Slashdot Mirror
Vinyl's Revival Is Now a Phenomenon On Both Sides of the Atlantic
New submitter journovampire sends this report about the resurgence of vinyl:
Vinyl album sales smashed records on both sides of the Atlantic in 2014, as a format that recently seemed on its last legs hit astonishing new heights. ...n the UK in 2014, vinyl album sales totaled of 1.3m – six times bigger than its tally just five years earlier (2009). In fact, 2014 represented the most vinyl albums sales in the UK since 1995 – nearly 20 years ago. In the U.S., vinyl sales have quadrupled in the past five years, narrowly missing out on a 10m sales milestone in 2014. Amazingly, the year’s 9.2m vinyl sales haul is the biggest since Nielsen Soundscan records began in 1993 – by some distance.
peace.
If you really wanna go retro, use wax tubes.
Go figure. Hipster trends hit mainstream, give it 2-3 years and vinyl will fall by the wayside as people pickup Zune's and say "THIS IS HOW IT WAS MEANT TO BE!"
Wheel of Time: Book by Book and Sumview (summary review) Bigdady92 style: http://bigdady92.blogspot.com/
Typical.
But then again, there's a lot of us old farts who still have a nice Vinyl collection collecting dust. Say what we will about the immediacy and portability of digital media, I get really irritated having to redownload/sync my media (especially CD and odds and ends picked up from bands on the internet) on my laptop. Yes, I can't take my vinyl with me on the go (and for that, I have my phone). but for lounging around the house on saturday afternoon, sometimes picking up an old record (or new one) has a bit of nostalgia that I can sit back and enjoy while sipping a coffee.
There's a coming anti-digital storm: Vinyl, Instant Film, cassette tapes, now we just need to see super 8 and 16 for film. Too many hacks, too many insecure sites, and people finally coming to the realization that maybe, just maybe, they shouldn't put everything they do online for anyone and everyone to see or "steal". I'm okay with this.
If you were me, you'd be good lookin'. - six string samurai
Of course, there is the retro side to vinyl. However, there is the physical aspect of the media, from plenty of space on the cover for album art (as opposed to what is shown on a smartphone display) to having liner notes and other niceties with the album, to the actual handling of a record which is 100% analog. Of course, its audio quality compared to a CD is debatable, but there is definitely something about having a record collection and the physical aspect of that.
For example, one physical aspect was Jethro Tull's "Thick as a Brick" newspaper. Another album actually folded into a miniature desk. This is a physical trait that has been lost, and is now being rediscovered.
Of course, there is the fact that DRM and the play device phoning home isn't an issue, and it doesn't take that much in the way of electronics to play a record compared to a CD or MP3 file.
I start to think what they call "warmth" is "muddiness".
What you hear in the ear, preach from the rooftop Matthew 10.27b
Static guns and discwasher brushes notwithstanding, vinyl had a lot of issues with dust that people are soon going to discover, if they haven't already.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
"Vinyl album sales smashed records on both sides of the Atlantic in 2014..."
I noticed our local JB hifi has got a whole section of vinyl so had a leaf through. Most of the albums I already have on LP from when they were new and they cost a lot but it is still nice to see. The real problem LPs had back in the late 80's was the quality of the pressings because they were so mass produced and the vinyl was thin plus they were trying to squeeze a CDs worth of music onto the LP so you got shallow grooves and crushed dynamics making them sound much worse than they could. Given the choice between CD and those terrible LPs from that period the CD is hands down the better choice. If these new pressings are done right, they should sound very good assuming the source material is good and I have a few direct to disc LPs which are incredible. I don't tend to use my turntable these days but I have still got it, plus my collection and hope to have the right space to set it up because the experience of listening to a record isn't just about the quality but rather you end up listening to the whole album as a complete piece of work where with CDs or MP3s you would focus more on tracks
"I have the attention span of a strobe lit goldfish, please get to the point quickly!"
I see what you did there ...
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
There are a few types I see doing this.
You'll always have those insane people who think Vinyl has better quality than CDs or FLAC... but I imagine they are a pretty small group.
You've got people who're after the experience -- maybe a more personal feel to having a big physical system that needs more interaction. Again I imagine this is larger than the first group, but still relatively small.
