Why such an insistence on either/or? I'm quite pleased by the various vinyl or streaming fashionistas who declare the cd dead, as they're loading up the shops with their discards. My collection grows each week as I raid the local record store; the proprietor, maybe the most interesting and knowledgeable guy, musically speaking, I've ever met says cd's are inconsequential to his concerns, even as he stocks the best selection I've ever encountered and prices classic cd's as low as a dollar. Vinyl may be his bread and butter, but his stock respects a much broader taste.
I like vinyl very much, having recently purchased a table and a decent selection of good pressings of (mostly jazz) albums. But holy hell, the prices are exorbitant. $54 for a Three Blind Mice label record? $35 for an Impex Records pressing? I get that using analogue masters are pricey, but I have a mortgage and children's braces to pay for. And as paulburnett notes above, even poorly-done reissues, made from digital sources, cost silly money these days.
How about recognizing that "the more the merrier" makes good sense here, instead of claiming that "putting up with digital" is some kind of audio sloppy seconds?
To reply to the question: It all depends, right?
I like vinyl very much, having recently purchased a table and a decent selection of good pressings of (mostly jazz) albums. But holy hell, the prices are exorbitant. $54 for a Three Blind Mice label record? $35 for an Impex Records pressing? I get that using analogue masters are pricey, but I have a mortgage and children's braces to pay for. And as paulburnett notes above, even poorly-done reissues, made from digital sources, cost silly money these days.
How about recognizing that "the more the merrier" makes good sense here, instead of claiming that "putting up with digital" is some kind of audio sloppy seconds?
To reply to the question: It all depends, right?