Who's with me?

I was just listening to a $2.00 record store find I purchased around 1 year ago. It so happened that the power was out while I was there, but by chance I purchased among others, Rush s/t lp. After I arrived back at the homestead, I realized it was a early pressing,(A1).

Fast forward to today. While listening and really enjoying this lp, I thought that wouldn't it be great if modern lps sounded this good!

No sign of compression, (Did we even know compression existed back then?) Dynamics in spades, soundstage: very, very good. Bass, yes!

So, what may I ask is lacking now? That is the quest we must all participate in. Doing our best to make record companies/labels realize that 'sound quality' equals record sales/satisfied customers. We all win!
I totally agree with you and love my 1960s, 70s records. The Rock/Pop business today is all about putting the final product onto a compressed file for a new generation of listeners. Jazz and Classical labels are into Hi Rez digital with vinyl in mind, but even this music ends up on itunes.
Back in the 1960s the Motown Sound was considered highly compressed. The Beatles recordings were noted for their use of compression overdrive. Early Who recordings were rejected by a mastering engineer due to high levels of distortion in the recordings. Digital recording technology has made it possible to basically have recordings with zero dynamic range, but the use of compressors and compression effects has been with us since the early days of rock.
Since a lot, (most?) of 'Audiophiles' spend mega bucks on the playback gear and just a pittance on the playback media, i.e. the lps, why should the labels go through the trouble and expense to do it right.

If you paid several thousand dollars for your tonearm and many thousnads on the rest of your system, and you only own a few lps, used mainly to demonstrate, or showoff your system, you have your answer.

Rok hit that smak dab in the middle of the bullseye.
You're right, Onhwy61. There was always some compression used in the mixing process, but with today's recordings the final master gets additional compression onto a digital file; and various compression rates according to it's final medium...cd, sacd, downloads, vinyl.

And yes, I agree there was a lot more noise and distortion in those older recordings.
To put it another way, lack of exclusivity and competition. They know you guys are going to buy their stuff.
Lowrider57, don't confuse data compression (mp3s) with audio compressors/limiters. Go to the end of this article and listen to some samples of audio compression on a drum loop.
It's no wonder we have a hard enough time getting our systems to sound live and musical, dealing with all the settings/variances between every single recording.
Onhwy61, that's an interesting article but I've used compressor/limiters when I was an audio engineer, so I guess your point is that compression is used to shape the sound in the mix.
My point was that an overly compressed data file can ruin an audiophile listening experience.

I never thought of that in this way. Excellent!