In article <c22192c1-48f1-4ab2-b28b-c54178bbc314n@googlegroups.com>,
RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:

> Trying to sell a new body for film might
> not fly.

will not fly.

On 21/05/2023 11:12 am, nospam wrote:
> In article <c22192c1-48f1-4ab2-b28b-c54178bbc314n@googlegroups.com>,
> RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Trying to sell a new body for film might
>> not fly.
>
> will not fly.

I think they should bring back vinyl.

geoff

In article <DFSdnYcLSImxEfT5nZ2dnZfqnPudnZ2d@giganews.com>, geoff
<geoff@nospamgeoffwood.org> wrote:

> >> Trying to sell a new body for film might
> >> not fly.
> >
> > will not fly.
>
> I think they should bring back vinyl.

all the cool kids use shellac.

On Sunday, 21 May 2023 at 04:14:47 UTC+1, geoff wrote:
> On 21/05/2023 11:12 am, nospam wrote:
> > In article <c22192c1-48f1-4ab2...@googlegroups.com>,
> > RichA <rande...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Trying to sell a new body for film might
> >> not fly.
> >
> > will not fly.
> I think they should bring back vinyl.
>
> geoff

Vinyl making a partical comeback fro people who like to have something physical.
In a simialr way that people like books.
I've even heard that cassette tape sales are on the rise although I don't understand why.

On 2023-05-22, Whisky-dave <whisky.dave@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sunday, 21 May 2023 at 04:14:47 UTC+1, geoff wrote:
>> On 21/05/2023 11:12 am, nospam wrote:
>> > In article <c22192c1-48f1-4ab2...@googlegroups.com>,
>> > RichA <rande...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Trying to sell a new body for film might
>> >> not fly.
>> >
>> > will not fly.
>> I think they should bring back vinyl.
>>
>> geoff
>
> Vinyl making a partical comeback fro people who like to have something physical.
> In a simialr way that people like books.
> I've even heard that cassette tape sales are on the rise although I don't understand why.

Vinyl has always been popular with people into Heavy Metal and dance
music. I prefer CDs these days, having realised that investing in
headphones and speakers and good amplification outweighs any benefit
over having vinyl (where the subjective benefit is very much due to how
they are mixed over the actual technology used).

I have a load of old records that I am going to put on Ebay, in fact.

In article <slrnu6mvjb.5nc.u9536612@localhost.localdomain>, Incubus
<u9536612@gmail.com> wrote:

> Vinyl has always been popular with people into Heavy Metal and dance
> music.

where did you get that idea??

it's popular with those who are delusional and think it sounds better.

> I prefer CDs these days, having realised that investing in
> headphones and speakers and good amplification outweighs any benefit
> over having vinyl (where the subjective benefit is very much due to how
> they are mixed over the actual technology used).

there is no benefit for vinyl, other than the album artwork that does
not exist with a download.

On 2023-05-22, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <slrnu6mvjb.5nc.u9536612@localhost.localdomain>, Incubus
><u9536612@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Vinyl has always been popular with people into Heavy Metal and dance
>> music.
>
> where did you get that idea??

Hanging around with people who like Metal and DJs. Some people have
displays where they put their rarest vinyl on show, almost like a shrine
to their favourite bands. Even small, independent record labels press
vinyl.

> it's popular with those who are delusional and think it sounds better.
>
>> I prefer CDs these days, having realised that investing in
>> headphones and speakers and good amplification outweighs any benefit
>> over having vinyl (where the subjective benefit is very much due to how
>> they are mixed over the actual technology used).
>
> there is no benefit for vinyl, other than the album artwork that does
> not exist with a download.

The limitations of vinyl involve certain technical constraints when it
comes to mastering. That's ultimately what gives vinyl its perceived
sound and some people prefer that.

In article <slrnu6n7mp.b1m.u9536612@localhost.localdomain>, Incubus
<u9536612@gmail.com> wrote:

> >> Vinyl has always been popular with people into Heavy Metal and dance
> >> music.
> >
> > where did you get that idea??
>
> Hanging around with people who like Metal and DJs. Some people have
> displays where they put their rarest vinyl on show, almost like a shrine
> to their favourite bands.

putting it on show is very different than listening to it.

> Even small, independent record labels press
> vinyl.

not in numbers that matter.