And finally you've got hipsters, who'll do anything just because nobody else is doing it. Very suspicious that vinyl's popularity starts to grow with a strong correlation to this group's size.
If one is going to buy the physical media version of an album, why WOULDN'T they get the Vinyl?
It's debatable in the same way as the audio quality of regular speaker cable compared with gold-plated oxygen-free copper cable is debatable. It's not a long debate.
If you look at the equipment the analogue-faddists are using, it is for the most part not the high-end audio equipment of a previous generation, but retro-reproductions of the portable record players teenagers used to have in their bedrooms, record players that sounded terrible then and sound just as bad now. The only thing that's changed is that there were a lot of genuinely hi-fi systems around in those days for comparison. These days tiny speakers with wildly exaggerated bass are the norm on pretty much everything you buy from mobile phones to TV sound bars; it's hardly surprising that the sound from a Dansette record player sounds better by comparison.
I still have the speakers I used with my pre-CD sound system and I don't regret ditching a turntable for the first model of CD player that was available - the sound quality is superior in every respect (noise, frequency response, dynamic range). Vinyl records are the audio equivalent of Instagram - washed out, artifically-coloured facsimiles of the original that have become a passing fashion.
(and some gasoline)
Well, *I* use whale oil, which burns much cleaner and with a warmer flame. But you mainstream types probably wouldn't appreciate it.
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
I'm a self-proclaimed "audiophile" but not in the annoying, trust-my-ears-only way that plagues the hobby (I'm a scientist, dammit). I have a nice tube amp, great speakers, subwoofer, etc.... and I have a turntable as well (and a network enabled player + nice DAC). Anyhoo.... I can speak to the non-hipster side of things. Yes, some of the growth of vinyl has a faddish aspect to it. But, keep in mind, many musicphiles and audiophiles never stopped collecting and buying vinyl even through the meteoric rise of CD.
If you are a major music fan (and do not have an unlimited supply of pirated needledrops on the internet), a turntable is essential. A lot of obscure stuff was never released on CD. A lot of stuff that was released from the past on CD sounded (and continues to sound) dreadful due to the mad scramble to ride the CD wave; nth generation tapes, some equalized for vinyl, were used as the source material. Thankfully a lot of stuff these days that is selling is remastered versions of old stuff from original master tapes (not copies). You can be cyincal about this (say the major labels are just milking old warhorses) and you can also acknowledge that the digital audio technology has increased astoundingly since the late 80s and 90s. What does this have to do with vinyl? Well, vinyl can sound really good if done well. I won't argue that it is a better medium than digital; it simply isn't. But it has its own charms.
I have bought vinyl reissues that were mastered very well, and the vinyl was quiet, lacking surface noise - but about a third of the time I get burned with either lousy mastering (sibilance and related issues - and I have a very good microline cart) or more commonly, ticks and pops in shrinkwrapped new vinyl (and run through a we clean). This is the way it has always been and will always be with vinyl.
A primary motivation I have for buying new vinyl releases of new music is to acquire recordings that haven't been as dynamically squashed in the digital mastering process. While vinyl releases can be very dynamically compressed as well, as a rule, vinyl releases tend to be mastered with more dynamic range than the digital version (you could argue that this is partly, or mostly due, to physical limitations of the vinyl medium). And yes, I acknowledge that most vinyl is either digitally sourced or goes through an ADA conversion.
But mostly I continue to buy vinyl because it's fun - it's part of a hobby I enjoy very much. Spending hours just sitting "in the sweet spot" and listening to music (from any source - digital, tape, vinyl or whatever) is something I enjoy. So while people scoff at the vinyl "revival" I'm just glad to see there are more choices our there for getting good sounding music.
A squid eating dough in a polyethylene bag is fast and bulbous, got me?
(and some gasoline)
Well, *I* use whale oil, which burns much cleaner and with a warmer flame. But you mainstream types probably wouldn't appreciate it.
