0

http://homepage.mac.com/danielturek/PhotoAlbum50.html

This page shows how two different music technologies stack up...


I think 80s technology was FAR BETTER!

I am one that likes good sound and i much prefer my VHS tapes to anything digital...

Alot of stuff today is garbage,as small as can be and very hard to use!!!!!


I just think stuff was easier to use back in the 80s (And better made)

Take these cell phones today,TOTAL CRAP..... Keeps dropping calls,sounds like crap...... So small you can barely figure out how to use it!! (Back in the 80s and 90s when they first came out they were BIGGER AND SOUNDED MUCHO BETTER (Analog))

Analog sounds MUCH BETTER and thats 1 reason i like my VHS/Cassette tapes more.....

8
Contributors
11
Replies
12
Views
10 Years
Discussion Span
Last Post by John A
Featured Replies
  • 1
    John A 1,896   10 Years Ago

    [QUOTE=MidiMagic;457564]There is, with a few minor variations, one [B]single standard[/B] for phonograph records. No major upgrades, no incompatible format changes, no competing platforms vying for consumer attention with incompatible products. With a few rare exceptions (mostly records larger than 12"), my favorite record changer can play any disc record made … Read More

0

Listen to this AM-HD (IBOC) radio station clip.... SOUNDS LIKE CRAP..... NOT ENOUGH BASS,SOUNDS LIKE ITS IN A TIN CAN!!

http://files.ww.com/files/40086.html

Found this on another site and upped it here for easy access of it....Who else thinks it sounds bad??

Analog (Uncompressed) is MUCH BETTER........

0

That's a hard question. Has technology improved between the 1980s and 2000s? I'll have to think hard about that one.

0

That's a hard question. Has technology improved between the 1980s and 2000s? I'll have to think hard about that one.

You made me think too! I got to ask some of the old timers I know. All I heard so far was that things like cell phones got smaller. In the 1980s cell phones were the size of a suitcase.

0

I'd say mix 2000's tec with 1990's design (size wise) and that should be a perfect combo. A bit of everything. 1980's is a bit too old.

0

I'll take late 1950s to mid 1960s technology over both:

- Phonograph records have a much longer shelf life than either tape or digital storage. The Library of Congress has chosen microgroove 78 rpm records to store audio archives on. And I have records dating back to 1903 that show no signs of deterioration, other than having been played on acoustic players with very high tracking force.

- There is, with a few minor variations, one single standard for phonograph records. No major upgrades, no incompatible format changes, no competing platforms vying for consumer attention with incompatible products. With a few rare exceptions (mostly records larger than 12"), my favorite record changer can play any disc record made from 1889 until now. No modern format can boast that kind of compatibility, because there are always idiots wanting to "improve" them with incompatible changes.

- If minor damage occurs to the phonograph record, it still plays, with a little added noise. Digital recordings refuse to play past the point of damage. And large parts of the recording are ruined when a tape jams.

- A late 1950s record player and radio can survive an electromagnetic pulse. Given a power source, it would be the only source of music left after an atomic war. All digital players and all transistorized and integrated circuit players will be destroyed. Of course, with modern equipment, no radio stations will survive.

- Likewise, the only TV sets that work would be NTSC, mostly black and white. No HDTV equipment would survive.

- If power is not available, an acoustic record player could be made to play the record. There is no way to play either a cassette or a digital recording without power.

1

There is, with a few minor variations, one single standard for phonograph records. No major upgrades, no incompatible format changes, no competing platforms vying for consumer attention with incompatible products. With a few rare exceptions (mostly records larger than 12"), my favorite record changer can play any disc record made from 1889 until now. No modern format can boast that kind of compatibility, because there are always idiots wanting to "improve" them with incompatible changes.

I agree. It reminds me of the other day when I bought a new Slayer album. I stuck it in my turntable, and you know what? I got a horrible grinding noise. Crap was I pissed when I found out that I needed to buy a CD player. Can't they ever make new technology backwards-compatible these days?

Votes + Comments
Slayer. Sweet.
This topic has been dead for over six months. Start a new discussion instead.
Have something to contribute to this discussion? Please be thoughtful, detailed and courteous, and be sure to adhere to our posting rules.