XPost: rec.music.gdead, sci.electronics.design   
   From: askforEmail@gmail.com   
      
   "MadManMoon"  wrote in message   
   news:3f8nm650gaa87j8gk6a25be1pj4dcd18qm@4ax.com...   
   >>> "Randy Yates"  wrote in message   
   >>> news:8vKdnRKZl8nU__TQnZ2dnUVZ_tGdnZ2d@supernews.com...   
   >>>> Even if the source material was marginal, you'd still have sonic   
   >>>> advantages with a CD. For example, the elimination of ticks and pops,   
   >>>> wow-and-flutter, and rumble. But I miss my anti-static gun, dirt   
   >>>> brush, and Yamaha direct-drive turntable nonetheless... :)   
   >>>   
   >>> Gee I sure don't!   
   >>> And I certainly don't miss the ticks, pops, wow, flutter, and rumble   
   >>> either. Nor the cost of replacement stylii or cartridges. Or trying to   
   >>> find decently made vinyl records in the first place! In fact I can't   
   >>> think   
   >>> of one thing I miss besides the bigger cover art. But the storage hassle   
   >>> more than negates that IMO.   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >>Yet another person that hasn't listened to a recent release on vinyl and   
   >>compared it to the same release on CD then?   
   >>You'd be eating your words if you had.  For some reason the sound   
   >>engineers   
   >>that mix vinyl, in general, don't compress the hell out of the dynamic   
   >>range   
   >>like they do CD.   
   >>   
   >   
   >  That depends on the CD.   
      
   Which is why I put 'in general' as it has been what I have found more often   
   than not.   
   LPs do cost about 3 times the price of CDs now (~£18) but are 'in general'   
   pressed on good quality heavy weight virgin vinyl.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)