> > it's popular with those who are delusional and think it sounds better.
> >
> >> I prefer CDs these days, having realised that investing in
> >> headphones and speakers and good amplification outweighs any benefit
> >> over having vinyl (where the subjective benefit is very much due to how
> >> they are mixed over the actual technology used).
> >
> > there is no benefit for vinyl, other than the album artwork that does
> > not exist with a download.
>
> The limitations of vinyl involve certain technical constraints when it
> comes to mastering. That's ultimately what gives vinyl its perceived
> sound and some people prefer that.

those technical constraints, otherwise known as distortion, can be
applied to digital, to obtain exactly the same sound quality.

some people do prefer lesser quality sound, just as they prefer lesser
quality images believing that film is better (mostly the same people
for both).

people who think that are delusional (along with other words that come
to mind).

On 23/05/2023 12:03 am, Whisky-dave wrote:
> On Sunday, 21 May 2023 at 04:14:47 UTC+1, geoff wrote:
>> On 21/05/2023 11:12 am, nospam wrote:
>>> In article <c22192c1-48f1-4ab2...@googlegroups.com>,
>>> RichA <rande...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Trying to sell a new body for film might
>>>> not fly.
>>>
>>> will not fly.
>> I think they should bring back vinyl.
>>
>> geoff
>
> Vinyl making a partical comeback fro people who like to have something physical.
> In a simialr way that people like books.
> I've even heard that cassette tape sales are on the rise although I don't understand why.
>

CDs are physical. And better is all respects other nostalgia and cover
artwork/notes size.

8 x 10 plate cameras anybody ?

geoff

On 23/05/2023 4:56 am, Incubus wrote:
> On 2023-05-22, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>> In article <slrnu6mvjb.5nc.u9536612@localhost.localdomain>, Incubus
>> <u9536612@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Vinyl has always been popular with people into Heavy Metal and dance
>>> music.
>>
>> where did you get that idea??
>
> Hanging around with people who like Metal and DJs. Some people have
> displays where they put their rarest vinyl on show, almost like a shrine
> to their favourite bands. Even small, independent record labels press
> vinyl.
>
>> it's popular with those who are delusional and think it sounds better.
>>
>>> I prefer CDs these days, having realised that investing in
>>> headphones and speakers and good amplification outweighs any benefit
>>> over having vinyl (where the subjective benefit is very much due to how
>>> they are mixed over the actual technology used).
>>
>> there is no benefit for vinyl, other than the album artwork that does
>> not exist with a download.
>
> The limitations of vinyl involve certain technical constraints when it
> comes to mastering. That's ultimately what gives vinyl its perceived
> sound and some people prefer that.

This is hilarious. I think it is actually serious - not a piss-take:
https://www.heavys.com/

geoff

On 2023-05-22, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <slrnu6n7mp.b1m.u9536612@localhost.localdomain>, Incubus
><u9536612@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> >> Vinyl has always been popular with people into Heavy Metal and dance
>> >> music.
>> >
>> > where did you get that idea??
>>
>> Hanging around with people who like Metal and DJs. Some people have
>> displays where they put their rarest vinyl on show, almost like a shrine
>> to their favourite bands.
>
> putting it on show is very different than listening to it.

'Than' should be used with a comparitive.

Listening, displaying or both: the fact remains that it is more popular
among certain groups.

>> Even small, independent record labels press
>> vinyl.
>
> not in numbers that matter.

It matters enough for there to be a market for it.

>> > it's popular with those who are delusional and think it sounds better.
>> >
>> >> I prefer CDs these days, having realised that investing in
>> >> headphones and speakers and good amplification outweighs any benefit
>> >> over having vinyl (where the subjective benefit is very much due to how
>> >> they are mixed over the actual technology used).
>> >
>> > there is no benefit for vinyl, other than the album artwork that does
>> > not exist with a download.
>>
>> The limitations of vinyl involve certain technical constraints when it
>> comes to mastering. That's ultimately what gives vinyl its perceived
>> sound and some people prefer that.
>
> those technical constraints, otherwise known as distortion, can be
> applied to digital, to obtain exactly the same sound quality.

The technical constraints, where mastering is concerned, are adhered to
in order to avoid distortion and other problems. CDs can, of course, be
mastered in a similar way. Historically, that hasn't always been the
case.

