Peter wrote: > I don't get this. Surely, the main difference between LP and cassette > was the recording capability of the latter?
Correct. And the Record Labels hated the ability to record LPs. They wanted you to buy the LP, have your friends buy the LP, etc. > To replace the compact > cassette Sony created the mini disk Which was not CD quality, No way to get CD quality out of it. It was lossy compressed. > Philips (who created the CD > together with Sony) came up with the > (horrible) Digital Compact Cassette Philips was not a record label, its a hardware company. They had different business goals. > cassette. Sure, the CD was much more portable than the LP, but it > wouldn't be recordable for a long time, which is rather important for > some people ;) As I said that a CD was not recordable for 15 years was the main advantage of it. It was smaller and more portable than an LP and still not recordable. I'm not sure I understand what you don't get. CDs were not recordable for 15+ years, SACDs were never recordable, DVD-A were only slightly recordable. This is how the labels wanted it. The labels are not artists, musicians, recording studios, etc. They are lawyers. -- Pat Farrell PRC recording studio http://www.pfarrell.com/PRC _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
