This is an endless debate.
We needf only know that there are vinyl recordings worth having that are better than or not avaable on digital. If so you will need a turntable to play them. The premise has been conceded
Greg that wasn't Gary's point-that has long since been lost. It was that there were different mixes used for the two mediums. [/QUOTE
You take what the defense gives you. Smile
Not so fast Johnny me boy. When Rbbert said "Neither one for me, thanks..." he meant no turntable and no diet coke. You on the other hand have a turntable so "Same here" doesn't apply to you.
Not so fast Johnny me boy. When Rbbert said "Neither one for me, thanks..." he meant no turntable and no diet coke. You on the other hand have a turntable so "Same here" doesn't apply to you.
All the artificial sweeteners make me sick so no diet drinks. Not a big fan of soda in general, so it's coffee, tea, water and fruit and vegetable juices.
It's all a matter of who is trying to sell the turntable...isn't it?
For the price it, apparently, now takes to expunge the last ounce of myth from a 1902 medium...I would (rather) venture: going through a private auction with the guy in Mexico that hoarded a collection of Beatles' safety master reels the former Capitol pressing factory down there was going to throw out when they shut down in 1980 and; I'd pay 'em $5G for 1970s transfers of Rubber Soul and Pepper.
Then...I'd (still) have enough left: to splurge on a $27k pair of vintage Electro-Voice Patrician 800's and a pair of 1950s Heathkit 5M Williamson monoblocks(!).
I *guarantee* THAT would rock the house with goosebumps a heckuva lot more than any vinyl ritualism.