It's not an 'obvious point', it's a silly question because the idea that anyone is "supposed to" listen to anything makes no sense. If you want to use the locution "not suppose to" you likewise embrace "supposed to". "You are listening to the wrong music" -- how far does that get you? You can have your opinion, others have their's.
What you are trying to imply is that "Streaming gives me access to new music and I like that." Or some such. Why not just say that? As a defense, however, it does not address the sound quality topic.
I find that music recorded in the heyday of big orchestras, say 1960 thru 1985-90 is better performed, better recorded and more interesting than most "new music." That's my opinion. It covers roughly 600 years of music making. There is plenty of it recorded and available on vinyl and compact disc. If I have not heard a piece, it is new to me. Based on RIAA data, "the years 1973 through 2018 saw nearly $29 billion in new vinyl sales." There is plenty of new music to be discovered and I don't need streaming to do that. If you do, that's fine by me.
Hi Tima,
I agree that streaming is a great way to get access to new music, perhaps the greatest advantage to streaming. I also agree, to a point, that music recorded to vinyl in the heyday (regardless of whether big orchestras or smaller jazz ensemble's, etc.) were better recorded. I understand your using vinyl record sales through 2018 (based on RIAA data) as proof that streaming isn't the only source of new music, but that point glosses over a serious issue in deciding if streaming is an inferior format, and not high end, that being lumping in digital to vinyl recordings with pure analogue to vinyl recordings "in the heyday" which ended circa 1980.
I am saying that digital (streaming or otherwise) is high end. It provides all the "hi-fi" characteristics often defined (extended highs, deep bass, lightning fast transients, great soundstage, etc.), in a highly accessible way, just differently, and in the opinion of many (who have compared digital to vinyl against pure analogue to vinyl on their own systems), not as nice as pure analogue. So both are high end, to many equally high end, and to a few (myself included) second place behind pure analogue, but still "high end".
My issue with your lumping together LP sales after the industry began cutting vinyl records from digital sources is that it (unintentionally perhaps) implies that the industry's conversion to digital did not harm record sales, whereas I think if you compare not only the rate of growth in LP sales of the major industry outlets with the growth in record sales of those specialist outlets that release strictly analogue tape master to LP cutter or Direct-To-Disc records like Acoustic Sounds, fone' , Berliner Meister Schallplatten, etc., but also who was buying from each, then I would speculate that there would be a larger percentage growth, certainly since 2000, in the specialist group dealing with pure analogue (my speculation only, I am sure someone here will no-doubt find evidence of an error on my part).
).
