Slashdot Mirror
'High Definition Vinyl' Is Coming As Early As Next Year (pitchfork.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Pitchfork: In 2016, a European patent filing described a way of manufacturing records that the inventors claimed would have higher audio fidelity, louder volume, and longer playing times than conventional LPs. Now, the Austrian-based startup Rebeat Innovation has received $4.8 million in funding for the initiative, founder and CEO Gunter Loibl told Pitchfork. Thanks to the investment, the first "HD vinyl" albums could hit stores as early as 2019, Loibl said. The HD vinyl process involves converting audio digitally to a 3D topographic map. Lasers are then used to inscribe the map onto the "stamper," the part that stamps the grooves into the vinyl. According to Loibl, these methods allow for records to be made more precisely and with less loss of audio information. The results, he said, are vinyl LPs that can have up to 30 percent more playing time, 30 percent more amplitude, and overall more faithful sound reproduction. The technique would also avoid the chemicals that play a role in traditional vinyl manufacturing. Plus, the new-school HD vinyl LPs would still play on ordinary record players.
What the DUCK are you on about?!
so.. basically cd "quality" on vinyl. ya, that'll sell really well. /s
Call me jaded, but every time I hear an advertisement claim a percentage improvement in efficiency, I hear "up to" even if it's unspoken.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
The volume of the record is dependent on the movement of the needle which is dependent on the width of the track. Louder tracks are wider which reduces the length of play. Remember those old compilation albums with 10+ tracks per side sounded tinny compared to the original because to fit the tracks were compressed and volume (especially bass) was lost.
About a decade ago I read about a record player which uses laser beams instead of physical cartridges that can wear down the vinyl and decrease the sound quality.
The whole point of vinyl, for those into that, is the authentic LP experience. HD vinyl is more akin to compact disc (CD) technology developed in the late 1970s and commercially released in 1982. In short, they're reinventing the CD.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_disc
Almost all vinyl recording start life with digital audio. So what is the point of converting to analog and then reading the analog? A loss less hifi with 100khz bandwidth and 20 bit precision (far higher than vinyl) can be stored on SD card at a cost of 1 cent/min. Most users use vinyl as a vintage showoff and nothing else (like an automatic watch).
Who wants to bet that any improvement in vinyl audio quality will only cause vinyl lovers to hate it nearly as much as they did when CD's came out?
HD radio failed in America but it's being "enforced" in some European countries....
Now we get HD vinyl... another format in an attempt to spur sales of the requisite players. This is another format in search of an audience. When will they try to re-introduce Quadraphonic sound and ask us to support it? =P
I find it amazing that in the age of devices capable of handling arbitrary precision arithmetic, someone opts for a process inherently limited by scales of size of physical material features. This is definitely not one of those things I'd be pining for.
Ezekiel 23:20
(shamelessly stolen from Men in Black)
Or.. now hear me out on this one... or ... we could just, you know, send the digitally converted audio, you know, without converting it back into a bumpy piece of plastic.
I know this might sound radical, but it seems to me that converting analog sound to digital format then to a digital 3d map then to a laser-cut stamper then to a piece of bumpy vinyl then to a vibrating stylus and into a varying electrical current to drive an amplification system to run the speakers that you listen to might just be a little more complicated than just taking the digital format for storage and transport and converting that back into analog sound at playback.
Trust me this will go over as well as HD-CD and SACD did. Include MiniDisc too for that matter.
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
Being able to use my Technics 1200s isn't the only factor. I have a pair of Shure M44-7 needles, as well as a pair of Ortofon Clubs, which have a tip of a particular size. If HD vinyl is fitting louder tracks at higher fidelity, and more of them, onto a 12" vinyl record, then the grooves *have* to be more narrow. Will I need new needles for these? If not, won't my wider needles just wear them out faster? If neither of these are true, is it because of a tougher material that is more resistant to wear at the expense of the stylus?
