[Audio Empire]

On Mon, 18 Jun 2012 16:42:48 -0700, Arny Krueger wrote
(in article ):

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Audio Empire" wrote in message
...

Several moths ago, his father-in-law passed away leaving him a
considerable
classical record collection. Our friend had no record player but his
Classe
preamp did come with a phono preamp option. Not really being all that
interested in records, but being nonetheless curious about the record
collection he'd inherited, he purchased a Music Hall MMF5.1 turntable
ensemble for around $900 complete with arm and "Music Hall" branded MM
cartridge (which I suspect is really a British Goldring).

Doesn't even sound like the best stuff or even anything close.

I believe that that's part of his point.

His alleged point seems to be confusing personal preference with some kind
of technological difference.


Wrong, again, Arny. It's your prejudice against vinyl that showing here, not
mine.

My point was to show several things: Sounding great and being accurate can be
two different things. And while there can be no doubt that digital done right
is certainly technically superior to analog in every way (I look at it this
way. When you switch between the state-of-the-art mike feed and the digital
recording itself, and cannot hear ANY difference, then the recording format,
while possibly still not perfect, is certainly better than the microphone one
is recording, and better than that you cannot get), it doesn't mean that
commercially sold digital recordings, whether Red Book or some high-end
format like DSD or 24/192 will necessarily sound better than the vinyl
release that came first. Any other agenda that you might ascribe to my
anecdote, is purely of your own making.