John, you are expressing a very valid point of view. However, the new younger artists who want to be able to brag about their “Vinyl” Lp release are using it for cache, not sonic excellence, and some I know are rockabilly style musicians who just think it is cool to be retro.
Examples - and I do not expect any of these to be of musical interest to this list:
This young woman does a great show, and writes excellent songs in a vintage style that remains current in the folk/pop scene:
And this very young New Orleans bordello style singer:
<http://www.carsieblanton.com> only her Lp is sold out at the moment: <http://store.carsieblanton.com/album/so-ferocious>
(the clever if crude cover takes the red part away when you pull the record out … leaving the rest to your imagination)
Notice how they almost always include a download with the Lp so people don’t even have to play it, they can just download the music, and display the 12” art.
Just noticing, and trying to make the point that many people are not putting out Lps for their sound, but for their merchandising and “in club” or “hipster” aspects.
I know a band that plays 30s jazz who put out a 78 - a microgroove Lp but at 78 RPM. Quirky, but they sold it out too.
Whatever the market will bear can bear fruit$.
On Jul 24, 2017, at 7:02 PM, John Haley <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> So much of this discussion just blows by me. The whole vinyl trend, which
> is what it is (and apparently a dying one), is based on the false
> assumption that somehow analog beats digital. Both media are worth only
> what is put into them, but digital is a far more transparent way of
> reproducing music than any vinyl record can ever be. Period. That is
> simply an absolute scientific truth.
> I am often appalled at all the waste of resources that has been poured into
> trying to "resurrect" vinyl by those who are fooling themselves into
> believing that it is somehow superior. My vinyl record collection is as
> large as anyone else's, but for heaven's sake, it is time to let it go when
> it comes to new releases.
> Yes, there are plenty of examples where the LP sounds better than the CD.
> In the early CD era there were technical issues, but it has been a long
> time since those existed. Apart from that early era, those examples where
> the LP sounds better are only because the engineering choices that went
> into the CD (remastering, etc.) were not up to stuff or were misguided or
> even uninformed.
> There is another layer to all this, which is that almost all analog tape
> master sources really need to some "sprucing up" to sound their best in
> today's world, and that kind of work is only done in the digital domain.
> That means that the master gets converted to hi-def digital in order to
> perform the necessary work to it. Many things generally need to be
> addressed--redoing splices, fixing drop-outs, correcting bad edits,
> correcting pitch anomalies, addressing deterioration of the tape
> itself--it's a long list. Very few master tapes from decades ago survive
> today in pristine condition. The idea that an old analog tape will just be
> dubbed into a record cutting machine strikes me as most unlikely in almost
> all cases. There may be people who do that, but I can't come up with any
> good reason why.
> John Haley
> On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 6:12 PM, Gary A. Galo <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> Agreed! Same with 78s.
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List [mailto:
>> [log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Shai Drori
>> Sent: Monday, July 24, 2017 5:23 PM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Vinyl Sales DOWN - why? See interesting WSJ
>> article today
>> Hi Gary
>> There is another option, that people buy the LP for it's NOT perfect sound.
>> I love vinyl for what it is, and also for the non audio visual part of
>> seeing the turntable turn.