Is there a problem with Decca's new packaging for vinyl records?

@mahler123 

No, they will have been mastered as hi-res digital files and then made available as hi-res downloads, CDs and vinyl.

@mahler123 

I have read all the stuff supplied by Decca with my latest purchases of vinyl and CDs.  There is absolutely nothing about the technology used!  Only the recording dates and venues.  So what I wrote is a guess, but an educated one!

By comparison, BIS and Chandos go to great lengths to document the microphones they use, digital formats, etc.  2L even state why they archive in high resolution DSD - they can create any PCM format from it.

@richardbrand 

I just have to shake my head at people who crow about the superiority of vinyl when recordings are used that were either recorded digitally or digitally mixed in a remastering process.  This was a big deal when many of the recommendations from gurus such as Fremer were shown to be made from DVD-Audio preservations of older recordings in which master tapes had begun to deteriorate.  Once an analog recording had passed through a digital phase, it’s digital, and it doesn’t matter how many times it’s been embedded in vinyl afterwards.

  It would have been interesting if Decca had simultaneously used analog and digital recording equipment.  This is more expensive to do obviously.  I suspect that if they had used analog equipment, they would have advertised this quite loudly , to enhance the credibility of the end product to prospective buyers.  The fact that they are mum about this suggests that they recorded digitally and are vinylizing (is that a word?) digital files because they wish to sell to people that shell out extra money because “it sounds better “.

@mahler123 

Seems to me that Decca is ignoring the audiophile market completely.  They have some outstanding classical musicians on their books, and some outstanding performances are being captured.  

In their heyday Decca introduced ffrr or Full Frequency Recording Range which was hugely successful from a marketing perspective.  I still use Decca analogue recordings (delivered on CD or via digital streaming) to evaluate sound quality.

I am on a personal journey to find out what all the fuss about vinyl is really about.  In the classical world, not much so far.

Decca has an advantage over more audiophile labels for me when it comes to vinyl, because unlike them it does not offer the more tempting SACD or multi-channel formats.

I can understand why some folk prefer the extra noises from vinyl playback, just as some prefer the extra harmonics added by 'warm' tubes.  I do not think vinyl is "the closest approach to the original sound" though!

Decca isn’t ignoring the audiophile community.  If they were ignoring us they wouldn’t be issuing vinyl.  It’s more correct to say that they are exploiting audiophiles who are willing to shell out extra cash in the belief that vinyl is a superior playback medium.  
  They are ignoring nay sayers such as myself that argue that a digital file-, even if embedded in a slab of petroleum and requiring a needle scratching that petroleum to cause movement of that needle and it’s housing and then convert that movement into analog sound wave- that this is still digital.  However why should they care what I think since people like me won’t be interested in their product.