Well, I'm getting a copy of it on CD in what I assume is a 144Kbps format. Is there any chance of maybe getting an imprint in Vinyl done from the original recording? I'm guessing there's more than a few audiophiles willing to check if Eve has sound or not?

Simple question, Dev answers get double chocolate chip cookies

I assumed they would have recorded it in either analogue or a very high fidelity digital for editing from the original recording.

I'm kinda new to this side of audio to be honest

Do records really sound better? I hear that every now and then but I haven't used a record player since I had a fisher price one as a kid and 5 year olds generally don't care about sound quality.

Classical should only be heard on vinyl, like this particular recording.

Vinyl records sound radically different from CDs and other digital formats.

Mostly it has to do with ambient artifacts, like the subliminal hums of the turntable and the needle itself dragging across the medium. And the pops and clicks of course.

But all that contributes to a warmth in the sound that is utterly missing from digital.

I remember the first song I ever heard on CD, MJ's "Billie Jean" (when the players cost about US$1000), and it sounded slower. I guess it was all the more audio information coming in for the brain to process or something.

This doesn't make difference when it comes to rock, pop, and electronic music, but for classical and other acoustic instrument strong genres, we have definitely lost something.

Classical should only be heard on vinyl, like this particular recording. Digital classical is truly sub-par.

RPMs on turn tables (cheap ones especially) were rarely correct.
Do miss cheap giggles playing queen tunes at 72rpm when made for 33.333333

After about 1978 it was standard for turntables to have speed adjustment wheels so yes they were 100% accurate.....as accurate as you are wrong..

I bet most of the so called audiophile people only believe in vinyl, because they have bought their first stereo with their very first hard-earned money and during a time where this was basically the only electric device for recreational purposes available to consumer.

When CDs first came out, I could definitely hear the 'digitalness,' compared to vinyl. My friend had really good turntable and all-around excellent audio system. We compared U2 "Unforgettable Fire" on vinyl and CD, and to me the vinyl sounded much smoother and richer.

You are saying that nobody under the age of 60 could possible understand the sound of a vinyl album.

This is no different than film, where say, a Kubrick film with particular written instructions for the projectionist simply won't have the same experience if remastered into higher quality digital.

I'm wondering the sample rate or whatever is better with digital these than in the early days. I don't really notice that digital sound anymore-- kind of like sharp, crisp, flat layers. Then again I haven't heard vinyl in years, nothing to compare too.

Do records really sound better? I hear that every now and then but I haven't used a record player since I had a fisher price one as a kid and 5 year olds generally don't care about sound quality.

Without a doubt the difference between vinyl and digital is there.

Well, actually there's massive amounts of scientifically accurate evidence that says there isn't one, and a whole lot of people saying "I *can* hear a difference, but not if you test me on it!"

I guess I'm not human then as I can tell in a blind-hearing demonstration. If it's the same song or whatever.

Difference is night and day.

But you go ahead and believe your fantasy. That's just fine.