The information here is unclear regarding whether I'll need nothing but a record. However, the *real* question is whether there will be any music pressed on HD vinyl that will truly leverage the medium. Pink Floyd's "Dark Side of the Moon" is great, but I doubt they will an end-to-end remaster from the original recordings, themselves in good enough shape, to warrant listening with the format. Modern stuff that's compressed to hell and generated in Ableton or Logic isn't going to sound any better. Perhaps new recordings of classical works might be the closest thing, but I'd argue that even these are going to have a very small audience; said audience is more likely to see a live performance by the local philharmonic.
Cheap conversion rate?
I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
Minidisc was viable, and very durable. DRM killed it.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
The volume of the record is dependent on the movement of the needle which is dependent on the width of the track.
Relax, dude
Every kind of defects can be fixed with the addition of GOLD PLATED MONSTER CABLE
What about DAT? I still have my player.
the rush of high definition 8 track players that are sure to follow....
a little every time you play them. Someday people are going to start collecting CDs again, when this vinyl nonsense has run its course.
I agree the problem with HD formats is greed. when HD formats came out they put DRM on them and tried to sell them at double or more mark up. the thing is to make a CD or mp3 they have to invest money and time to downgrade the signal from the original master so it's actually cheaper to give us the master. weird system isn't it? and yeah because we don't pay more for the HD source laden with DRM the format has ended up dead.
online stores continue to sell cheap audio files till this day which are worse than any physical format ever sold besides cassette tapes. this is why I go for audio CD still .. still waiting for them to just abandon CD or iTunes in favor of lossless HD files as the standard.
I do buy a ton of albums I have like over 2000 CDs. tend to buy at least 10 a year or a couple a month.
so tired of CD tho recently turned to piracy because I refuse to pay $20+ for an HD album.
If only record companies would put a fraction as much effort and resources into mastering their CDs properly and making them sound good, all this would be unnecessary.
Digital audio to vinyl records? I guess if someone is stupid enough to make it there will be people stupid enough to buy it.
But then you have to deal with digital jitter; and we don't like that.
Not because I have any intention of ever buying one of these, or own a phonograph, or ever intend to... I am excited because this bodes well for MY new startup, which is currently seeking investors to get it off the ground. We're going to be making High-Definition Books! Why carry your entire book collection around conveniently in electronic form, able to read any book you please at any time, and get new ones over the air in a few seconds, without ever having to plod your way to a (regrettably increasingly hard to find) book STORE, when you can just use an e-book reader such as a Kobo, a Kindle, or a Nook, or a book-reader APP on any of the roughly one TRILLION phones, phablets, tablets, smart TVs or other smart devices, or personal computers, etc., etc. etc., when you can pay even more money for the exact same thing you probably already own a copy of, so that you can read your favorite novels, biographies, science fiction works, etc., in a dazzling 12-point font, whose "pixels," if you will, using our amazing new virtual, interpolated resolution reach an astounding 9600 dpi?!?
Cannst thou conceive of how much more lovely and more temperate thine love shalt seem to thou, as compared with the tawdry tedium of a Summer's day, when thou readst the 18th sonnet of William of Shakespeare, in our new, DAZZLING HIGH DEFINITION BOOK OF POEMS?!?
Sure, most existing text is either printed with plates or using a printer that has effectively indistinguishably high "resolution," with dots that are already vanishingly small, individually, at 600 dpi, but who cares, when you can smirk to yourself about how YOUR book, (containing the exact same text, mind you,) has more virtual, interpolated dots per inch? You can feel smug and satisfied that YOUR copy of "Harry Potter and the Ridiculous Invention" has even nicer paper, and letters formed from even SMALLER dots, even though you already couldn't SEE the dots in the lower-resolution form of the book... but who cares about that when this book has a special gold medallion embossed into each outward-facing surface, so anyone seeing you buying, holding, or reading this book, will KNOW that YOU are a DISCERNING reader with more money than you know what to do with, because you paid extra for a copy of a book you could have bought for a fraction of that price, just to show off how much more money you have, than sense.
