Vinyl or wait for the new stuff??

I am certainly one of the most dedicated analog guys at this site, but the new Sony 9000ES, that will play DVD movies with progressive scan output, CD and SACD for about $1100.00 puts real pressure on me to buy one. The opportunity to purchase a top end DVD movie machine and get SACD, almost for free, really tempts me. If I do take the leap, I do not have expectations of it competing with my high end analog rig. However, it would be nice to have a state of the art movie machine that would also provide good playback from CD and SACD formats. If, eventually the SACD format fails, I can wear out the player with titles from Blockbusters Video, and my existing CD library. Meanwhile, I will continue to browse the discount stores for the millions of great titles available on LP, best to you all!

John_l, pleased to read your comments in defense of vinyl. Carl has expressed his preference, and now, so will I. The general topic is one of High End Audio, and therefore is NOT limited to "best value," or most convenient audio. To me that means that the ultimate performance people have a right to comments as well. Therefore, I say to Joe_coherent or anyone else that says that CD is superior to LP, then you have not heard vinyl at it's full potential. Perhaps the statement that inexpensive LP playback equipment will not compete with similarly priced digital gear may in fact be correct. The vinyl format requires tremendous work to make perfect, and if the work is put in, it can be made to work better than any other music format. This (of course) excludes those who have access to original master tapes of musical performances. I will not argue for vinyl concerning value, the availability of new titles, convenience of operation, or justify that everyone should put in the work required for a perfect set up. I WILL state that if the labor and money are invested, nothing will compete with the performance LP can provide. Personally, for me to get there, I have (at retail) $46,000.00 just in the turntable, phono cartridge and the equipment DIRECTLY associated to play an LP. This certainly does not include my music library, the record cleaning equipment or the substantial investment in the remainder of my system (including the Soundlab Ultimate 1's). You can ridicule my substantial investment, call me crazy, or just dedicated. However, if you have not heard LP playback at this level, you are correct ONLY within your realm of experience. To further clarify my personal position, I do not deal with any retail stores, I do advertising photography for the audio business, with ads in nearly every high end publication printed this month. I have been in or around the high end audio business for over 30 years, and am personal friends with many of the people who manufacture the products discussed at Audiogon. There are no manufacturers within my experience that will NOT agree that LP is superior. This may have to be discussed in the hallway at CES, or at their home, but it is none the less common knowledge in the business. This does not mean that CD cannot be wonderful, it certainly does not mean you should abandon digital and move to LP. It simply means that if the ultimate musical performance is really valuable to you, the LP format is a requirement.

Jadem6, I don't know if you have carefully read some of the above posts that ridicule analog. Why is it when the question is: "Vinyle or wait for the new stuff," it is wrong to offer strong support for the format I think is best? I do not question that the LP format will be displaced by digital, regardless of it's superiority or not. My point is that new does not necessarily mean better. I have digital and LP in my own system, and like Carl, wonder what would be the problem with enjoying both. If digital makes you feel you are "looking forward," and that is of equal or greater importance to you than the quality afforded by analog, then avoid LP all together. I guess I do not understand why you think that a suggestion that I believe guarantees musical excellence, somehow automatically makes everyone else "not worthy."

Well then, it stands that we have one person who owns both formats and says that LP is superior, and one person who owns both formats that says digital is superior. I say lets take it to Florida and get a recount. But remember, the analog gets a hand recount, and the digital goes into a machine for the total. I just hope for your side, that the digital is in a "1" mode and not a "0" mode when checked.

Excellent point John, and not unlike some of the bargains I have found. I suggest those of you that have decided to give LP a try, keep your eye open for Public Libraries that sell out their analog collection. There are some rare and incredible items in these public stores, and many have seen very little or no use at all! add to that fact, much of this excellent material is not available in other music formats, at any price! I know of one person who bought multiple London Blueback LP's at .50 cents apiece. These albums are not only some of the finest classical music ever produced, they have increased in value to the point where resale of them could furnish your shelves with hundreds of lesser pieces of material.

Another 7 year thread. I love it! Keep em coming!

Ever heard of the 7 year itch? The only cure is the 7 year scratch.

You can only scratch with records. The thread lasted long enough to answer itself.

The fact that kids can freely exchange digital files and burn perfect copies without paying has certainly hurt CD sales.

As you hinted, digital will remain but distributed by other means and who knows how many of those might be in our future?

I think LP hangs on because the old die hard music people like myself prefer the sound. No question LP is more difficult to get right and more labor intensive to maintain.