mlukfc.com Forums - View Single Post

**RadioMaster** · 20 May 2009, 08:22

maybe you buy a record for the good quality, but I dont think that's what the majority thinks. The Bat2 vinyl clearly wasnt produced for quality, otherwise it would have been a double album, but more as a collectable piece IMO. The price is not really a matter on this one, it could also indicate there's only been a few produced. IF the records were made for quality, I'd reather expect them to be reasonably priced so people who are not fans would actually bother to buy them.
And regarding quality: Bat1 was produced to be on vinyl, but was Bat2 as well? 1993 was already the CD era, so it's likely the album was produced to be on CD, so it's unlikely a vinyl recording of the CD production would sound better...

(actually I'm just being a wise ass here, as I've never listened to Bat2 on vinyl to build my own opinion

)

20 May 2009, 08:22	#20
RadioMaster The German Join Date: 11.03.2006 Location: some kind of hunting lodge for rich weirdos... Posts: 15,778	maybe you buy a record for the good quality, but I dont think that's what the majority thinks. The Bat2 vinyl clearly wasnt produced for quality, otherwise it would have been a double album, but more as a collectable piece IMO. The price is not really a matter on this one, it could also indicate there's only been a few produced. IF the records were made for quality, I'd reather expect them to be reasonably priced so people who are not fans would actually bother to buy them. And regarding quality: Bat1 was produced to be on vinyl, but was Bat2 as well? 1993 was already the CD era, so it's likely the album was produced to be on CD, so it's unlikely a vinyl recording of the CD production would sound better... (actually I'm just being a wise ass here, as I've never listened to Bat2 on vinyl to build my own opinion )