I have been hard at work cloning dinosaurs from mosquito DNA so I can raise them and make them into oil myself; the overall experience is vastly superior to your silliness with slaughtering those new-age whales. I'm also manufacturing new vacuum tubes for my unbeatable analog system, but you wouldn't understand how it works so I won't bother telling you, you silly modern sell-out.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
Green Day does not deserve to be inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. At least, not the Green Day that put out American Idiot - an argument could be made for the Green Day that put out Kerplunk but they haven't been heard from in about 20 yars.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
I'm waiting for punch cards to come back. You just don't get the same experience when loading your program on cassette tape.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
I'm getting a 10" black and white TV
Of course you do have room for better album art and liner detail/notes, and you just can't knock what came with Cheech and Chong's Big Bambu, truly a watermark event in consumer relations.
And don't even get me started on the tube mythologies.
What this boils down to in the audio sense, in all cases except for two exceptions -- when you're playing vinyl you simply don't have a digital source for or when the digital source has been compressed and the vinyl hasn't -- is that consumers have been duped by Audiophile mythology. Badly duped.
There's every reason to have a turntable in your system, as high-performance as your budget can stand, so you can manage those two exceptions. No point in depriving yourself of something just because there's no adequate digital version. But barring those use cases, if your ears are actually working, you want a CD or better.
signed (Musician, music lover, engineer, recording engineer), me.
PS: You want to hear what a CD is actually capable of (and so also learn what crappy recording techniques and mastering houses have been cheating you out of), go get yourself a few CDs from TELARC, and listen on a good system. No vinyl on the planet can even come close -- and that's just how it should be. Why don't all CDs (and up) sound like that? The vast majority of it can be attributed to bad recording practice and far too much compression (but I repeat myself.) Google "Loudness wars" and learn the ins and outs. It's both fascinating and sad.
PPS: Not associated with TELARC, except they've gotten a lot of my money already, and are going to get more. :)
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Wow. There is just so much wrong here...
Most of what passes for "DJ'ing" today is what used to be called "Pressing Play on An iPad."
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
Years ago I was very close to buying a whole lathe setup with spare cutters and everything, it was an auction and the price was 1$... but you had to pay for getting the thing out of the warehouse that very day or they'd penalize you big time.
Sometimes I regret not being more proactive about the whole thing. I enjoy electromechanical contraptions like that and would have liked to make masters and one-offs for people.
But the thing was enormous and it would not have worked well in a 3rd floor apartment in any case. It would be happier in the basement of a warehouse.
http://gallery.audioasylum.com...
plus two 19 inch racks full of all kinds of junk...
Mostly random stuff.
If I had to guess, the main reason Vinyl is popular is because of the enlarged artwork and people wanting to own some memorabilia from an artist they like. I wouldn't be surprised if the people who own these records never play them.
What if I just like the look? I also have two reel to reel tape decks. It's FUN to watch reels.
Mostly random stuff.
Yes, "great care". Not dropping them, keeping them in their sleeve, and using a carbon brush before playing. The burden! The pain!
Mostly random stuff.
and noise
Knobs and buttons are far superior to crappy touchscreens when trying to change stations.
Agreed, but digital radios can (and often do) have buttons and knobs. What's nice is that in many cases you can decide what a given control does, rather than it being hard-wired at the factory.
No ridiculous black bars down the side of a picture when the camera is held vertically.
Huh? Never had that problem with an actual camera, digital or film. Your problem is with phones and other devices pretending to be cameras, to greater or lesser degrees of success.
When the power goes out, an analog phone line doesn't die or need a charger.
And VoIP has a built-in battery backup for this exact reason.
No reading a manual to figure out how to set your a/c or heating controls.
That's because they only do one thing -- keep the temperature roughly between two defined points. If that's all you want to do with a digital thermostat, you don't need to read anything either. You only need the reference card (and I do mean card, it's the size of a credit card) if you want to do something like have it automatically expand the allowable temperature range during hours when nobody is home, or everyone is asleep. Having to read the card is a far sight better than a simple "NOPE, can't do that".
Typewriters never lose your documents.
Nope, they just spit out paper for you to lose, damage, or destroy instead. Incidentally, so do printers.
As a general rule, you can fix a broken analog device for less than the cost of a new digital one.
Again, this depends on what it does. Try working split on a tube transceiver from the 1970s, and tell me with a straight face that things going solid-state in the 1980s wasn't a MASSIVE improvement. Reliability improved, ruggedness improved, feature set improved, and prices stayed about the same. Once the feature set started to level off, prices started to drop.
Now if you're talking about a guitar amp, you might have a more valid point (so long as the Russians keep making tubes).
