Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site moncol.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!vax135!petsd!moncol!ben From: ben@moncol.UUCP (Bennett Broder) Newsgroups: net.audio Subject: Re: CDs and LPs Message-ID: <340@moncol.UUCP> Date: Thu, 30-May-85 10:15:51 EDT Article-I.D.: moncol.340 Posted: Thu May 30 10:15:51 1985 Date-Received: Fri, 31-May-85 04:02:18 EDT References: <1576@ihuxl.UUCP> Organization: Monmouth College, West Long Branch, NJ 07764 Lines: 32 > Compared to high quality analog equipment, replacement of a cartridge, > buying Master and Import LPs (which are about the same price as a CD, if > not more in some cases), and buying the same LP several times because > the one you have as been worn though to side B. True, record wear is a problem; it's all downhill after the first play. One of the things I like best about my CD player is knowing that the unwanted sounds interrupting my musical pleasure are the refrigerator and furnace fan, not a newly discovered defect on the recording medium. In defense of records, however, I'd like to raise two points. 1) Plenty of good music is available in the 'cut-out' bins of record stores. This gives me an opportunity to buy music at $1.99 to $3.99 that I am not sufficiently interested in to justify a higher price tag. This has helped to expand both my collection and my musical horizons. 2) Audiophile records are of more consistant quality. The record you spend better than $10.00 on will either sound good or the store will take back the record and give you a credit. As a result, there are very few audiophile records of poor fidelity. With CDs there are definitely some clunkers out there, and if you happen to purchase one, you are stuck. (Stores in this area will only replace CDs with a duplicate of the same title) If you don't know what I am talking about, just ask anyone who bought the CD of Jethro Tull's 'Aqualung'. Ben Broder ..ihnp4!princeton!moncol!ben ..vax135!petsd!moncol!ben