......is getting bigger. Everything today is recorded digitally. All the R&D money is spent on digital for obvious reasons. I get a giggle when people honestly argue that vinyl is better. The arguement is nearly impossible if the music (especially old)is played side by side and judged by the naked ear. The fact that digitial chops up the sound and puts it into 1's and 0's, albeit MILLIONS of times per second, bothers the vintage audiophile. Listening to vintage music recorded in analog is one thing but anything recorded after '87..........

I'm even unsure of the future of CD's. The price of memory and the advancements are incredible. Pretty soon we will be buying our albums (or movies) on a little piece of plastic that costs about $.03 to make or simply downloading it and put it on our own plastic.

Bottom line, digital rules but I love my old albums and wouldn't get rid of them for anything.

The best mechanical watch can't beat the cheapest digital for accuracy. I don't need to be that accurate but I do need that special feeling when I check my wrist for the approximate time. ;-)

dave

: The sound of vinyl is way ahead of CD (listen
: to the MFSL Beatles collection on vinyl for
: a start) but you do need a decent system to
: play them on. My record player alone cost a
: fortune (SME 20/2/V arm/Koetsu) but you
: forget about the money when you have the
: musicians in the room. Equal priced CD
: player is good but bears no comparison.
: Proved this to so many friends I have lost
: count; all agree the vinyl is better after 5
: minutes of listening. Same goes for watches.
: My Heuers are more pleasing and fun to wear
: than Rolex, Brequet or Patek but people do
: not understand. Jacked in my Porsche 996 and
: went back to the 993 as it a better car -
: not quite as quick but far more satisfying
: to drive.

: New does not mean better and more accurate does
: not necessarily give better results. All
: about passion, so yes there is a correlation
: in answer to the original question.