Re: Too neat to waste...


"Jim Lesurf" <jcgl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:4e59ce5c2fjcgl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In article <a6eGg.8086$k22.3895@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Iain Churches
<taelNOSPAM@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

"Jim Lesurf" <jcgl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:4e57360f2bjcgl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In article <FsGdnY5bz_7B0H_ZRVnysQ@xxxxxxxxx>, Keith G
<keith_g@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


I have a bunch of 'virgin vinyl' records ('KC 569 Blend Premium
Virgin Vinyl') which would silence the worst critics and knock the
socks of anyone who thinks CDs really offer 'sound quality'...!!

Iain: The above is an example of the kind of statement I was referring
to earlier. Regardless of if Keith intends it or not, it can easily be
taken to imply that *as a format* CD is *inherently* poorer than LP.
Whereas IIRC your argument is that this is *not* the case, and the
problem is the way CD may be abused by those producing them.

Hello Jim. Sorry M'Lud, but "easily be taken to imply" is neither
adequate nor allowable. So take off the wig, and put the black
handkerchief back in the drawer:-)))

I am dissapointed by your response. To me it seems simply an evasion of
the
point I was making.

I know of no-one who has stated implicitly that CD as a format is
inherently poorer than LP. Though as we have discussed here before,
many CD productions certainly give that impression, and I can see why
some people may draw that conclusion.

Then consider Keith's own response below. I am afraid that it seems to me
that you are simply either unwilling to see what he is saying, or are
being
evasive in your response to avoid having to explicitly disagree with him.

Slainte

Jim

On 16 Aug in uk.rec.audio, Keith G <keith_g@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:



I have a bunch of 'virgin vinyl' records ('KC 569 Blend Premium
Virgin Vinyl') which would silence the worst critics and knock the
socks of anyone who thinks CDs really offer 'sound quality'...!!

Iain: The above is an example of the kind of statement I was referring
to earlier. Regardless of if Keith intends it or not, it can easily be
taken to imply that *as a format* CD is *inherently* poorer than LP.


I did intend it - I would have thought it was obvious!



Yep, I stand by that!!

I'm not really interested in the eternal 'LP vs. CD' debate, as I have said
before - other than a little harmless 'argy bargy' here, but happy to expand
if anyone should require.....




.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Too neat to waste...
    ... socks of anyone who thinks CDs really offer 'sound quality'...!! ... Iain: The above is an example of the kind of statement I was referring ...
    (uk.rec.audio)
  • Re: SHM-CDs!!!
    ... standard CDs using a new material which provides better sound. ... This could either be a significant step-up from regular CDs, ... You have a master tape with a bunch of 0s and 1s and you put it on ... to do with 0s and 1s, as the re-mastering philosophy, materials and ...
    (rec.music.classical.recordings)
  • Re: Dylan thinks The Wallflowers are atrocious?
    ... recently but I still managed to hang on to both stereo and monos. ... leads to atrocious sound quality from your CDs. ... for years there should be a class action lawsuit against the recording ...
    (rec.music.dylan)
  • Re: Dylan thinks The Wallflowers are atrocious?
    ... leads to atrocious sound quality from your CDs. ... PRO TOOLS SUCK. ... Vinyl cost them way more to produce. ...
    (rec.music.dylan)
  • Re: Dylan thinks The Wallflowers are atrocious?
    ... I think what Bob is saying is that the modern approach to recording ... leads to atrocious sound quality from your CDs. ...
    (rec.music.dylan)