Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 alpha 4/15/85; site sdchema.sdchema.UUCP
Path: utzoo!decvax!ittatc!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcc3!sdchema!marcos
From: marcos@sdchema.UUCP (Marcos Hatada)
Newsgroups: net.music,net.audio
Subject: Compact disks: A rip off?
Message-ID: <484@sdchema.sdchema.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 27-Nov-85 16:46:42 EST
Article-I.D.: sdchema.484
Posted: Wed Nov 27 16:46:42 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 28-Nov-85 19:14:12 EST
Distribution: na
Organization: Chemistry, UC San Diego
Lines: 14
Xref: dcdwest net.music:8872 net.audio:5309

Has anyone else out there come to the realization that compact disks
are, at least on one level, a way for the record companies to gouge the
customer? Specifically, why was the standard disk format chosen to hold
only 77 (?) minutes of music. Supposedly, this is long enough to hold
Beethoven's 9th on one disk. But it is clearly not long enough to hold
the standard double album (average running time about 84 minutes). Net
result: we are forced to shell out double bucks for double albums.
$24.00 (on sale) for the Who's Quadrophenia or Floyd's The Wall does not
seem like a good deal, especially in light of the fact that double LP's
are generally priced at a discount per album from single pocket sets.

Something is rotten in the state of CD-land, me thinks...

				    David ("Dr DAP") Pearlman