It’s not that I don’t get the appeal of having larger artwork. But the medium itself in the way it’s used and produced doesn’t make sense. The whole audio production pipeline is digital. Producers take analogue audio, introduce quantisation and digitisation errors immediately to be able to use their fancy computers to produce the music (which introduces even more errors due to all filters being digital) just to then dump that digital piece of sound into an analogue medium at the very end. Nothing is gained except the digital-analogue-conversion happens before creating the medium whereas with CDs you do it after reading from that medium. Which is a stupid idea, as dust and other issues will then mess with the result you’re hearing.
Now, if you’re a producer that actually uses an all-analogue workflow, ignore this, I don’t mean you. You also have my deepest respect for enduring that pain. Please point me towards some records that actually did this though.
Analog processing is more complex than your statements.
Care to elaborate?
It might be more complicated than I understand it to make it sound good, but compared to a CD player setup it is simpler.
I think my point still stands :)
I already brought up the RIAA EQ curve. Plus you have all the effects like compression, limiting, distortion etc. Plus you’ve got the whole process to make a record. For a CD digital files are simply written to disc. With a record when you send the plant the audio there is really no telling how the record is actually going to sound due to all the hidden processing that is applied.