Do we have a "weird perspective" on recordings and technology?

I find it somewhat amusing that in the case of music, formats and music technology we, in very many cases, take the opposite approach to what we do in every other respect in our lives.

If we want to buy a car, TV, household appliance or almost enything else in most cases we demand the most up to date technologically advanced items and wouldn't settle for less other than if a cost factor was involved. Do you look for a fridge, stove car or TV that preforms to thirty year old specifications? If someone tried to sell you something like that (other than antiques) you would probably tell 'em to go to hell.

When it comes to music we become totally irrational and want to judge the new formats by what half-century old recorded music will be released on one or the other. While I fully understand that many of us "grew up" with this music and desire the best possible reproduction of these titles they can in no way ever even come close in a technical sound quality aspect to a well recorded new recording made in the last few years. Why then would we consider how many old titles are going to be released on a new format as a deciding factor in which to buy. Wouldn't it make more sense to have a really good vinyl and CD reproduction system for the older stuff and a new format player for newer material that can take full advantage of it?

I know one thing for sure, I wouldn't buy a new HDTV set based only on how it displayed old tapes of "Leave It To Beaver" or "Father Knows Best" would you? If so, please help me understand why?

 

You'll be very suprised how many people here would rather throw away their PDA's, Email and cable TV for tube amps, vinyl, real Coca-Cola, malt shops, Hamburgers, wild AM radio, cameras with film, cars that were built of steel for 1-2 grand, and a neighborhood full of happy, friendly neighbors.

Not to mention baseball that didn't suck, good jobs for everyone, and Beatle records easilly had cheaply.

Beaver had it pretty damn good. Ask anyone in that generation. I betcha they'll even tell you TV back then was pretty good entertainment. I'm not very pleased with TV or the radio now...

 

I think the problem is that our ever-increasing resolution on the consumer-end of the playback chain is revealing all the problems in the production chain, from bad remastering to computerized pitch control to edits, edits and more edits.

I think because they didn't have the ability to endlessly manipulate the tape, the older recordings from the mid-fifties to the mid-sixties sound better than contemporary releases. Compare a Steve Hoffman-remastered Rudy Van Gelder monaural recording to a contemporary DDD jazz release. Which one sounds like a real trumpet? Which drums actually sound like drums? The only recordings I think sound as good as the jazz records from that era are . . . jazz records from Norman Granz's Pablo label during the seventies.

I'm usually very disappointed when I playback a treasured pop/rock CD on one of my friend's mortgage-priced systems. Played back through thousands (sometimes tens of thousands) of dollars of carefully selected components, almost all pop/rock sounds terribly artificial. On the other hand, the classical and jazz recordings sound live and present. You can't fake direct-to-the-tape.

 

The older dishwashers dried dishes better. They didn't have to conform to newer water-saver technology.

The average car built before 1974 had real muscle.

I prefer the old Windows over XP anyday.

My point? I don't always want what newer technology has to offer. Music? I appreciate being able to hear every last wart and blemish in a recording that newer technology can offer.

I just woke up, so i'm not thinking that deep yet...