jsaliga
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2007
- Posts
- 2,256
- Likes
- 13
Well that explains a lot. But it doesn't make their use of the term accurate.
When vinyl dominated everyone knew what a record was, and they understood it to be a 78, 45, or 33 RPM recording on vinyl or shellac discs. This is not a matter of "opinion," it is a matter of fact. There was no ambiguity regarding the meaning of the term. And it wasn't as if there were no competing recording media -- cassette, 8-track, and open reel tapes were around.
Choosing to apply a term incorrectly as jargon does not make it accurate. I can choose to call a lump of coal a diamond, but I doubt I will be able to persuade a jeweller to buy it from me as a diamond. Similarly, you cannot expect someone who grew up with records and knows what they are to accept the idea that any medium containing a sound recording is a "record." It is not.
--Jerome
When vinyl dominated everyone knew what a record was, and they understood it to be a 78, 45, or 33 RPM recording on vinyl or shellac discs. This is not a matter of "opinion," it is a matter of fact. There was no ambiguity regarding the meaning of the term. And it wasn't as if there were no competing recording media -- cassette, 8-track, and open reel tapes were around.
Choosing to apply a term incorrectly as jargon does not make it accurate. I can choose to call a lump of coal a diamond, but I doubt I will be able to persuade a jeweller to buy it from me as a diamond. Similarly, you cannot expect someone who grew up with records and knows what they are to accept the idea that any medium containing a sound recording is a "record." It is not.
--Jerome