I’ve just bought my first turntable in about four decades and the thing that strikes me is that LPs seem to have been designed for the maximum amount of grease, dirt and schmutz getting on the album itself in transferring it from the sleeve to the turntable. CDs, too, to a lesser degree. I’ve been wondering if there’s some better design for packaging these things that makes virtually impossible the transfer of finger grease–there certainly could be no design that would have been worse.
Build them in cartridges like minidiscs or removable ones like early CD-R or sleeves like RCA CED.
You bought the wrong turntable.
If you stored them vertically, in theirt sleeves, not in 120 degree heat, they’ll most likely be fine. They’ll have the exact level of dregradation as they did when you stored them, but not as much as they will after the next play. 
Unless one uses a laser scanner in place of a stylus, there really isn’t anything that can prevent a diamond from eroding the grooves.
I was a young teenager when CDs started becoming popular. I don’t know if you remember the hype, but I do. “CDs will last forever! They’ll never wear out!”
Turns out that people massively over-estimated the beneficial effects from not having to physically touch the medium in order to play it. They honestly thought that since CDs are read by a laser instead of a stylus, they would last essentially forever.
Anyhow, there two ways in which LPs are indisputably better than CDs–
- Cover art. A record cover is big enough to accommodate pictures with good detail.
- Program notes/a list of songs/etc. You can get song titles, information about the album, etc., right from the record cover instead of having to open up a booklet and/or look something up online.
Those aren’t format advantages. Those are packaging advantages. There’s no reason you couldn’t package a CD in a 12 inch sleeve.
Certainly, they don’t deteriorate from being played, the way vinyl records do. Also certainly, they can be damaged or destroyed through physical abuse. The jury is still out on the extent to which age alone poses a danger.
I remember those long boxes that CDs used to come in.
But I think you’re only partly right. Part of the appeal of vinyl to afficionados is the look and feel of the physical object: the record and its packaging.
Now I am envisioning a beautifully packaged album with art, notes, the works, and included in it somewhere, a micro SD card of a few GB with a high-res DSD file on it!
(would anyone buy?)
My Chevy Silverado has both. And I can switch the digital between MPH and KPH too.
Anecdotal evidence - the oldest CD I have, bought in 1985, is still perfect and playable.
I’ve never had a prerecorded CD fail, but I have had two DVDs fail spontaneously.
That’s a huge “IF”. IF they’re in excellent condition, played on excellent equipment they sound like the studio masters.
Who ever had all that going for them at once? For most people, they’re having something less than “excellent”- probably some sort of all-in-one tape player, record player & cd player with attached speakers.
On stuff like that, and when dubbed to tape, vinyl is going to sound bad compared to a CD, is larger, more easily damaged to the point where it’s noticeable, and generally an all-around pain.
There are perfectly good reasons that CDs blew both tapes and vinyl LPs out of the water, and they aren’t conspiratorial bullshit about what the studios wanted. For the vast majority of consumers, CDs were (and are) noticeably superior in sound quality, durability and portability.
I don’t disagree with most of that. And yet, vinyl is making a strong comeback. There’s a reason for that, and I think it’s some combination of physical aesthetics around the packaging and the medium, nostalgia, and the fact that the sound quality really is different from CDs. No question that for casual listeners CDs (or just digital files) are more practical, a fact that I already acknowledged.
As for tapes, I don’t believe that even with the best of equipment cassettes could ever compete with vinyl for sound quality. Some might say they couldn’t even come close. Reel-to-reel tapes could, but prerecorded reel tapes were a very limited niche market, and of course lacked the portability of cassettes.
Speaking of tapes, back in the day, my solution to vinyl degrading with use was often to copy new records to a professional-grade reel-to-reel recorder. I found that with high quality tape, I could do this at 7 1/2 ips and capture pretty much the full audio range of the record. 15 ips was what was typically used for studio masters, but that would have been overkill. But now consider, in contrast, the minuscule amount of magnetic material per second of recording in the narrow, slow-moving tape of a cassette! No wonder those things sucked! But they were small and portable, so for many people it was a good compromise for many purposes. That legacy of compromise persists today in CDs and compressed lossy digital formats, albeit at a higher quality level.
I have been buying and playing CD’s for close to 30 years now (wasn’t an early adopter). I’ve never had a commercially produced music CD fail. Even those that are 25+ years old still function perfectly.
Twenty years ago I would print out lots of stuff, and engineer types would warn me that those prints have a definite shelf life: one day, the ink would just drop off the paper. Well, I have tons of 20+ year old print outs that are still perfectly readable. I guess some day, any day now, they’ll be ruined. Not holding my breath.
Unlike consumer electronics, it seems these two late-20th century storage methods last for decades, if not a lifetime.
One (possible!) reason for that is, people are very good at making poor choices. We see that every day, in many selections people make, in any number of things. They are affected by “influencers” into not thinking through rationally the things they believe in.
But hey, people can do whatever they want. It’s still a free country. Doesn’t affect me. Go for it - I’ll sell them my vinyl collection.
Who knows what’s next - Maybe silent movies will make a comeback.
It’s almost like you didn’t read the rest of my post.
In addition to JAS’ point, I think the vinyl resurgence has to do with the fact that streaming has made listening a huge variety of music an extremely easy and potentially free activity.
Nowadays, any regular Joe can dig up late 60’s unsung Funk gems or whatever off Youtube with a couple of clicks, unlike in the past. In this ‘cheapened’ environment, hipsters have both the motivation and the means to cook up an extraneous, intentionally laborious, somewhat ritualized way to consume music, separate from the masses. Hence vinyl.
I did! But I didn’t want to pile on that my Yamaha DBX-equipped deck had better sound than vinyl.
Until it wore out.
I wanyed a reel-to-reel, but the Yamadog was nearly as good for much less tape costs,
I’m still hanging onto those eight-track tapes. Just in case!
Ha ha! Records vs digital. There’s a debate that will never be resolved, and never go away. The amount of distain expended on this topic may well surpass religious crusades on the scorn-o-meter.
I think I’ll just tiptoe past this one, before somebody goes “your a fucken looser!!!”.