"Lawrence Leung" wrote in message
news:lS0Sb.135521$5V2.693836@attbi_s53...
"Charles Tomaras" wrote in
:

So you are saying that you don't think CD won the battle over LP
because of no flipping, no scratches, reduced "hiss", no wear, wider
frequency response, ability to have left and right panned low end,
ability to play in cars and on portables, and many other improvements
and conveniences? You are saying it was marketing? Once the word got
out about how absolutely superior CD's were in just about every
meaningful way to consumers they preferred it over the incredible
limitations of vinyl. That's not marketing, that's just knowledge that
was mostly spread word of mouth and by sound of stereo. I was the
music director of a 100,000 watt NPR jazz station in 1984 and I even
went so far as to air blind comparisons between CD and LP on the same
titles for a listener survey I designed to present information to a
radio panel I was a speaker on at that year's Jazz Times Convention in
NYC. The results were overwhelmingly for CD even on FM radio. Better
fidelity, better separation, more lifelike were just a few of the
comments from back then which were culled from over 200 respondents.


OK! I'm wrong! I do agree that a nice recorded CD sounds better than most
of the LP. But when was the last time you heard of a cheap CD that sounds
just like cassette tape?

I've never heard a CD that sounded as bad as a cassette tape.

And if CD is so "dramatically" better than the
old LP, why on earth there are still (and more and more) so many
turnables around? Well, they are not cheap, I think an average turnables
nowaday cost a lot more than a mid-end CD-player.

Why are there so many antique cars around? Not because they out perform new
cars.


Ummm... I don't even
want to start debate about: "Which is better? CD or LP?"

Because there really isn't a debate. The LP crowd prefers something that
does not sound as much like the master tape as the CD crowd. The LP crowd
prefers the "effect" that LP mastering and reproduction imparts to alter the
original sound to fit onto the medium.

I don't think you will find any recording engineers who think an LP sounds
more like what they recorded than a CD.



Yes, CD is very portable compare to LP, but tell me why mini-disc cannot
take over CD's place? So portable is not a main issue.

Because the lossy Atracs MD is audibly inferior to redbook CD.


Quality, if you are listening your CD via your walkman while you are
traveling, the background noise will simply cover up any quality issue,
as long as your discman won't skip!

Not with my Etymotic Research ER4's.

What I am trying to say is: no matter DVD-A or SACD, whoever can do the
marketing better will win the war. As a matter of fact, can anyone tell
me what is the sonic difference between DVD-A and SACD? What am I suppose
to listen to? Because I just can't tell the difference.

I'm with you on this one. They both sound great to me and on high end
equipment they are both an improvement over CD.