> some people do prefer lesser quality sound, just as they prefer lesser
> quality images believing that film is better (mostly the same people
> for both).
>
> people who think that are delusional (along with other words that come
> to mind).

Aesthetics are subjective. There's nothing delusional about preferring
one thing over another or having nostalgia. Believing that a measurably
less capable format is better is misinformed, not delusional.

On 2023-05-23, geoff <geoff@nospamgeoffwood.org> wrote:
> On 23/05/2023 4:56 am, Incubus wrote:
>> On 2023-05-22, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>> In article <slrnu6mvjb.5nc.u9536612@localhost.localdomain>, Incubus
>>> <u9536612@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Vinyl has always been popular with people into Heavy Metal and dance
>>>> music.
>>>
>>> where did you get that idea??
>>
>> Hanging around with people who like Metal and DJs. Some people have
>> displays where they put their rarest vinyl on show, almost like a shrine
>> to their favourite bands. Even small, independent record labels press
>> vinyl.
>>
>>> it's popular with those who are delusional and think it sounds better.
>>>
>>>> I prefer CDs these days, having realised that investing in
>>>> headphones and speakers and good amplification outweighs any benefit
>>>> over having vinyl (where the subjective benefit is very much due to how
>>>> they are mixed over the actual technology used).
>>>
>>> there is no benefit for vinyl, other than the album artwork that does
>>> not exist with a download.
>>
>> The limitations of vinyl involve certain technical constraints when it
>> comes to mastering. That's ultimately what gives vinyl its perceived
>> sound and some people prefer that.
>
> This is hilarious. I think it is actually serious - not a piss-take:
> https://www.heavys.com/

I have seen those. Apparently, they are ex-Sennheiser "engineers".

They have probably blocked me from their FB ads; I kept telling everyone
how great Beyer Dynamic headphones are instead :)

In article <slrnu6p593.57f.u9536612@localhost.localdomain>, Incubus
<u9536612@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> > some people do prefer lesser quality sound, just as they prefer lesser
> > quality images believing that film is better (mostly the same people
> > for both).
> >
> > people who think that are delusional (along with other words that come
> > to mind).
>
> Aesthetics are subjective.

yep, however, this isn't about aesthetics.

> There's nothing delusional about preferring
> one thing over another or having nostalgia.

nobody said that. people can prefer whatever they want.

> Believing that a measurably
> less capable format is better is misinformed, not delusional.

it's delusional.

if they were simply misinformed, then a simple explanation would help
them learn why they are wrong. not surprisingly, they aren't interested
in learning anything.

delusional people try to rationalize lower quality reproductions with
very fucked up reasons, such as 'the highs are airy' or 'the sound is
warmer', or some mythical 'film look', without every saying *which*
film.

On Tuesday, 23 May 2023 at 11:30:06 UTC+1, Incubus wrote:
> On 2023-05-22, nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> > In article <slrnu6n7mp....@localhost.localdomain>, Incubus
> ><u953...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> >> Vinyl has always been popular with people into Heavy Metal and dance
> >> >> music.
> >> >
> >> > where did you get that idea??
> >>
> >> Hanging around with people who like Metal and DJs. Some people have
> >> displays where they put their rarest vinyl on show, almost like a shrine
> >> to their favourite bands.
> >
> > putting it on show is very different than listening to it.
> 'Than' should be used with a comparitive.
>
> Listening, displaying or both: the fact remains that it is more popular
> among certain groups.

Usually the sort that actual like music rather than watching a group of scantily clad individuals
girating in a sexual way to some throwaway 'tune'.

> >> Even small, independent record labels press
> >> vinyl.
> >
> > not in numbers that matter.
> It matters enough for there to be a market for it.

Yes and to those that buy music rather than listen to it via spotify.
I think people today are more likely to be told what to like and follow than lead.

> >> > it's popular with those who are delusional and think it sounds better.
> >> >
> >> >> I prefer CDs these days, having realised that investing in
> >> >> headphones and speakers and good amplification outweighs any benefit
> >> >> over having vinyl (where the subjective benefit is very much due to how
> >> >> they are mixed over the actual technology used).
> >> >
> >> > there is no benefit for vinyl, other than the album artwork that does
> >> > not exist with a download.
> >>
> >> The limitations of vinyl involve certain technical constraints when it
> >> comes to mastering. That's ultimately what gives vinyl its perceived
> >> sound and some people prefer that.
> >
> > those technical constraints, otherwise known as distortion, can be
> > applied to digital, to obtain exactly the same sound quality.
> The technical constraints, where mastering is concerned, are adhered to
> in order to avoid distortion and other problems. CDs can, of course, be
> mastered in a similar way. Historically, that hasn't always been the
> case.

