scott wrote:
>>> Yes, but analog sounds better, and you CAN hear the difference!
>>>
>>> ;)
>>
>> Not with consumer-grade equipment you can't. :-P
> 
> Of course you can hear the difference, usually the (perhaps superior) 
> analog recording is accompanied by lots of crackles and hiss ;-)

Indeed. The CD itself is *highly* unlikely to be the weakest point in 
the chain. Maybe the recording was done with cheap microphones, maybe 
the sound engineer wasn't the best, and maybe your speakers suck. But 
the CD itself is far from being the weakest link.

> Seriously though, perhaps not with your 25.99 record deck+amp+speakers 
> from Argos, but if you spend a few hundred quid on each component (deck, 
> amp, speakers) you will be *really* surprised how different it sounds to 
> CD.


still waiting to hear a difference. ;-) (And I'm a musician, remember?)

> I did just this a few months back when my dad got down his old deck 
> and tidied it up, we had a few records that we also had on CD.  Whilst 
> it was hard to say which was "better" or "worse", there was definitely a 
> very noticeable difference in the sound "feeling".

Which probably just means they were mastered differently. Hey, maybe the 
LPs date to the valve era? It's widely reported that valve amps sound 
quite different to transistor amps...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message