Is a vinyl rig only worth it for oldies?

Yes I have all the new ones from Johnny, and I like them, even though I only have the cd's!.

I do have some old mono lp's from the man, and they aren't too shabby either.

I've never heard of Low, but I do like the group Lambchop, mostly for the music, again only on cd.

I have listened to Sufjan Stevens on cd and vinyl, and vinyl wins out, in whatever format he chose to record in.

I'm not saying that there's nothing good about modern groups or that they are less talented.They are mostly better musicians than myself and most of my peers.

I also appreciate the talents of groups like Widespread Panic,Phish,etc.

I just wish that the folks recording them were as talented in their trade.

Neil Young is an oldie who is still investigating ways to bring high fidelity back to the forefront.I understand he may bring something new to the format wars in the near future.Time will tell.

Then it will be up to the general public to pay up or shut up.

I've listened to his live recordings made at Massey Hall in 1971 using a simple tape deck and a few mikes.

I find them quite impressive.How much the masters were messed with I haven't a clue.If you make a mistake in a live recording we forgive you, please don't alter them.That is if you value realism.

I've also listened to them in high res playback thru the full Scarlatti rig, and the detail is better than Redbook cd by a large margin.But the original was analog afterall.

I've several Direct to disk recordings and always used them to evaluate my turntable setups.Still use them to this day,and I agree they are very realistic,because they were all about capturing reality not trying to create something unnatural.

I would presume there must be some direct to digital recordings also, but the temptation to alter reality, to sweeten things up, add a touch more reverb,to play with more toys is always there.

More is not better, less usually is.

Dear Atmasphere: I did not mentiones ( inharmonic distortion. ) because I was ignorant of it.

Look, I appreciated your posts, thank's for that but in the whole subject I'm done.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear Lacee: ++++ " The music is very derivitive, the playing can be great, but the recordings are so altered, how can you tell if they are any good? " ++++

agree and agree almost with your whole post, good.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Hah didn't realize how Laurie Anderson's "Mister Heartbreak" released in 1984 sounds substantially more superior than most of albums released in early 70's till I started spinning it after long time.

Lacee, Low was recording in a studio known locally as 'the Church' because that is what it is... It also has very good acoustics. Low's recordings on Kranky were all done at the Church and have good sound. They sound very laid back, very slow, perhaps a bit somber, but beautiful as well. The LP is on 180 gram vinyl and is all-analog. It been out for a long time but you can still find it. I don't think their later recordings on SubPop are as good.