So a digital giant goes analog. To bad the damage is done.
What damage?
So a digital giant goes analog. To bad the damage is done.
What damage?![]()
At least a generation of music lost to digital.
Although I disagree with the nostalgic idea of your statement, I must remember that next audio generation will be listening to more than 95% of digital processed LPs.
Fortunately we are discovering that the digital music encoded since the 80's can sound much better than the average LP if we use the adequate playback system. If many great recordings recorded in tape were not transcribed to digital in due time they would be lost forever.
Who is this "we" that is discovering digital is better than LP? It is no doubt those who always thought digital was better than lp.Although I disagree with the nostalgic idea of your statement, I must remember that next audio generation will be listening to more than 95% of digital processed LPs.
...Fortunately we are discovering music encoded since. The '80s
Fortunately we are discovering that the digital music encoded since the 80's can sound much better than the average LP if we use the adequate playback system. If many great recordings recorded in tape were not transcribed to digital in due time they would be lost forever.
Who is this "we" that is discovering digital is better than LP? It is no doubt those who always thought digital was better than lp.
As for preservation there is no reason for a properly stored audio tape to significantly degrade. If desperate an unplayed lp will last forever.
You should read better the current threads on top digital in WBF ...And please note that my point was not on digital being better than LP, but than the average LP.
when you say 'average Lp' I assume you mean 'average LP playback system'? but maybe you mean average Lp pressing played back on any system? or maybe you mean average Lp pressing played back on the average Lp audiophile system?
these are all different meanings.
wanting to comment on your comment, but making sure I understand it first.
I was addressing the average LP pressing - it was what the average consumer could get ...
Mike, you've heard some great DDs and idlers in your time.
Rockport Sirius, Kodo The Beat, Dobbins 301, and of course yr current NVS.
How do you think this reimagined SP-10R might fit into things?
The Technics hothouse team seem to be throwing the kitchen sink at this one.
You should read better the current threads on top digital in WBF ...And please note that my point was not on digital being better than LP, but than the average LP.
There are many reasons why a tape degrades and many papers on it. The typical lifetime of analog tapes has been debated in the professional forums - people feel very happy when a tape is still playable after 30-40 years, usually with high losses in the treble and sometimes only one last time.
Although I disagree with the nostalgic idea of your statement, I must remember that next audio generation will be listening to more than 95% of digital processed LPs.
Fortunately we are discovering that the digital music encoded since the 80's can sound much better than the average LP if we use the adequate playback system. If many great recordings recorded in tape were not transcribed to digital in due time they would be lost forever.
Well Mike, the big difference I can see is that the high torque motor is non cogging. If this thing really keeps to +/-0.2s per side of lp and the motor avoids cogging/hunt and seek jitter, and throws enough money at it to make it a bulletproof viable proposition, and keep the price close to $10k, then it truly becomes one to beat.
my Dobbins SP-10 mK3 had the drive energy and steady speed, but not the low noise. tweakers are said to have improved the power supply of the original, as well as lowered the noise.
![]() | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator | ![]() | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator | ![]() | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |