Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Log In

A valid email is required.
Password is required.
Site Notices
6/21/2017 8:25:40 PM
Posted: 12/25/2001 9:28:23 PM EDT
I have some time off an one chore is to clean out the computer room. So I found about 400 5.25" diskettes in a closet. I was planning on using the diskette holders for CDs. But what about the 5.25" diskettes, should I stick them in a box and forget about them again, or toss them?
Link Posted: 12/25/2001 9:30:01 PM EDT
Link Posted: 12/25/2001 9:32:01 PM EDT
Virtually worthless, chuck em'.
Link Posted: 12/25/2001 9:32:05 PM EDT
Toss 'em! Unless you know what's on the Disk's and really NEED the info. and actually HAVE a 5 1/4" drive?
Link Posted: 12/25/2001 9:33:18 PM EDT
[red][b][size=6]TARGETS!!!!!![/size=6][/red][/b]
Link Posted: 12/25/2001 9:41:55 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/25/2001 9:47:23 PM EDT by DJbump]
See the difference is the 5 and a quarters have become obsolete while the vinyl has not. In fact digital replay has only recently (SACD and DVD-Audio) approached the fidelity offered by vinyl records. Long story short--toss the old floppies, either clean the vinyl and get a decent 'table and listen to 'em or give to someone who will enjoy them. Unless of course all your vinyl collection is Barry Manilow and Michael Bolton albums--in that case....target practice.
Link Posted: 12/25/2001 10:09:46 PM EDT
Link Posted: 12/25/2001 10:19:50 PM EDT
Not to take this post hostage, but you're wrong Troy--at least regarding fidelity CD versus vinyl. In head to head tests, vinyl repeatedly outperforms CD. 16 bits simply is not enough to convey music, and then add in piss-poor mastering in many cases and CD is doomed. I'm talking 16 bit CD here, not the new hi-res formats. the only thing CD has over vinyl is convenience and given proper care--longevity. Not a direct attack on you, Troy. It just appears you haven't heard vinyl on any decent ($300) 'table or you get all you info from Consumer Reports and the old Stereo Review.
Link Posted: 12/25/2001 10:29:49 PM EDT
Ever see that guy from the microsoft museum looking for old software? If you think you might have a rainy day, set them aside and one day copy the data. Then you can toss the disks. Old data/software will probably become sought after.
Link Posted: 12/25/2001 10:38:21 PM EDT
Hey, I still have my Atari 400 computer with 16k of ram.
Link Posted: 12/25/2001 10:43:27 PM EDT
Originally Posted By DJbump: Not to take this post hostage, but you're wrong Troy--at least regarding fidelity CD versus vinyl. In head to head tests, vinyl repeatedly outperforms CD. 16 bits simply is not enough to convey music, and then add in piss-poor mastering in many cases and CD is doomed. I'm talking 16 bit CD here, not the new hi-res formats. the only thing CD has over vinyl is convenience and given proper care--longevity. Not a direct attack on you, Troy. It just appears you haven't heard vinyl on any decent ($300) 'table or you get all you info from Consumer Reports and the old Stereo Review.
View Quote
I'm with Troy. So what are these "head to head" tests you speak of anyway? Any analog format has noise introduced in the mechanical medium and analog filters/processing (i.e. stereo seperation) that digital does not. Also I'm asking this because I don't know, does vinyl have Dolby Digital Surround encoding?
Link Posted: 12/25/2001 10:51:23 PM EDT
Link Posted: 12/25/2001 11:13:17 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/25/2001 11:21:29 PM EDT by DJbump]
You're right, Troy--on many counts. Thanks also for mentioning your audio background. But to the point, no I am not making these judgements based on faulty CD mastering (which is rampant as you probably know), but rather on what you cited. Two sources from the same master, one on vinyl, one on CD. Even folks with no background other than $200 bookshelf stereos have been able to tell the difference in sound QUALITY. Words spoken from these "amateurs" range from the vinyl "had more life" to the CD "seemed to shrink the space". Not even taking into account tests revealing vinyl actually RELAXES folks while digital (16 bit CD that is) STRESSES folks. The fact remains 16 bits was not enough to convey all that music is--even with the best mastering. Yes, vinyl does have pops, clicks, hisses, but hey our beloved ARs use gas blowback and foul the BCG. It would appear you can't have it all, but at least in my experience (and others) vinyl has bested 16 bit digital time and time again in SOUND QUALITY. And the funny thing is, these differences are audible in vinyl front-ends costing under $500 versus digital front-ends priced well over $1K. What can I say? It appears we agree to disagree. For me music playback is a spiritual endeavor, not a background activity. Music reminds me that we are more than organs, flesh and blood. Time and time again for myself and others, vinyl does that better than 16-bit digital. Edited to add one more question. Troy, you're not one of those folks who thinks the $1.29 RCA patch cords included with most electronic purchases sound as good as say even budget Audioquest interconnects are you?
Link Posted: 12/26/2001 12:18:05 AM EDT
Top Top