Why, oh why, does vinyl continue to blow away digital?
- Thread starter godofwealth
- Start date
Oh, So is a suffix.
It would just indicate..
Example:
‘It turnes out that it was so and so… ‘him’ or it ‘name’ ‘place’ day’
Norwegian use in sentence .. prosaic indicates a legendary event
I should just say: On the 15’th - on the dawning of that day, it came to pass that -
Yes.
Or ‘On the 15’th.
. easiest - but I just got carried away
Last edited:
While Karajan liked money, I doubt that he was motivated by it in this case. Karajan always wanted clarity in sound, and remember, the turntable of the average consumer did not provide that in the day, the early 80s (neither do the cheap turntables of today). From that vantage point, CD was indeed a great step forward in the day, leaving aside the concerns of audiophiles, a small segment of the population. I still remember how all those acquaintances and friends around me were amazed at the clarity of the new medium, everyone loved it. I was amazed by it too; only later once I got deeper into audiophilia I recognized the limitations of early implementations of digital. Those limitations that I heard then have now vanished for me as digital has progressed.
As for Sony, yes they wanted to make more money. Yet we also should not underestimate the sincerity of the recording engineers back then, who genuinely wanted a better solution than analog tape. It was not all money-driven. Only a cynic who is uninformed about the historical development of digital recording technology would assert that it was.
Heh, I just remembered.
My first ever CD was
Karajan was most likely smitten with the sound
And really happy that it came about.
The story can be seen HERE
Cd introduction in 1981 Article
Karajan was not the first cd release however.
Billy Joel beat him to that.
1 october 1982…
And the Sony CDP-101 was on sale that very day.
My first ever CD was
Karajan was most likely smitten with the sound
And really happy that it came about.
The story can be seen HERE
Cd introduction in 1981 Article
Karajan was not the first cd release however.
Billy Joel beat him to that.
1 october 1982…
And the Sony CDP-101 was on sale that very day.
Last edited:
Sorry to chop your post Peter!!!!!!
This is the crux of my much earlier comment. Unless your part of the 1% with 0 financial and time limitations, altering the components you use can alter your assessment of what performs better in your system. 99% of people have limitations that stop them from pursuing options in either their digital or vinyl. If they kept trying, they would most likely supersede one or the other.
Digital reconstruction has one very specific task: to take the digital data and deliver the original analogue waveform. It either succeeds or it doesn’t. Trying to construct a false equivalence in order to muddy the waters is bad faith, and probably why I’d previously blocked youErm, hmm, what was your point again?
Back to blocked.Details *were* provided above, and in particular Rob Watt’s explanations via YouTube. The same Rob Watts you yourself acknowledge… While I go take a look at HQPlayer, perhaps you might research Ad Hominems
Respectfully disagree. Its what a couple very vocal people want. It may have nothing to do with the reality of consumers.
Others may want fat bass with accentuated drive so the The Who and Van Halen rip your face off. Or warmth to create a more sultry female voice.
I actually found The Who played on one super high end system to be too resolving. Too much of the recording details that were unneasary to the magic of the music. I preferd a more washed and meaty sound over the hyper detailed and precise that I was hearing.
Last edited:
No bad faith involved, just making a valid point.
I can once more turn it around and say:
Sound reconstruction from vinyl has one very specific task: To take the groove information and deliver the original analog waveform. It either succeeds or it doesn't.
So why then are there so many avenues to arrive at a solution?
Like with many vinyl enthusiasts, I sense a particular, quite curious sensitivity here when views about digital and unquestioned superiority of vinyl are challenged (and "blocking", oh my).
Again, nothing against vinyl, and there are also fantastic, wonderful modern all-analog efforts, such as the Tone Poet series by Blue Note or The Original Source by Deutsche Grammophon.
Yet most arguments against digital and in favor of vinyl presented are just not very good. Among the recurring worst: The popularity of vinyl today -- most of which is *digital* sourced, for crying out loud.
You are fine. I, like others, understood your phrasing. A simple "figure of speech". It's the person who questioned that phrasing who apparently likes to mimic a lawyer, police detective, grammar teacher or partake in some other type of role playing.
Last edited:
Me too, it was perfectly fine. I didn't spend even a microsecond questioning it.
It's bad faith because this is irrelevant: you are moving the goal posts away from the question at hand: is there a problem with digital reconstruction?
"Kindness is the language which the deaf can hear and the blind can see"- Mark Twain
Many of us on this forum retort when our opinion is challenged. I like @Ron Resnick for the way he does that. Also, others should take note.
So, I am fine with policing - I actually like it.
I’m arrogant about My insights, and so Are a lot of us.
In Norway by the way the shops Are all out of corrn seeds. Norwegians Are not making popcorn.
They Are planting them and making popcorn grass in their gardens.
I write the Karajan post to answer @tima
But I feel I did an disrespectfull policing there.
I’m sorry about that @tima
Many of us on this forum retort when our opinion is challenged. I like @Ron Resnick for the way he does that. Also, others should take note.
So, I am fine with policing - I actually like it.
I’m arrogant about My insights, and so Are a lot of us.
In Norway by the way the shops Are all out of corrn seeds. Norwegians Are not making popcorn.
They Are planting them and making popcorn grass in their gardens.
I write the Karajan post to answer @tima
But I feel I did an disrespectfull policing there.
I’m sorry about that @tima
No, in principle. And not to my ears.
Again, it all depends on practical implementation, just like the quality of vinyl playback depends on practical implementation.
Last edited:
Many people, including myself and others on this forum, find digital to be enjoyable and satisfying. Obviously, for those folks, there is no problem.
Are you one of those who is always right and those who have a different, opposing opinion are wrong? And who are you trying to convince otherwise? What is the purpose of your contnious anti digital rant? And who are you preaching to other than yourself?
Last edited:
When you asked me to provide objective proof regarding my posts (wealthy people buying trophy audio systems, with no interest in audio quality, to impress friends) in the $100K Speaker Cable Thread, Post No. 36 was not about grammar at aĺl but about you trying to "nail" me to the cross. A personal and pointed attack about my honesty and credibility. Have you forgotten about that? I haven't. Have a great day.
And why on earth do you care about people's grammar? I assume you have better things to do with your time.
Last edited:
Yes many consumers don't want their music to sound like the real thing, they like to add their own seasoning. That's fine but these people are not in the High Fidelity Audio hobby. Some recordings sound better on a boombox than a high end system so just play them on the boombox.