[Audio Empire]

On Thu, 27 Jan 2011 18:14:18 -0800, Ed Seedhouse wrote
(in article ):


[ excess quotation snipped -- dsr ]




I was alive at the time with access to magazines that discussed the
differences between 78's and 33's. And it is just a fact that there
were plenty of letters in magazines extolling the virtues of the
former and the deficiencies of the latter.

Yes, I'm aware of that. There were also live vs recorded "shootouts" using
acoustical gramophones back in the early decades of the 20th century that
showed conclusively that there was no difference between a record of the time
and a live performance. This particular bias has followed every advance in
sound reproduction since Edison. Acoustic to electrical transcription, 78 to
LP, mono to stereo, and analog to digital.

The debate went on issue
after issue in, if I recall rightly, the pages of "Wireless world",
the premier British electronics magazine and every time I come across
today's "CD's suck and tubes sound ever so much better" tirades in
today's fashionable rags, I am reminded afresh of the 78 vs 33 debates
from all those years ago. In fact, allowing for changes in english
usage over the years many of these early letters could be published
today by just substituting "digital" and "analogue" as appropriate.
Although you don't see too many letters in today's magazines extolling
the virtues of thorn needles over steel ones, or the "real sound" of
the completely sound driven horn gramophones vs the "fake" sound
produced with electronics. And these were tube electronics, mind you.

Ah, the debates of yesteryear.

It says more about human nature than it does about recorded sound.