Yeah, no. This is stupid. All this really does is serve as a reminder that as long as there are gullible people with too much money, others, elsewhere, industrious and clever, will never cease working on dumb shit for them to squander their too-much-money on.
Our reign has gone on long enough. Indeed. Summon the meteors.
The real issue is that there's a digital step, which taints all audio derived from it.
Vinyl is about the status conferred by being seen to use vinyl. It's not about the music or the technology. People, especially men, will go to great lengths to attain status. Buying vinyl is relatively mild.
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
half speed masters ?
The Loudness War is THE reason why records have made a come back over the past decade- because of the analog nature of the format, it isn't possible to force the ridiculous amount of compression and loudness that's on CDs on to records, resulting in the records having a much more accurate sound. If someone tells you that the record sounds better, this is almost certainly why.
FOR WHATEVER REASON, the record companies want to force the horrendous, artificial, severe sound compression that's appeared on CDs over the past 20 years on to records- and the digital nature of HD Vinyl will allow this.
Can we please keep the loudness war away from the turntable? If I want to listen to shitty compressed music I'll go on to youtube thanks.
For those of you unfamiliar with the loudness war, here is a good example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Gmex_4hreQ
Another great example was Metallicas "Death Magnetic"- the CD release was absolute garbage, but an uncompressed and unaltered version was found and it sounds much, much better (and it rocks!).
This scheme is a shoe-in for the 2018 "polished turd of the year" award.
process involves converting audio digitally to a 3D topographic map
They should just rename themselves whoosh.
You must have never listened to Minidisc then.
It sounded AWFUL. By the time they got to ATRAC4 is was almost as good as 128Kb MP3 but the temporal quantizing was still a non-starter.
There are other reasons people purchase VINYL. The larger album artwork, the physical tangible packaging delivers a greater connection with the music your listening too. While the sound quality of vinyl over digital formats is debatable they do offer some beautiful packaging. As a collector they are way more satisfying to hold in your hands and look over at over any other format. Vinyl records offer a different listening experience. There is something to be said about sitting down and listening to a record rather than pressing play on a digital device. It seems that "HD VINYL" seems to be a better manufacturing process aimed at improving the quality of records produced. As vinyl isn't compressed hopefully this will lead to a more faithful sound reproduction of the source material.
I used to think like that, but it occurred to me to just look at it differently.
Steampunk aesthetic is producing modern outcomes with archaic (generally 19th century) means and/or styling. Generally it involves overly complicated mechanisms (as complex as needed to achieve the outcome mechanically, only 'overly complicated' when compared to a solution using electronics.)
Using rotating turntables, vinyl and needles to reproduce sound fits this description neatly. So all those people who like vinyl are just a variety of steampunks (whether or not they realize it.) And I'm cool with steampunks.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Quattuor res in hoc mundo sanctae sunt: libri, liberi, libertas et liberalitas.
Really? No one remembers this?
https://youtu.be/1qtxPSR8q98
Mostly random stuff.
I still have a pile of records from .... a long time ago. I thought that the encoding was a limiting factor, and I don't mean the RIAA equalization. Some disconnected neuron in my brain is saying LPs use velocity and 78s and older used amplitude encoding.
The Russians have won. They have made the world a cesspool of distrust, greed, fear and hate.
Read the fine print suckers!
I am sure it will work for vinyl also..
This is pure marketing wank.
Whats next, putting the peas back into artificial pods for people to be able to open them for that more authentic experience.
Fuck off.
The high-efficiency horse will go x2 as fast as a regular horse. The muscle overgrowth shrinks life expectancy to just three years but you can now go so so fast your neighbour's jaw will drop.
