Superior analog source question

[mbself]

This is a hypothetical (sort of...) question.

Suppose that someone bought a bootleg LP, back in the day, of a soundboard Led Zeppelin show. The purchase was made within 6 months of the actual show taking place (so the source tape used to cut the master press would be no older than 5 months and presumably low gen if not from the master itself). The owner played the LP to make a cassette copy of the show and then put it away.

Here is the question:

Would a new transfer from this Vinyl album set be superior to new transfers from 30 year old tapes available in the trading and bootleg pool now (assuming that they are of equal generation)? Is the degradation of analog tape source material such that the well preserved LP would more closely resemble the fidelity of the original master?

I hope this question isn't as confusing as it sounds while reading it.

[Five]

hypothetically the vinly will continue to sound as it did the day it was pressed so long as it is not played and would not require as perfect storage conditions as a tape. The record could last much longer than the tape. However, it depends on what source was used to cut the record and the quality of mastering the record and the vinyl itself. Some bootleg pressings they were so cheap they would melt down not only old records but also the cardboard jackets, causing bits of cardboard to be sticking out of some of the grooves. Also, the playing order was often changed around to make the songs fit on the record.

[Karst]

Agree with Five. I've had a few vinyls from the 70s, never played, but which were full of distortion because of the cheap materials. Think most Japanese labels now have been able to track down the master tapes of these things and have done a great job (in general) to transfer them digitally. But you should really check on Royal Orelans...