
claimed that turntable sales in England were greater than CD player sales
last year.

I'm sitting here thinking that the sales of home optical players has
migrated from CD to DVD so fast that there might even be a bit of truth to
this claim.

Even IF true, what they conveniently ignored was the millions of DVD
player,
SACD player, DVDA player and other assorted hybrid player sales, that all
play standard CD disks.

Not that much less of a stretch than what Keith was saying - that the fact
that CD sales are being replaced by downloaded music is somehow relevant to
the fact that analog media like the LP went from 100% of the market to only
a percent or two.

"Never let the facts get in the way of a good argument" is still a widely
accepted philosophy it seems.

Agreed.

"Mr.T" MrT@home wrote in message
u...

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
Yep it's been happening for 25 years and no sign of
stopping.

My take is that now that the DJ-driven demand for vinyl is falling off,
and
sales are already dropping preciptiously, the hype will trail off.

I'll bet it doesn't, unfortunately.

Vinylista propaganda is more like an indeology than a religion.
Converting
to Vinylism seems to often involve refuting the established claims of
science,

Isn't that just what Religion did too?

Certain religions have done just about anything stupid that you can imagine.

Should we still accept that the sun
and stars revolve around the earth?

Remember that established Science taught that for most of recorded history.

Was Darwin right, or just another heretic like Galileo?

They got more than a few things right.

And how old is the universe in your religion Arny?

Indefinately long.

What about the so called "intelligent design", "debate"?

Nothing I support as Science.

Still let's NOT go down that track in this newsgroup! :-)

I don't think we have any TV evangelists who are saying that their magic
prayer cloth will double the number of molecules of anything you wrap with
it. Do we? ;-)

"Rob" wrote in message
...

I don't think anyone on this NG (or elsewhere, come to that) has the
ability to *prove* the inherent technical superiority of one over the
other.

Sure we do, within the context of audio technology.

It depends on your definition of 'technical',

Check your dictionary.

and the significance of that definition when it comes to the sound. I
think.

Think again.

"Mr.T" MrT@home wrote in message
u...

"Keith G" wrote in message
...
No Arny, you've got that all wrong (unless you are *distorting* again
which, of course, is highly likely) - it's CDs that are disappearing
rapidly.

Where the hell do YOU live?
But I note you do NOT claim vinyl sales have even reached the most
minuscule
percentage of CD sales, or availability.


Why should I make any such claim? - I neither know nor care, but think
about this: If 'vinylists' were as *elitist* as some here would have you
believe, then the smaller that percentage, the better - no?



It's amazing what you can do with statistics though. An Audio rag
recently
claimed that turntable sales in England were greater than CD player
sales
last year.
Even IF true, what they conveniently ignored was the millions of DVD
player,
SACD player, DVDA player and other assorted hybrid player sales, that
all
play standard CD disks.


Factor in the 'iPod effect' and you've answered your own question...


"Never let the facts get in the way of a good argument" is still a
widely
accepted philosophy it seems.


Facts? That's an intriguing prospect - we get a lot of 'facts' in here
(ukra)....