|
There are a lot of misunderstandings about the technical merits of each format. In terms of accurate sound reproduction, digital is clearly superior. The fact that it's sampled doesn't imply any meaningful loss of quality. Sampling only limits the maximum frequency that can be reproduced, which in the CD's case is 22 kHz, well above the limit of probably 99.9% of human hearing. Few people past their teens can hear over 18 kHz and it gets worse with age and noise-induced damage.
Furthermore vinyl can't generally reproduce frequencies over 20 kHz either. Even if anyone could hear them, or if the vast majority of amplifiers and speakers could reproduce them, even a brand new vinyl on a good system probably won't be that good, and it gets worse with age and wear. After a few plays you probably won't be getting much over 16 kHz. Just because it's an analog format doesn't mean it can reproduce any analog soundwave; analog systems have limitations just the same as digital and usually worse since high-quality analog components are hard to design and expensive. The 'warm' sound of vinyl is caused by distortion plain and simple. But I'm not going to tell you that music sounds worse with analog distortion because it's purely a subjective opinion whether it does or not and I see the merits of both arguments.
Anyway I own plenty of music on both formats. There is definitely something appealing about having a physical representation of your music in vinyl, and in fact, vinyl will probably outlive the CD just as it outlived the cassette because CDs are highly disadvantaged against internet distribution, flash memory, and hard drives while vinyl has those certain benefits that can't be replaced. In the future, if you want the artwork, you'll buy the vinyl, and it will come with a code to allow you to download the album in digital format and you'll have the best of both worlds.
|