Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
Sorry if it's been posted already. Vinyl is cool but the CD changed the face of music, man.
but it's just such an unloveable piece of kit isn't it?
erm, that is all.
I don't believe they're made anywhere near as robustly as they used to be.
Also, those early discs all had some sort of yellow 'rot' didn't they?
The upper surface of the CD (which is the bit that actually has the metal layer) used to be better protected than it typically is now. This keeps happening at work, where people keep trying to write on CDs (admittedly CD-Rs) with a biro, and thus scratch through the coding layer.
The rot is caused by oxidation of the metal layer, IIRC. I think they're sealed differently now so less prone to this.
They've always had the writing layer as a thin adhesive stuck to the top which is why you've always been told to use felt tips on the surface. I htink with conventional CDs it's still as well protected on the top layer as ever.
and I might be making all this up, as I now can't find a reference despite furtive googling while pretending to work. Bah!
as a layer of plastic. I have some old releases where the edge of the CD is quite 'sharp' because the label half a mm or so bigger in diameter than the CD underneath it.
- you don't have to get up and change sides
- more opportunity for creative expression in terms of album length and structure
- much greater fidelity in terms of sound, and much greater opportunity to play with sounds
- everyone wants to make ridiculously long and unnecessary albums: a bloated double album is still a bloated double album, even if it all fits nicely onto 1 cd
- artwork n ting
songs more to get them onto cd?
If you're talking about an audio CD that'll play in a hi-fi (rather than a CD of MP3s), then it doesn't matter what the audio is it'll take up the same amount of space.
do you mean by comparison to LPs? I'm not sure whether the dynamic range of CDs is better or worse than LPs, tbh.
(presuming I'd guess it's a nice thick slab of vinyl) though there are less factors with CD as I'd guess a bad stylus is never going to read a disc properly.
Moreover the act of reading a vinyl disc degrades it so over time it loses definition.
thus why people say vinyl sounds nicer: because there's less chance of screechy highs and distorted lows
I think the range is bigger but CDs have a different response to that range because their response is entirely flat. On Vinyl I think the highs and lows are different sections of the groove. Don't overplayed vinyls tend to lose bass? Maybe I made that up.
I am probably utterly wrong on all counts here. Try wikipedia.
high frequency sounds mean small lumps in a vinyl groove and hence get 'knocked off' very quickly. this leads to a warmer sound.
the first cd i ever saw was brothers in arms. it was in my older brother's arms.
Is it still working?
and she's not working, so I doubt it.
If you can. Some of my cd-rs are falling to bits already you see. I'm scared.
to celebrate the 25th anniversary of cds, I picked up 200 copies of a single by The Outdoor Types from sfh this morning