Quote:
Originally Posted by Katsunami
I've been digitizing music for around 15 years. I know what I'm doing. CD's blow LP's off the planet in sound quality, convenience, and obviously, conversion speed. I find it impossibly hard to believe how people keep claiming that LP's, which are basically based on 1870's technology (or at the very best, 1970's technology for the latest versions), can best a CD, which is a technology that's more than 100 years newer.
IMHO it's just nostalgia, and the sense that "everything was better, way back when."
I'm not the one saying that paper books are easier to read. That's said by all the people who write articles trying to convince other people that paper books are better and easier to handle than ebooks. If the technology doesn't pose any problems to you (like, using a computer), then ebooks have a gazillion advantages, apart from some specific exceptions such as picture books and reference books.
|
I have a tin ear, play it loud, play it long, I can't tell the difference. Some music I like and some I dislike, but it has to be a really bad quality recordibg for me to notice.
I have had people tell me, and I actually believe them that analog recordings get a better tone and more subtle nuances than digital. I may even have experienced it myself, but due to my tin ear, was probably the power of suggestion.
Still with the right equipment analog recordings can get more detail. Digital is
two values only and analog can theoretically have infinite values.
Helen