Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Members' Lounge (General Discussion) › LP quality: old vs. new
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

LP quality: old vs. new - Page 2

post #16 of 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Megaohmz View Post

Shh... Dont talk about such technical things around here! Somebody might not understand and make fun of you with all that fancy talk, just like on the movie Idiocracy. I mean it is a conspiracy to think the Earth has a magnetic field. LOL just kidding!


I hope you don't mean to imply you know what you're talking about in Sound Science!

 

Why'd you revive a 2.5 year old thread, anyway?

post #17 of 18

It's a combination of all things mentioned here.

 

Source material has the biggest impact on the sound followed closely by mastering and by the vinyl quality and packaging control.

 

As for the earth's magnetic field slowly deteriorating the tape - not true. You might get some print through but most tapes prior to 1974 hold up extremely well. It's all tape recordings made between 1974 and 1986 that suffer the most from deterioration....and yes...that includes "Hotel California" by The Eagles. Why you ask? Well, all tapes made prior to 1974 used whale oil as a lubricant. In 1974, the manufactures changed from whale oil to synthetics. Not knowing any better, the figured it was just as good...and it was but only in the short term. After a few years, the synthetic oil breaks down rapidly making all of these tapes unplayable.

 

35mm sound recordings also fail in the longevity test. A lot of those great hi-fi 35mm magnetic recordings have turned into vinegar because they were stored in metal boxes. However, if they were stored in cardboard boxes...they should be fine.


Edited by LFF - 9/18/11 at 9:27am
post #18 of 18

It also depends on how good of a record player you have

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Members' Lounge (General Discussion) › LP quality: old vs. new