Originally Posted by esldude
Now I agree well done LP is gorgeous and enjoyable. But it really shouldn't be a reference. The real hifi reference in those days were hi-speed reels. They cost more and the masses had much less expensive LP's.
I have had the urge to bring up reel-to-reel often when people mention vinyl as the more faithful, or more natural or other adjectives that place vinyl above other mediums.
In the 60's, 70's and early 80's, when vinyl was the format that ruled the market, 1/4" tape was the choice for the discerning listener. You could make the case that tape was superior because you couldn't possibly "etch" the music into a "mechanical" medium without mechanically induced distortions. It was also argued that tape was the more "natural" medium, because the original masters were on tape. Now that the original masters are digital, wouldn't that argument hold for the CD?
I only want point out that, at the height of vinyl's popularity, nobody considered it a superior medium, only a more cost-effective medium.