Lol. This seems to have the worst of both worlds. The people who like vinyl often say it sounds better because it's analogue - none of that nasty digitisation. Except that in this process it is digitised.... And the people who like digital point to the greater fidelity of a digital recording. Except that here, the digitised information is written back to a quickly-degrading vinyl medium. Doh!
No, still not true.
CD, as a medium, has every audio advantage over vinyl other than myth.
What is different — and does matter — is the recording technique. Vinyl with good recording technique can sound better than a CD with poor recording technique.
Part of what takes people legitimately back to vinyl is that many older recordings sound better, primarily because the dynamic range wasn't horribly crushed, as is often the approach taken today with CD recordings.
But best recording technique on vinyl, against best recording technique on CD... CD wins on every possible audible metric. Signal to noise, dynamic range, accuracy of reproduction, consistent audible frequency response, ancillary distortion, immunity to surface defects that damage the recording, repeatability, THD, etc.
Vinyl offers some non-audio features, such as large jackets, with larger artwork. Those same large jackets can, and often do, carry great liner notes you won't get with a CD due to the packaging area; such as interesting colors and artwork on the center of the platter. And of course, for those of us who are older, just plain old nostalgia.
Personally, speaking as an older fellow, I don't find the trade of the art and liner notes worth the candle when I can have better audio from a CD. I buy from high-end CD makers such as Telarc, and those productions are well worth the money spent. But when I can't find a good modern recording of something I treasure, then sometimes, it's vinyl FTW.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
A plea from a music mastering service to fund a vinyl stamping factory at a time when Sony is making a new push into vinyl.
Everyone knows that if you want real high quality sound you skip the CD, Vinyl, SACD, and HD-DVD, copies and go straight into playing guitarhero: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
In case people don't understand this comment I mean that any positive attributes of sound attributed to vinyl has nothing at all to do with vinyl. Studio mastering is a dead art killed by people in suits.
Listening to vinyl requires the user be in a particular environment - one that allows a record player. I've tried running with a record player. The needle bounces. And you can't balance one on the control panel of a cross trainer. At least that's what they said when they cancelled my membership.
Or.. now hear me out on this one... or ... we could just, you know, send the digitally converted audio, you know, without converting it back into a bumpy piece of plastic.
What you're saying boils down to "You shouldn't make records." That's not the point, and TBH it seems to be needlessly pissing on other people's hobbies, both people who collect vinyl and bands who want a physical copy of their album for posterity.
What a lot of people seem to be missing is that there is already a market for producing vinyl. So much so that new cutting shops and pressing plants are coming online. If these people can skip most of the expensive steps of getting a stamper cut, that will make it easier and cheaper for bands to produce vinyl, and as someone who's paid to have one of their albums pressed, that would be a welcome change.
No it is not.
Oh, right. You believe in fairy dust.
"I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
It will certainly be lossy.
Electronic Music Made Using Linux http://soundcloud.com/polyp
While in principle CD's offer better quality, the daily practice shows that they don't mostly. There is a tendency in
CD recording to make it AS LOUD as possible thereby sacrificing the dynamic range of the recording. You can't do that on vinyl. I believe people sub-conscience 'notice' that effect and that is one of the most important reasons of the revival of vinyl.
Vinyl was a shit format
Vinyl is a shit format
Vinyl will always be a shit format
Your vinyl is shit
My vinyl is shit
His or her vinyl is shit
Their vinyl is shit
Vinyl is made of shite.
That year of Latin in school has finally paid off.
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
Somebody please explain this to me. Once "converting audio digitally to a 3D topographic map" is done, how can the sound improve by going back to an analog format? Doesn't it have to become worse? Isn't the best way to store digital information, well, digital?
Depends on the source material.
If the source is the CD and it is converted to vinyl then it's a horrible idea. ... unlike the CD.
If the source is the original tracks and it is converted to vinyl though this convoluted niche process then it is a great idea as some bumbling studio exec may ignore it and we may end up with a decent result
HD-CD was a stillbirth. MiniDisc was HUGE and incredibly popular killed by a completely different and vastly superior medium. SACD is still active, you can still buy equipment, there are new releases in the format etc.
