Quote:
Originally Posted by Baron von Kriterium
It would be interesting to know how many sold were re-issues of analog recordings and how many were recorded digitally. The latter kind of misses the point, in my opinion.
|
I don't see why it makes much of a difference. The things that make vinyl different are virtually all from the playback and not the source. The warmer sound, imperfections, and ritual of playing it have nothing to do with the format of the original recording. Sometimes you'll get a better master on the vinyl release than the CD one, but again that doesn't really have much to do with the format.
Besides, most vinyl that has been cut in the last 30 years has been converted to digital as part of the cutting process whether the source is analog or not. Since the early '80s (and even in the '70s in some facilities) recordings have generally been fed through a digital delay line stage which allows the engineer to preview the transfer by converting the signal to digital and delaying what goes to the cutterhead. With a full analog system like they used before that it all happens in real time and if something gets messed up 20 minutes into Side B of the master, the whole disc has to get thrown out and redone. With the digital delay, the engineer can pick up on any issues and make adjustments before the master disc gets ruined. Because of that, most places started using the digital delay which means almost any vinyl made in the last few decades has been converted to digital at some point in the process.
And really, even with reissues of stuff that was recorded on tape, the source for the vinyl on any major release is still likely going to be a digital master these days.