'mastered' for cheapness, then remastered to resell to the gullible.

But then again what exactly is remastering rather than remixing.
Somewhere there must be a better quality version than the original mass produced CD.

> > some people do prefer lesser quality sound, just as they prefer lesser
> > quality images believing that film is better (mostly the same people
> > for both).

Some call it raw, and they prefer live music over heavily produced reproductions.

Similar with auto-tuning some what to hear a proper singer sing.

It's gloign to be interesting to see how music goes with the new AI music being produced.

I prefer the sound of a disctored sinwave over a perfectly produced sinewave :-)
It;s one of the reasons marshall guitar amps were so popular because they didn;t faithfull reproduce
the noise a guitar made.
It's also why most pedals are used, it''s NOT to get rid of distortion.

> > people who think that are delusional (along with other words that come
> > to mind).
> Aesthetics are subjective. There's nothing delusional about preferring
> one thing over another or having nostalgia. Believing that a measurably
> less capable format is better is misinformed, not delusional.

There's certain tracks where I prefer to hear from a vinyl source rather than the CD version
it brings back memories of the time.

On 23/05/2023 10:27 pm, Incubus wrote:

> The technical constraints, where mastering is concerned, are adhered to
> in order to avoid distortion and other problems. CDs can, of course, be
> mastered in a similar way. Historically, that hasn't always been the
> case.

And all the vinyl imperfections (mastering compromises, distortion,
noise, wow, flutter, frequency anomalies, etc) inherent in vinyl can be
re-recorded to CD and reproduced exactly.

>
> Aesthetics are subjective. There's nothing delusional about preferring
> one thing over another or having nostalgia. Believing that a measurably
> less capable format is better is misinformed, not delusional.
>

But sticking to the misinformed belief despite incontrovertible evidence
to the contrary borders on delusional. A bit like religion.

geoff

On 24/05/2023 12:56 am, Whisky-dave wrote:

> 'mastered' for cheapness, then remastered to resell to the gullible.

No, some early CD released rushed without proper mastering, others
remastered with ther intention of being as close to the original sound
as possible, and subsequently remastered with a newer/better generation
of software. Some to with the aim of getting even closer to the original
or the mastering-engineer's preference, and sometime to fit current
audio trends.

>
> But then again what exactly is remastering rather than remixing.
> Somewhere there must be a better quality version than the original mass produced CD.

Not if the original CD version was sourced from , or transcribed to
44k1/16/S.

Remixing is nothing to do with re-mastering.

>
>>> some people do prefer lesser quality sound, just as they prefer lesser
>>> quality images believing that film is better (mostly the same people
>>> for both).
>
> Some call it raw, and they prefer live music over heavily produced reproductions.
>
> Similar with auto-tuning some what to hear a proper singer sing.
>
> It's gloign to be interesting to see how music goes with the new AI music being produced.

All completely irrelevant.

>
> I prefer the sound of a disctored sinwave over a perfectly produced sinewave :-)

Pleased for you. Happy listening.

> It;s one of the reasons marshall guitar amps were so popular because they didn;t faithfull reproduce
> the noise a guitar made.
> It's also why most pedals are used, it''s NOT to get rid of distortion.

Why just Marshall ? And why 'were ?

And totally irrelevant and nothing to do with hi-fidelity reproduction,
in which the recorded aspects of your favourite Marshall stack benefit
from being reproduced exactly, not filtered thru a lesser medium.

>
> There's certain tracks where I prefer to hear from a vinyl source rather than the CD version
> it brings back memories of the time.