A compass never needs a satellite to tell you which way is North.
That's because it can't tell you which way is north, only which direction the magnetic pole approximating north lies in. Depending on where you are, the two could be substantially different. Compasses are a good basic sanity check for other data, but precise, they are not.
I'm not claiming digital is always better, but most of your examples are poor ones.
How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
I found a chart from the Wikipedia Vinyl revival article. Interestingly, it seems that the demand is skyrocketing.
Don't have to worry about a company telling you you can't listen to the music you already purchased.
There were plenty of attempts at analog DRM.. I mean RM.
No ridiculous black bars down the side of a picture when the camera is held vertically.
That's nothing to do with analog or digital. That's to do with phones, which are usually held and operated in portrait mode, having their camera in the same orientation as the screen, for obvious reasons.
Typewriters never lose your documents.
They also remain resolutely silent when asked to search for that thing you typed 18 months ago, though.
A compass never needs a satellite to tell you which way is North.
Neither does my phone.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
It shouldn't be. Not unless either your tube amp, or your transistor amp, in a word, sucks, anyway.
Tube amps and transistor amps differ from each other in sound reproduction not at all in the linear zone used to reproduce music. A tube amp may have a slightly higher noise floor (and then again, it may not... but really low noise tube amps will cost ya.)
Where tube and transistor amps differ significantly (meaning, to your ear) are in what happens when you drive them so hard that they can no longer linearly reproduce the signal you're feeding them. A naive transistor amp will hard clip, generating a most unpleasant bunch of harmonics, along with a distorted version of the original signal. A tube amp (given an adequate power supply) will clip softly (by comparison), rounding off the signal instead of cutting the tops into flatlines or droopy reverse trapezoids, and this is much easier on the ear.
Now here is the thing: Anyone who likes music, much less loves it, would never, and I seriously mean never, not just "mostly wouldn't", manage music reproduction in such a way as to have our tube or transistor amplifiers distort. Because the second we do so, differences notwithstanding, the music would have to sound better to reach up through the resulting dreck to the standard of "sounding like shit."
So tube/transistor, difference meme, WTF? This WTF: For a musician, playing a single instrument, and usually that means an instrument producing a relatively simple waveform, the tube distortion *does* add interest (think electric blues guitar for the classic example), and so for the musician, the tube amp is a tool which does indeed get used in its distorted regimes.
But when that sound gets to YOU, the very last thing you would EVER want to do is add MORE distortion to it. You'll have some, because no sound production system is distortion free (the speakers are the worst culprit, followed by the stylus if you use vinyl) but man, you want that to be as near not-a-damn-bit-more as you can manage. Otherwise, your ear will shit in your auditory cortex and crown it with audio battery acid. Hate and discontent everywhere in your mind.
So, no. 1000 times no. Tube amps sound like transistor amps in hifi setups unless someone has completely screwed up your installation, or your ears.
Having gone that far, some caveats: That noise floor thing I mentioned, that's one. Lousy tube amps often hiss like angry snakes. If so, get rid of that POS (or at least try new tubes, and/or have someone replace the capacitors and old carbon resistors in your "classic" pride and joy.) Next, damping factor: For bass, a transistor amp may do a lot better, depending on your speaker systems. This is because transformer coupled outputs from a tube amp (these are typical) can't control the inductive kickback from a moving coil speaker as precisely and decisively as a direct coupled transistor amp can. However, from the tube days, there are speaker systems that were designed with this in mind, and which are extremely well behaved re inductive kickback, and so the end result is similar. This is a multi-variable issue (amp+speaker), and one that takes some knowledge to waltz around satisfactorily. So there's that. Finally, tubes are more likely to be microphonic; in a really high power system, that can cause feedback, which is intolerable; but the (good?) news is, there are very few hifi tube systems with that kind of whip-ass.
You like tube amps, I have no argument with you. I like them too, and I own some great ones. Plus, they glow in the dark, which appeals to my batlike nature. :) But when you say they sound different or better, just, no. Not unless something's been done very wrong, or something is broken.
If you want primo sound reproduction, the place to put your do
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
After it ends, others in the room will be usually be consulted on what the next side will be.
How many sides do vinyls have nowadays?
