|
Music Lane It's all about the music, dude! Sit down, relax and listen to some tunes. |
|
|
|
Music Lane It's all about the music, dude! Sit down, relax and listen to some tunes. |
|
In Reply to: I think quite the opposite is true posted by Analog Scott on June 12, 2016 at 17:39:38:
As a long-time classical LP collector, it's been clear to me that there is a prejudice in favor of certain so-called audiophile labels, possibly justified in terms of sound quality but not always justified in terms of performance. The biggest example in the negative direction is probably Columbia, deemed for the most part non-audiophile but with many of the best and most important American recordings.
It's not a simple question, since many of the so-called "budget" labels of the LP era featured not only bad sound quality but also bad performances.
But imo the biggest false bias by far is that in favor of rare LPs as opposed to common ones.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- I think it's the other way around, Scott -- - rbolaw 12:38:42 06/13/16 (5)
- RE: I think it's the other way around, Scott -- - Analog Scott 16:28:46 06/13/16 (4)
- "anti Columbia bias" - rbolaw 07:32:42 06/15/16 (3)
- Well, of course the RCAs and Mercury's have been the focus of audiophile labels - Analog Scott 09:37:50 06/15/16 (1)
- Old is certainly not always better than new, but ... - rbolaw 14:26:22 06/15/16 (0)
- Also, weren't a lot of Columbia/CBS LP's released with inverted phase? - Chris from Lafayette 09:08:47 06/15/16 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