The only one here worth comparing to is HD-CD.
I was hoping they developed a laser based virtual needle (LIDAR in micro-miniature) ...
Here you are. Spoiler alert: the devices are sold in the 15k USD range.
oh well - now that I brought it up, I'm sure it will be a failed Kickstarter soon enough.
Sorry, you're making too much engineering sense with lasers.
Crowdfunding is more for the kind of hipster that will scoff lasers off as not being authentic enough.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
About a decade ago I read about a record player which uses laser beams instead of physical cartridges that can wear down the vinyl and decrease the sound quality.
Ob. wikipedia link.
Combine this with laser record player
Spoiler alert : these record player still cost in the 15k USD range (source from above).
So not gonna happen except in a very small and limited market of ultra-rich audiophiles.
Your standard hipster can't afford them.
On the other hand, patents have expired, so you can bet some chinese no-name company will be trying to jump into the bandwagon. (But probably without the advanced signal post-processing, so tons of hiss and pops and distortion)
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
what is next; HD laserdisc?
On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
I assumed that a modern record player would have no needed and use a laser for reading.
A better fitting needle, wow ?
Back when new releases were $6, you could buy an album that was half-speed mastered, pressed on "harder" vinyl, made in limited quantities per die (to have deeper grooves), and not polished to wear them down. The jackets explained the process and why they asked for $18 to $20 for the premium record. They also explained that there would be more pops and clicks the first time they were played due to small bits of vinyl still in the grooves.
Audiophiles would play the first half of the record while taking notes of where the VU meters would peak. Then let the album "cool" from the slight heat caused by the pressure of the diamond on the grooves which theoretically could soften the vinyl. The next day you flip the album and do the same with side B. After all this, you record onto metal cassette tape with your 3 head direct drive 3 motor dual capstan Dolby C or S cassette deck. Listen to the tape until it wears out, then record a new tape from the album again. This way you limit wear on the album.
MiniDisc might have replaced CDs if Sony had released it as an open standard (hahaha) and Hi-MD had been the original format.
Or.. now hear me out on this one... or ... we could just, you know, send the digitally converted audio, you know, without converting it back into a bumpy piece of plastic.
I know this might sound radical, but it seems to me that converting analog sound to digital format then to a digital 3d map then to a laser-cut stamper then to a piece of bumpy vinyl then to a vibrating stylus and into a varying electrical current to drive an amplification system to run the speakers that you listen to might just be a little more complicated than just taking the digital format for storage and transport and converting that back into analog sound at playback.
Next you'll be telling me that gold cables won't help.
First thing I thought of was Monster and their digital HD audio cables at a bazillion percent markup.
Have you looked at music waveforms lately ? There really isn't any dynamic range. Everything is cranked just shy of the clipping limits across the entire song.
They need to fix that first.
Vinyl is the best analog format around, but what's the point when it's the only analog component? Everything between the mics/instruments and the vinyl is digital, so is there any real advantage?
"The HD vinyl process involves converting audio digitally to a 3D topographic map."
Once you convert audio to a digital format, it is destroyed, and you can no longer reproduce it faithfully. If they were to render this map in analog then perhaps this technology could work. Until then, NOPE!
Will they have quadraphonic recordings?
I wish they would put out more music in full 5.1 on DVD.
That would be music worth paying for.
The crappy MP3s (even when in a cd) are only a taste for the concert.
Bring back quadraphonic LP's like I had in the 70's. Now that was innovation.
I understand the people that are nostalgic about LP's. I love the album art. But let's stop pretending that mechanical sound reproduction is anywhere close to a faithful reproduction of the real thing. It's not. I will always introduce sounds that were not apart of the original performance. It's impossible not to do this. It's also extremely expensive to get the best possible reproduction.