Pleased for you. But don't confuse that with 'objective'.

geoff

On 23/05/2023 11:53 pm, Incubus wrote:
> On 2023-05-23, geoff <geoff@nospamgeoffwood.org> wrote:
>> On 23/05/2023 4:56 am, Incubus wrote:
>>> On 2023-05-22, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>>> In article <slrnu6mvjb.5nc.u9536612@localhost.localdomain>, Incubus
>>>> <u9536612@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Vinyl has always been popular with people into Heavy Metal and dance
>>>>> music.
>>>>
>>>> where did you get that idea??
>>>
>>> Hanging around with people who like Metal and DJs. Some people have
>>> displays where they put their rarest vinyl on show, almost like a shrine
>>> to their favourite bands. Even small, independent record labels press
>>> vinyl.
>>>
>>>> it's popular with those who are delusional and think it sounds better.
>>>>
>>>>> I prefer CDs these days, having realised that investing in
>>>>> headphones and speakers and good amplification outweighs any benefit
>>>>> over having vinyl (where the subjective benefit is very much due to how
>>>>> they are mixed over the actual technology used).
>>>>
>>>> there is no benefit for vinyl, other than the album artwork that does
>>>> not exist with a download.
>>>
>>> The limitations of vinyl involve certain technical constraints when it
>>> comes to mastering. That's ultimately what gives vinyl its perceived
>>> sound and some people prefer that.
>>
>> This is hilarious. I think it is actually serious - not a piss-take:
>> https://www.heavys.com/
>
> I have seen those. Apparently, they are ex-Sennheiser "engineers".
>
> They have probably blocked me from their FB ads; I kept telling everyone
> how great Beyer Dynamic headphones are instead :)

I post 'laugh' emojis.

geoff

In article <M9GdnV08dKLp1PD5nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@giganews.com>, geoff
<geoff@nospamgeoffwood.org> wrote:

>
> > The technical constraints, where mastering is concerned, are adhered to
> > in order to avoid distortion and other problems. CDs can, of course, be
> > mastered in a similar way. Historically, that hasn't always been the
> > case.
>
> And all the vinyl imperfections (mastering compromises, distortion,
> noise, wow, flutter, frequency anomalies, etc) inherent in vinyl can be
> re-recorded to CD and reproduced exactly.

or added digitally, without re-recording anything.

> > Aesthetics are subjective. There's nothing delusional about preferring
> > one thing over another or having nostalgia. Believing that a measurably
> > less capable format is better is misinformed, not delusional.
> >
>
> But sticking to the misinformed belief despite incontrovertible evidence
> to the contrary borders on delusional. A bit like religion.

yep.

On 24/05/2023 11:30 am, nospam wrote:
> In article <M9GdnV08dKLp1PD5nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@giganews.com>, geoff
> <geoff@nospamgeoffwood.org> wrote:
>
>>
>>> The technical constraints, where mastering is concerned, are adhered to
>>> in order to avoid distortion and other problems. CDs can, of course, be
>>> mastered in a similar way. Historically, that hasn't always been the
>>> case.
>>
>> And all the vinyl imperfections (mastering compromises, distortion,
>> noise, wow, flutter, frequency anomalies, etc) inherent in vinyl can be
>> re-recorded to CD and reproduced exactly.
>
> or added digitally, without re-recording anything.

Naa. To record the imperfections coming off an LP for a CD reproduction
of those imperfections, you need to convert it back to digital !

geoff

On 2023-05-23, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <slrnu6p593.57f.u9536612@localhost.localdomain>, Incubus
><u9536612@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> > some people do prefer lesser quality sound, just as they prefer lesser
>> > quality images believing that film is better (mostly the same people
>> > for both).
>> >
>> > people who think that are delusional (along with other words that come
>> > to mind).
>>
>> Aesthetics are subjective.
>
> yep, however, this isn't about aesthetics.

It's about whatever drives a person's choice.

>> There's nothing delusional about preferring
>> one thing over another or having nostalgia.
>
> nobody said that. people can prefer whatever they want.
>
>> Believing that a measurably
>> less capable format is better is misinformed, not delusional.
>
> it's delusional.
>
> if they were simply misinformed, then a simple explanation would help
> them learn why they are wrong. not surprisingly, they aren't interested
> in learning anything.
>
> delusional people try to rationalize lower quality reproductions with
> very fucked up reasons, such as 'the highs are airy' or 'the sound is
> warmer', or some mythical 'film look', without every saying *which*
> film.

I would call that wilful ignorance, not delusion.

