[Audio Empire]

On Tue, 8 Feb 2011 06:57:03 -0800, Steven Sullivan wrote
(in article ):

Audio Empire wrote:
On Tue, 25 Jan 2011 16:02:30 -0800, Scott wrote
(in article ):

how can you claim to speak authoritatively about how digital releases
sound?

I don't claim any authority. My opinion is my opinion. But my opinion
is based on extensive comparisons. I base my opinion on how digital
releases sound by playing them on my system.

And on the result of those comparisons, I concur. CD rarely sounds as good
as it could or should sound and in instances where a CD and a vinyl release
of the same title exist, the LP usually sounds better, as I said before.


Let's remember some history. The fanbase most excited about the coming
of CD circa 1982 wasn't rock or pop or country or jazz. It was 'classical'
fans. These were the listeners championing 'high fidelity' the most
consistently over the previous decades. They were excited about a medium
that promised perfect pitch consistentcy, lack of tracking distortion and
wear, 96dB of dynamic range, flat frequency response from 20Hz to 20kHz,
and immunity from 'pops and tics'.

Yes, I was one of them. What of it? Most of these same people were highly
disillusioned by the reality of CD. And even if CD, as a medium, does live up
to it's hype, that's not to say that record producers can't or don't suborn
the medium to their own marketing purposes, many of which have nothing to do
with "fi".

And it has been classical recording which has continued to hold out
longest against the 'loudness wars' (though some recordings have succumbed).

Do classical releases typically get an LP version these days? And if so,
does it usually 'sound better'?

Yes. The titles and labels that have stood the test of time do anyway and
they OFTEN sound better than the CD of the same performance, but not always.
And I'm surprised that you have taken it upon yourself to pontificate on this
subject when you don't even pretend to know what's available on vinyl and
what isn't.