A true audiophile knows that the first rule of accurate sound reproduction is to not add to the original performance.
"A plan fiendishly clever in its intricacies"- Homer Simpson
There is something to be said about sitting down and listening to a record rather than pressing play on a digital device.
There is some more to be said about being able to instantly find and play anything I want from a huge library of music with vastly superior sound that never degrades, automatically fetched artist information, higher resolution album art, synced lyric text and Milkdrop/ProjectM visualisations.
Exactly my thoughts and my experience....
So they create yet another digital medium. DAT, Digital Reel to Reel, CD, lossless DA, etc., it doesn't matter. DA is still ones and zeros. Digital is digital and analog is analog. People like LPs because of the warmth and depth of the sound - they are analog. Making them digital defeats the whole advantage.
Republican leadership = Idiocracy
it could be done with a laser, and has been, but apparently, it was too expensive. Fact: LPs use this EQ called an RIAA curve - it rolls off the top and bottom after mastering, then restores it during the amplification stage. The reason for this is that too much low end would make the needle bounce and too much top end would make the needle skip - not track the highs.
Republican leadership = Idiocracy
The High Definition Compatible Digital and Super Audio CD formats were lonely and needed a new companion on the pile of failed formats.
It flopped then even when vinyl was the predominant format. Not least because you needed special noise reduction / amplifying circuitry to extract the audio from the format it was stored in.
It will flop now for the same reason. That and because vinyl is just a stupid hipster format that offers not a single advantage over digital audio except for audiophile wankage.
Louder and with more running time per side seems like a contradiction according to my knowledge of how vinyl works. And I'm not really interested in technology that allows the record companies to more easily press all these modern, bullshit, compressed-to-hell, brick-wall mastered albums to vinyl. There's no dynamic range and thus, no human element to the music.
And get off my lawn.
don't blame the cd, blame the studio exec.
" let's stop pretending that mechanical sound reproduction is anywhere close to a faithful reproduction of the real thing"
...you mean like how a speaker moves air that reaches your ears and moves little hairs? Or do you mean how hitting a drum with a stick makes a sound?
Seems to me that sound IS mechanical.
So what's your point?
Oh, man...when I heard about HD-MD I briefly dreamed the dream again.
It was only only last year that I got rid of my two MD decks and three portables after realizing I hadn't listened to them in over a decade (and probably wouldn't ever again).
Yes, it has been done with a laser already. And it was commercially successful, too!
You're forgetting a fundamental piece of the digital source, the DAC. You're home stereo outputs an analog signal to your amplifiers, and then to your speakers. A digital source (which i DO prefer) requires a DAC to convert the signal to an analog path. Much of the loss of quality happens at this layer, not in the source itself. I've noticed a large difference in audio output quality based on this single component. I'm really enjoying the Schiit Audio DACs for the money, hard to beat!
...in HD!!!
I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
When everybody listens to MP3s. I have not trained my ear to hear MP3 distortion/artifacts because I don't want to hear them every time I listen to music. But I am sure even with my poor hearing (childhood ear infections) I can learn to hear them. It is kind of like seeing the two wires on Sony Trinitron monitors. The guy showing me them asked if I really wanted to see them because I would then be aware of them most of the time. He was correct I did start seeing them all the time.
High fidelity or high definition audio is now a fetish with 99.9% of audio being reproduced as MP3 audio streams. I even see Iphones plugged in million dollar PA systems for background music.
I smile when I hear people argue the importance of 4K video when so much video is watched on a computer monitor or smart phone.
Have forgotten the scratches, the dust, the warps. Cleaning the record, storing the record (upright only!), the sleeves, flipping the record halfway through playback. Needles that wear out, but there's no decent way for the owner to know that the needle is worn aside from mysterious playback problems.
Special brushes. Special cleaning solutions. Getting the static out. Gosh, all this HD vinyl authenticity is getting too much, I gots the vapours, I do declare!!