Vinyl sales for the entire year totaled nearly 3.5% of 257 million albums sold in 2014! The other 96.5% of sales pale in comparison!
And we're not going to mention the 1.1 billion individual track digital sales! Because that would make vinyl look bad!
"What these naive enviro-conscious hipsters don't realize is that every time a record is "cut" the small bits of plastic that result are released as nanoscopic pollutants that clog the tubules of bivalves living in a pond near a small community north of Maine."
The above is the dream of most every old prick on slashdot to be able to say. Get off my lawn!
With the recent news of the entertainment industry lying about numbers ($80 million settlement .. was a lie), how'm I to believe this rhetoric?
Remember, 106% of all statistics are a lie.
you expect me to believe that sales have been going up? What would people even be doing with all this vinyl if they don't even have a record player? That makes about a much sense as a recent quote by Abraham Lincoln.
Better range for your speakers. Guaranteed.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
This makes me think of the technological progress of communications between computers. (Note: This is not a totally accurate depiction of history.) First, we had serial communication, like RS232. When that wasn't fast enough, we went parallel, like Centronics. That reached a certain speed limit due to signal skew between the parallel wires. But by then, on-chip transistors were so fast that we could modulate differential serial in a way that beats the heck out of parallel. (Notice that modern highspeed interconnects, like USB3 and PCI-Express, are all differential serial, where any parallelism has decoupled phasing.)
So imagine we computed the transfer function of the "typical" record player, accounting for all the distortions in the needle, amplifier, and speaker. Then we took the waveform we WANT to get and reverse engineer exactly the groove we need on the record to get the exact sounds we want. It might take a decent amount of compute power to do it, but we could do a far better job than we ever could back in the 1970's.
Huh? Never had that problem with an actual camera, digital or film. Your problem is with phones and other devices pretending to be cameras, to greater or lesser degrees of success.
"No true camera..."
The category of "multifunction devices that just happen to have a functional camera included" didn't exist in the film days, outside of spy-catalog novelties that took pictures as bad as the ones you're lamenting. I don't think it's unreasonable to ask that you compare a dedicated film camera to a dedicated digital camera.
Also, I take far more pictures with a digital camera than I did with a film SLR, and I was pretty serious about it back in the film days. Back then, even when I could get my film processed free (which was doable, you just had to know the right people and not consume anything that could be inventoried), I still had to BUY the film. Now all I have to worry about is charging some batteries. I take an order of magnitude more pictures now than I did then, because they're damn near free. If I get one truly worth archiving, I could have it copied to archival film -- the same process I'd have to do if it STARTED on film, because even the photojournalist film I preferred doesn't last forever.
My "keeper rate" has gone down, probably to a third of what it was on film. But I'm taking ten times as many images overall, and have the economic freedom to bracket and otherwise screw with multiple settings in difficult circumstances. Plus, I can immediately look at the result to see if I got the shot, or if I need to try again. The end result is that I get a lot more keepers, at the expense of some charge cycles on my batteries. I haven't even burned out the 2 GB SD card I've had in the camera for the last eight years.
And VoIP has a built-in battery backup for this exact reason.
Uh are you arguing for parity with analogue landlines because anyone could potentially buy a UPS...?
I'm saying that one thing you're not going to get over a fiber-connected VoIP system is power, but the phone company took that into account and did something about it. If the problem is sufficiently severe that you can't restore power before the battery keels over, then there's a damn good chance your POTS line wouldn't be working either -- due to physical disconnection, or lack of power at the CO. Even though they have generators, they do eventually run out of fuel too.
Nope, they just spit out paper for you to lose, damage, or destroy instead. Incidentally, so do printers.
Oh please. I have stuff in the family that's 100+ years old and in perfectly readable condition and all I had to do was store it somewhere warm and dry. If one or two pieces of paper have had the ink fade, do you know how much that affects adjacent documents? Not at all. What will happen if I store a hard drive or optical media somewhere warm and dry for 100 years, please?
I'd rather have paper and a scanned copy that can be kept somewhere else. Without going digital, what are you going to do? Ask someone to store a safe full of photocopies in their attic for you? All I have to do currently is swap external drives with someone. I get to raid their media collection, they get to raid mine, and we BOTH get an offsite backup. Is it permanent? No. But neither is film, nor is most paper. Yes there are archival papers, and archival film stock, but those have to be specifically chosen. Ordinary consumer-grade celluloid falls apart in a matter of decades. And don't even start with fire, flooding, or E-flats.
