How long should vinyl last?

For some reason, my musings on the longevity of vinyl in this thread have disappeared. Not to be too cute, but what exactly is meant by the word "last"? It seems that vinyl has been recast into a medium without fault, better yet; its faults are now seen as virtue. I'm struggling mightily to get with the program, but still have but a handful of black discs that are quiet enough to satisfy. Vinyl does have a subtle character that is great at times. Too often though poor pressings take away a great part of the enjoyment. I still find that hard driving music comes across the best, and that anything with a lot of soft passages or silence fares the worst. From many decades of experience, I still think that I can safely say that vinyl records, unfortunately, get noisier with wear, and that I have never had a tt/arm/cart that did not contact the record’s surface and make it noisier with every play.

I sold hi-end hi-fi back in the late 70s and early 80s. I became quite familiar with the offerings from Denon, Revox, B&O, Yamaha, NAD, AR, Thorens, and several others that escape my memory right now.

No, I have not measured all the rigs out there, who has? But I can state, unequivocally, the the B&Os were the most gentle to the vinyl. Did they sound the best? No. But, for most folks, they sound plenty good enough, and their ease of use is a major bonus.

And, I'll bet ya a dollar that *nobody* has approached the low effective tip mass that B&Os come by naturally - it's hard to beat a tonearm and cartridge that have been designed from the get-go to work together. No alignment issues to deal with whatsoever.

As a demo, I used to grab the tonearm on a B&O and literally scrape the needle back and forth across a record's surface, after turning the volume down, of course. Subsequent replay of the record showed no aural indication of damage. Sold a lot of B&O turntables with that demo [smile]...

-rw-

Did they sound the best? No
RIGHT

*nobody* has approached the low effective tip mass that B&Os come by naturally
SO WHAT? MADE NO SONIC DIFFERENCE

As a demo, I used to grab the tonearm on a B&O and literally scrape the needle back and forth across a record's surface
JUST LIKE YOU WOULD EXPECT THE BUYER TO DO AT HOME........

It's no wonder they are no longer a factor

What is with you, WC65Mustang, heavy flow month? I *already* admitted that the B&O stuff was not the best sounding, but it sounds plenty good enough for most folks - including me.

As for the "effective tip mass" issue, this enables the record to played more often with less damage. In addition, if the buyer accidentally bumps the turntable or tonearm, they will not damage their record(s)

One other thing, dude, turn off the CAPS lock, nobody needs to shout around here...

-RW-

How long would a new Sargent Pepper last if played once a week on an excellent analog system... Lets see ONE year is 52 plays
520 plays is ten years... nope, no problems yet.
5,200 plays is ONE HUNDRED years... If it was treated with last, and played with a really CLEAN stylus, always... I bet it would sound great! Or?? it may have lost a bit of the upper frequencies there? I know from experience that CeeDees can be played over and over endlessly, as my pets get the same 5 CeeDees every day when I am gone, The same five CeeDees for the past EIGHT YEARS. (One great CeeDee Player I had ran for about 30,000+ hours before it croaked. a Sony ES 89) So calculating... Mmmm... Mmmm... = 5,000 plays and they ARE exactly like new.
So longevity? If I were making my decision on whether to go with vinyl based on longevity? I would seriously re-think my motives. If it is just a 'curiousity' question... clearly vinyl is MORE FRAGILE than CeeDees. Scratch a LP, it is damaged, forever. Scratch a CeeDee, and get the disc doctor, or the ScratchX... but it is usually not any sort of problem.
Of course for LPs, I have no proof of this, and I used some CAPS too, And my 'flow' is mellow too... B&O always looked cool, anyway. Can't we just fight like Cats and Dogs? instead of like Audiophiles?