Then the special turntables. Direct drive is best! No, belt drive isolates the platter from the motor, belt drive is best! I bought a linear tracking turntable, that eliminates tangential arm tracking errors.
And if you touch the surface of the record, the surface purity is gone. Skin cells and oils will be left behind, it will become a cesspool of dust bunnies, it's just a matter of time. Better to just throw the record out now!
Ugh.
I've had a couple of records (one was Zip-a-Dee-Doo-Dah by Bob B. Soxx and the Blue Jeans) which were mastered at such a high volume that one groove impinged on the adjacent one. (It's visible with a little magnification.) It's not possible to increase the loudness above that level; the stylus can't track when 2 grooves become one.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
Vinyl does have a different sound but unless the record is scratched there isn't any noise. Hell most vinyl is mastered better and not normalized to 100%.
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
Different strokes for different folks. I enjoy looking at the album artwork and reading the lyrics sheet and whatever else is included.
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
MiniDisc was never huge. Stores typically had a very small section devoted to them but that died on with the long box CD. The only time I heard about them being used was to record concerts.
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
That's not a function of the vinyl. With the same master a CD would have better sound quality.
Do not confuse cause and effect.
"I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
MiniDisc was never huge.
I see you've never left the USA. Minidisc was incredibly widely used not only in Asia but also in the radio industry with lots of commercial MD equipment dedicated to radio studios. Even my car back around 2000 had two options: CD player + MD stacker in the boot, or MD player + CD stacker in the boot, and I bought the latter.
You say stores had a small section devoted to them? I found stores that *only* stocked MDs.
Reinventing the fucking wheel.
If cylinders were good enough for Edison, they're good enough for me.
Next you'll be telling me that gold cables won't help.
Of course not, you need oxygen-free silver, aligned long grain, and with the current direction specified on the cable ends. Just like you can't use aluminum foil for tinfoil hats, you have to use actual tin.
#naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
or MD player + CD stacker in the boot, and I bought the latter
That only applies to cars who wear boots.
Trunks are for elephants.
Yes, very sad. But there are plenty of "still-had-a-production-team" discs on the used market, and I hunt down releases in the genres I am interested in as a sort of hobby.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
I can do exactly the same with digital music and more, like being able to zoom in on album art, having multiple album art for releases in different regions, having synced lyrics and having artist bios appear automagically in my player.
Oxford Dictionary defines a trunk (in the British sense) as:
A large box with a hinged lid for storing or transporting clothes and other articles.
Wikipedia states:
The usage of the word "trunk" comes from it being the word for a large travelling chest, as such trunks were often attached to the back of the vehicle before the development of integrated storage compartments in the 1930s; while the usage of the word "boot" comes from the word for a built-in compartment on a horse-drawn coach (originally used as a seat for the coachman and later for storage).
It would seem that the term "trunk" is the more accurate of the two, since that is literally what they started as before becoming integrated into the cars themselves.
...you mean like how a speaker moves air that reaches your ears and moves little hairs? Or do you mean how hitting a drum with a stick makes a sound?
Seems to me that sound IS mechanical.
So what's your point?
No, not at all. I can play a digital recording 1,000 times through a speaker and it will sound exactly the same on the 1,000th time as it did from the first. The same cannot be done of a recording from a vinyl LP record 1,000 times. The record will wear from the friction of playback. It will not sound the same after 1,000 plays.
The drum example is a live performance and doesn't pertain to this discussion.
"A plan fiendishly clever in its intricacies"- Homer Simpson
If you want higher quality sound, then BUY A FEAKIN' CD/DVD!?
The novel return of vinyl LPs was to include the novel LP noise and quality.
Vinyl is no where near CD quality and versatility. LPs will NEVER make mainstream in mobile/automobile players.
Even CDs are going away in lieu of digital downloads and streams.
I will be selling short any vinyl stock I see. This is a mini-bust about to happen.
Self-importance and self-indulgence is the root of ALL evil.