Analog is "better" in the sense that it existed first, so much of what you want to document is analog. If it was created digitally, then a digital copy is "better" in the sense of being able to produce more precise reproductions.
Again, this depends on what it does. Try working split on
How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
When the power goes out, an analog phone line doesn't die or need a charger.
We had an earthquake. Power didn't work, phone didn't work, internet (ADSL) didn't work. Cellphone worked. Just saying'.
I remember talk about the laser record players. They found it much harder to achieve (warped records, etc) than they expected.
And I believe there were two video disk technologies. Laserdisks, which were like giant CD's with digital video on, and Video Disks, which were about the same 12" size, but came in a hard shell-case sort of like old floppy disk, and they were in fact an analog video medium in a grooved disk. You put the case in the machine and then removed it, leaving the disk inside (you never saw the actual disk). That technology still blows me away.
The two disk formats went at it for a while in the 80s, and then failed, with VHS tapes winning most of the American market until DVD's came along.
"Ruthlessly pursuing the idea that the accordion is just another instrument."
I've always been a vinyl fan.
I could never get across to people I'd talk to about true reproduction and 8x sampling a second. Being you only get 8 points of "sound" per second. Not a reproduction as one was missing the other 92 points. Much like a JPG where hell you'll never miss it, but by the 5th to 10th save...
Build a man a fire, you'll keep him warm for a day.
Set a man on fire, and you'll keep him warm for the rest of his life.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
I suppose there are a number of people still with a serviceable record player. Recently the store has started stocking vinyl, and so the sale of vinyl there can only go up.
I would not expect that vinyl would improve much from 4 to 5% of sales, but then that is enough.
Why are people like myself still willing to buy vinyl? Well I suspect that there are a lot of different reasons. If you are older and have grown up around vinyl, and have a reasonable sized record collection then there is a reason to maintain the record player, and do all the servicing like cartridge changes etc. Vinyl is a pleasant way to listen to music, there is the simplicity of form and function, basicly scratches on plastic and an amplifier.
If I was starting out now I would never have gone the vinyl route, but I have my old transcription record deck, I refurbished (partly rebuilt) my valve amplifiers (circa 1963 seperate pre- and left / right power amps), redesigned the front end of the valve pre-amp. So as an engineer it is a double pleasure for me to enjoy music on a system which I understand down to the last component.
I was so glad to throw away my turntable. It was a high-end model, with a highly-rated cartridge/stylus. Even so, and even after I used the recommended dust remover on every disk several times, I had annoying clicks and hiss within a week after a new album purchase. Good riddance.
Is anyone really surprised here? A technically inferior product has become so cool that people are willing to pay a premium price for it. Apple has been making money hand over fist in the cellphone market for years with this strategy. Of course I'm going to get a bunch of people replying with that tired old saw that vinyl has a certain "soul" or "character" to its sound. They are like the people say they like the iPhone because it "just works" but are really too embarrassed to admit they've paid a premium price for the "cutting edge" of yesteryear. Face it, the hiss and crackle and lower fidelity of vinyl was surpassed two decades ago with CDs and the quality just keeps improving with the digital formats of today.
Now get off my lawn!
Um, clarify for me please? A POTS landline is powered via the 'phone company, and in the regions I've lived in the UK - from remote Scotland to urban Sussex - I have never had a dead line due to power outage, even when bad weather has killed electricity for a day or so. Perhaps BT are better than the average 'phone company at this. How is an on-premises VoIP system powered by the 'phone company?
We've never had the need or opportunity to test this, but the sealed lead-acid battery built into the VoIP box that is attached to our fiber connection promises two hours of talk time and 36 hours of standby time with no power applied. If true, this would mean that we too could pass the dial tone test after 24 hours of continuous power outage. We did not buy this equipment, this facility was built into equipment provided by Verizon, presumably because they knew it was unacceptable to let phone service go out in the event of power failure.
How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
Stupid people will buy anything if they have money to burn.
This is not the next big thing. Its morons with money.
Bring back film and we can start buying that as well. Lots of tinned film and vinyl degrading as we value it more and more.