[Mr.T]

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
The context was clearly stated at the beginning of the
post that I replied to:

"Vinyl basically died in less than 10 years.

Which was falsely corrected by the following statement:

" Ignoring the previous 80 years of course."

The official date of the invention of the phonograph was
1877, but that wasn't when the vinyl LP was invented.

But as YOU correctly point out, YOU never said LP, and
Dick correctly states vinyl dates from 1872!

Actually, I said:

"If it existed in some lab, there still weren't any production
quantities of it. Vinyl as a production product was a product of the U.S.
synthetic rubber program of WW2."

Nope, that was later and still wrong.

Vinyl LPs are very different products than the predecessor 78 rpm
technology, in my view.

You are welcome to it. Most others would disagree the *technology* was all
that different though.


And I still claim acetate 78's etc. were similar
technology to microgroove LP's, whilst CD digital
technology was completely new.

While 78s can be made to sound good, in general the ones that were sold to
consumers in the day were poor sounding even under ideal conditions, and
were usually played on fairly crude equipment. Acoustic playback was not
unusual. The playing time per side sucked. LPs pretty well forced
electronic
playback to become the rule and allowed at least one movement of a
classical
piece per side.

You really are clutching at straws Arny to try and justify your statement :
"Vinyl basically died in less than 10 years"

That's the one I disputed, and still do. You have still provided no
clarification or justification that would make it correct.

MrT.