On 2023-05-23, geoff <geoff@nospamgeoffwood.org> wrote:
> On 23/05/2023 10:27 pm, Incubus wrote:
>
>> The technical constraints, where mastering is concerned, are adhered to
>> in order to avoid distortion and other problems. CDs can, of course, be
>> mastered in a similar way. Historically, that hasn't always been the
>> case.
>
> And all the vinyl imperfections (mastering compromises, distortion,
> noise, wow, flutter, frequency anomalies, etc) inherent in vinyl can be
> re-recorded to CD and reproduced exactly.
>
>>
>> Aesthetics are subjective. There's nothing delusional about preferring
>> one thing over another or having nostalgia. Believing that a measurably
>> less capable format is better is misinformed, not delusional.
>>
>
> But sticking to the misinformed belief despite incontrovertible evidence
> to the contrary borders on delusional. A bit like religion.

I don't think that it helps to misuse terms used for clinical diagnosis.
It's like when someone separates from a partner, they suddenly become an
expert on narcissism.

On Wednesday, 24 May 2023 at 00:17:24 UTC+1, geoff wrote:
> On 23/05/2023 10:27 pm, Incubus wrote:
>
> > The technical constraints, where mastering is concerned, are adhered to
> > in order to avoid distortion and other problems. CDs can, of course, be
> > mastered in a similar way. Historically, that hasn't always been the
> > case.
> And all the vinyl imperfections (mastering compromises, distortion,
> noise, wow, flutter, frequency anomalies, etc) inherent in vinyl can be
> re-recorded to CD and reproduced exactly.

Just like you can use filters in photography to over/under exposure.

There was also cheap vinyl pressings and the better quality versions.
Promos were usually slightly better. Then there were I think 3 thickness of vinyl
well I have 3 differnt thicknesses of vinyl and I only have a small vinyl collection.
Then there were 12" singles which did sound better than the 7" singles
on systems that were up to it.

> >
> > Aesthetics are subjective. There's nothing delusional about preferring
> > one thing over another or having nostalgia. Believing that a measurably
> > less capable format is better is misinformed, not delusional.
> >
> But sticking to the misinformed belief despite incontrovertible evidence
> to the contrary borders on delusional. A bit like religion.

Yes that CDs must sound better because they are better quaility.
Sound is analogue.

>
> geoff

On 25/05/2023 11:59 pm, Whisky-dave wrote:
> On Wednesday, 24 May 2023 at 00:17:24 UTC+1, geoff wrote:
>> On 23/05/2023 10:27 pm, Incubus wrote:
>>
>>> The technical constraints, where mastering is concerned, are adhered to
>>> in order to avoid distortion and other problems. CDs can, of course, be
>>> mastered in a similar way. Historically, that hasn't always been the
>>> case.
>> And all the vinyl imperfections (mastering compromises, distortion,
>> noise, wow, flutter, frequency anomalies, etc) inherent in vinyl can be
>> re-recorded to CD and reproduced exactly.
>
> Just like you can use filters in photography to over/under exposure.
>
> There was also cheap vinyl pressings and the better quality versions.
> Promos were usually slightly better. Then there were I think 3 thickness of vinyl
> well I have 3 differnt thicknesses of vinyl and I only have a small vinyl collection.
> Then there were 12" singles which did sound better than the 7" singles
> on systems that were up to it.
>
>
>
>>>
>>> Aesthetics are subjective. There's nothing delusional about preferring
>>> one thing over another or having nostalgia. Believing that a measurably
>>> less capable format is better is misinformed, not delusional.
>>>
>> But sticking to the misinformed belief despite incontrovertible evidence
>> to the contrary borders on delusional. A bit like religion.
>
> Yes that CDs must sound better because they are better quaility.
> Sound is analogue.
>
>>
>> geoff

???

'Sound is analogue" ? Yes. That's why there is a D-A converter.

And also an A-D converter on the original recording side, or in the
transcribing from tape side.

All those processes are far superior to the best, the heaviest, the
widest groove-spaced, vinyl anybody has ever produced. Even at mere CD spec.

