I think that fidelity to the original performance is the essential determining factor in judging any recording. The argument that pops and scratches lend "character" to a recording is novel, but doesn't give an argument for fidelity. I have also heard the reasoning that analog recording processes reproduce sound at or beyond the limit of human audial perception, creating an undefinable but real response on the part of the listener. This smacks of hoo doo to me. I would agree that analog recording has the potential to record a wider frequency range, but it is certainly limited by the performance of the play-back equipment. Unless you are willing to fork out the necessary 2000-3000 smackers for a top-line turntable and tube amplifier, the fidelity found in a 200 dollar CD player will give far better frequency range, dynamics and clarity. So count me in on Alan's side in this debate.

This thread has the potential for the same kind of polarity and passion of the guns threads!

LEJ