Alice in Chains: Jar of Flies LP: 30th Anniversary Edition (Reissued Vinyl Album)

Is that for sure the same edition? (Anniversary)? I Think probably but Target doesn't say that. It's also a pre-order.

But in '94, people would have laughed at vinyl…

I bought this CD the day it came out, then got an Auntie Anne's pretzel and spent about $5 playing Mortal Kombat for a few hours.

Always a TU for AIC.

And one of these days people will again laugh at how crazy we were for buying vinyl again. Sure it sounds better than streaming, but not CDs.

And one of these days people will again laugh at how crazy we were for buying vinyl again. Sure it sounds better than streaming, but not CDs.

It's the same with video. When you take a digital photograph it might look great, but it's only a computational representation of nearest-neighbor light color values. "It looks better than film!", you might say. Yeh, try zooming in 100x.

Vinyl created from the original analog recordings will always have more depth and dynamic range than digital. Always.

When the original analog recording gets converted to digital, the waveforms have to be assigned a summarized limited numerical value in a limited range (defined by the digital bit value of the medium used) to represent the changes in frequency and amplitude.

In simplest terms, it represents a loss of precision. For audio CDs you're getting 16-bits of audio representation taken from the near unlimited representation of the signal in the original analog (assuming the original source was analog).

In a single moment of a recording where an analog signal might represent a value which could be measured in millionths of places, the digital version in your ears will only represent the first 16. That's enough for a lot of people, but at the end of the day you're not listening to a reproduction of the recording, you're listening to a playback of approximated shortened values of the original input signals. Another way of saying it is that you're not listening to Layne's voice, you're listening to an arbitrarily limited calculated value of what a computer chip thinks Layne's voice sounded like.

It's the same with video. When you take a digital photograph it might look great, but it's only a computational representation of nearest-neighbor light color values. "It looks better than film!", you might say. Yeh, try zooming in 100x.

Vinyl created from the original analog recordings will always have more depth and dynamic range than digital. Always.

When the original analog recording gets converted to digital, the waveforms have to be assigned a summarized limited numerical value in a limited range (defined by the digital bit value of the medium used) to represent the changes in frequency and amplitude.

In simplest terms, it represents a loss of precision. For audio CDs you're getting 16-bits of audio representation taken from the near unlimited representation of the signal in the original analog (assuming the original source was analog).

In a single moment of a recording where an analog signal might represent a value which could be measured in millionths of places, the digital version in your ears will only represent the first 16. That's enough for a lot of people, but at the end of the day you're not listening to a reproduction of the recording, you're listening to a playback of approximated shortened values of the original input signals. Another way of saying it is that you're not listening to Layne's voice, you're listening to an arbitrarily limited calculated value of what a computer chip thinks Layne's voice sounded like.

It's the same with video. When you take a digital photograph it might look great, but it's only a computational representation of nearest-neighbor light color values. "It looks better than film!", you might say. Yeh, try zooming in 100x.