Not sure how this translates to colour accuracy (easily tweak in post)
or dynamic range of film v. best digital. I'm sure somebody can tell us.

geoff

In article <QoacnR5xU7KTZPL5nZ2dnZfqnPGdnZ2d@giganews.com>, geoff
<geoff@nospamgeoffwood.org> wrote:

> >>> Aesthetics are subjective. There's nothing delusional about preferring
> >>> one thing over another or having nostalgia. Believing that a measurably
> >>> less capable format is better is misinformed, not delusional.
> >>>
> >> But sticking to the misinformed belief despite incontrovertible evidence
> >> to the contrary borders on delusional. A bit like religion.
> >
> > Yes that CDs must sound better because they are better quaility.
> > Sound is analogue.
> >
>
> ???
>
> 'Sound is analogue" ? Yes. That's why there is a D-A converter.
>
> And also an A-D converter on the original recording side, or in the
> transcribing from tape side.
>
> All those processes are far superior to the best, the heaviest, the
> widest groove-spaced, vinyl anybody has ever produced. Even at mere CD spec.
>
> Not sure how this translates to colour accuracy (easily tweak in post)
> or dynamic range of film v. best digital. I'm sure somebody can tell us.

it's the same math.

On Friday, 26 May 2023 at 01:11:09 UTC+1, geoff wrote:
> On 25/05/2023 11:59 pm, Whisky-dave wrote:
> > On Wednesday, 24 May 2023 at 00:17:24 UTC+1, geoff wrote:
> >> On 23/05/2023 10:27 pm, Incubus wrote:
> >>
> >>> The technical constraints, where mastering is concerned, are adhered to
> >>> in order to avoid distortion and other problems. CDs can, of course, be
> >>> mastered in a similar way. Historically, that hasn't always been the
> >>> case.
> >> And all the vinyl imperfections (mastering compromises, distortion,
> >> noise, wow, flutter, frequency anomalies, etc) inherent in vinyl can be
> >> re-recorded to CD and reproduced exactly.
> >
> > Just like you can use filters in photography to over/under exposure.
> >
> > There was also cheap vinyl pressings and the better quality versions.
> > Promos were usually slightly better. Then there were I think 3 thickness of vinyl
> > well I have 3 differnt thicknesses of vinyl and I only have a small vinyl collection.
> > Then there were 12" singles which did sound better than the 7" singles
> > on systems that were up to it.
> >
> >
> >
> >>>
> >>> Aesthetics are subjective. There's nothing delusional about preferring
> >>> one thing over another or having nostalgia. Believing that a measurably
> >>> less capable format is better is misinformed, not delusional.
> >>>
> >> But sticking to the misinformed belief despite incontrovertible evidence
> >> to the contrary borders on delusional. A bit like religion.
> >
> > Yes that CDs must sound better because they are better quaility.
> > Sound is analogue.
> >
> >>
> >> geoff
> ???
>
> 'Sound is analogue" ? Yes. That's why there is a D-A converter.

you need the A-D first though. Because sound is analogue from the microphone you convert it to digital.
which basically mean cutting it up into discrete slices, to give it a digital representation of frequency and volume.

>
> And also an A-D converter on the original recording side, or in the
> transcribing from tape side.

which comes before you store it on anything whether analogue or digital.
which is why we use higher numbers of digital samples.
44 or 48KHz isn't the best you can achieved but it is for general purpose CDs'

>
> All those processes are far superior to the best, the heaviest, the
> widest groove-spaced, vinyl anybody has ever produced. Even at mere CD spec.

But you've already destroyed the original sound by cutting it up in the first p[lace,
then you further compress it to make it sound better.

>
> Not sure how this translates to colour accuracy (easily tweak in post)
> or dynamic range of film v. best digital. I'm sure somebody can tell us.

you'd have to define accuracy compared to precision .
We talk about the wavelenght of light which is analogue , individual photon are essentially digital.

And whether your talking about the retina or the ear drum both are essentially analogue.
Then you have to decide whether watching a landscape on a digital screen is better than looking at it
in real life.

Similar to going to gigs and concerts.

The main advantage of digital is how easy it is to manupulate, store and copy.
Sales aren't the best way of looking at this as most want something for nothing or very little.
You may well think spotify is the best quality music you can get because it's digital, and choose the way they cut the quality
of the sound through 'digital and bandwidth limiting'

Vinyl records beat CDs for first time in decades
Consumers bought 41.3 million vinyl LPs and 200,000 vinyl singles in 2022, an increase of 3.2%. CD sales decreased 28% to 33.4 million albums and 100,000 CD singles.18 Mar 2023

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/graphics/2023/03/18/cd-players-40-years-compact-disc/11307793002/

>
> geoff