[Steven Sullivan]

Audio Empire wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2011 12:20:35 -0800, bob wrote
(in article ):

On Feb 5, 1:22=A0pm, "Arny Krueger" wrote:

The euphonic distortion argument IME pretty much falls flat.

In what way? Are you saying that the distortions inherent in vinyl
reproduction are *not* euphonic? They sound quite pleasant, even to
me. I can even see why some might confuse those distortions with "the
sound of live music."

To state what I've been hinting at here, I suspect that for the vast
majority of vinylphiles the appeal is in fact these distortions,
rather than the supposedly superior mastering. And that's why
audiophile vinyl appears to be far more popular than audiophile
digital.

bob

While I don't necessarily disagree, I think that in some cases the vinyl
mastering IS superior to the CD mastering of the same material. When the LP
has more presence, more bass, better dynamics, silkier, airier highs, with
more silken strings and more realistic-sounding percussion than does the CD
of the same material, there is more than just "euphonic coloration" going-on
here.


Not necessarily. Have you researched what is encompassed by the term?


Somebody, following some corporate agenda is purposely hobbling the CD
release because there is NO EXCUSE for the CD to sound that mediocre. After
all, if one can take that superior LP, transfer it to CD with all of the
virtues I just outlined intact, then it's clear that the CD is certainly
CAPABLE of being just as good as the LP, it just isn't.

No, it sometimes (and depending on the genre, usually) is as good, or better,
than LP.

As for the rest of your lament, why can't you get it through your head that
louder, to some, is thought to bring more sales?

It's not like this is a phenomenon exclusive to the CD era. It's just been
taken to a new extreme.


--
-S
We have it in our power to begin the world over again - Thomas Paine