It is bad by modern standards. Low capacity, high noise, imperfect stereo separation, pretty bad frequency response. CD quality audio solves every problem perfectly and it's old and dirt cheap at this point. To even approach that with vinyl you have to fuss over needles, weight, turntable mechanics and so on and and spend a lot of money and still won't get there.
replyPersonally I see far more magic in digital electronics. Storing vibrations physically is neat and clever, but none of that looks particularly magic to me. Just a straightforward, logical solution to a problem. More elegant simplicity than magic really.
It's bad, according to your definition of what good is.
replyI enjoy all those things you've listed as bad :shrug:
Yes. Not to mention, I have several crates of records that I've had since the 90s. Some of those were taken from my dad collection that he bought new back in the 60s. Those albums still play just fine, despite less than archival care taken.
replyContrast that with several folders of CDs I still have which have begun to delaminate and are plastic trash now. CDs were largely an invention to allow record companies to resell back catalogs, and it worked.
I meant CD quality audio, as in 44.1 KHz/16 bit digital files, not specifically the CD physical medium. It's an old invention and still fulfills every playback need possible, let alone for old audiophiles who long stopped being able to hear the highest frequencies anyway.
reply