I love this thread. If we stay true to the OP, it makes for interesting debate and it's good to see so much passion stirred up. Say, "Conservative versus Liberal", or.... "Tube amp versus solid state"(Guitar players or audiophiles) or…automatic, self-winding watch versus quartz digital or, ...."Less filling - tastes great (how many of you remember that?)" - or "Incandescent versus LED" and you'll see the passion stirred up for sure!
I 'discovered' incans about a year ago in
this thread. Like I normally do, I went off the deep end and purchased quite a number of lights, bulbs, blah blah, and decided that Incan was "it" and LED was not as good. Over time, that position evolved…
May I digress, only briefly? 
I remember selling high-end audio systems and components early in my working career - you know, the $10-20k (and much higher) mega systems. Recorded symphony orchestras with 30 inch per second mastering recorders and high-end tube 'point source' microphones. All through high end tube audio components. Ah, that awesome, smooth, soothing analog sound. The very word "analog" invoked an image of 'accurate replica' (and yes, I know that is NOT the definition of analog - I'm talking "audiophile speak").
We loved pristine vinyl recordings being played on high-end systems, all being input by a phono cartridge, tone arm, and turntable that cost more than most systems of today. As long as they are "pristine."
)
No doubt, there were lousy analog systems in those days, too. Probably more lousy ones than good ones.
Then came solid-state. Integrated circuits. The compact disc. Purists turned up their noses. "Grainy!! Screechy!! Inaccurate!!!" Doesn't sound like the original!! But those new technologies brought more robust electronics (in some cases) and, at an equivalent price point, sometimes equal or better performance. And they got better, and continue to improve, although some audiophile purists will go to their graves resisting solid-state electronics, and
faint
, integrated circuits!
Sadly, today such high-end analog audio systems are reserved for the more affluent purists, although tube guitar amplifiers (while pricey) remain preferred by many rock and blues guitarists. (I have a couple of really nice tube rigs…
)
Back to Incandescent versus LED, what's the point?
In my mind, incandescent has given the LED manufacturers a decent benchmark. Not always better, but for those who love warm tints, something to try and replicate. And like their audio analog counterparts, they continue to be closer to our memories of the 'original', while at the same time requiring more power, generating more heat, and (arguably) requiring more care and maintenance. (How many backup 6P lamps do you have? I have 14! And 10 9Ps! And 4 MN03s! And a number of Streamlight and Lumens Factory bulbs in backup – plus a few Carly.)
Granted, not all LED manufacturers seek to replicate the tint of an incandescent light, but those who do are getting better at it. And although it's already been mentioned, the Nichia high CRI emitters (in 119 and 219 variants) 'look' more accurate to me at rendering colors than do any of my incan lights. And there are users out there - many on them (and you know who you are) who PREFER the cool white tints! And that's okay, too...I like them for some applications, and the beauty of this scenario is the fact that we HAVE SUCH CHOICES!
So the point? I hope incandescent stays with us for a long time! For what they do, they are hard to beat. Warm, soothing tints – very pure (if not necessarily the most 'accurate.') And hopefully the LED will continue to evolve and improve…they already give us longer run times, longer life, cooler operation, etc. And as the technology continues to improve, many of us like to dabble in modifying our lights to the newest and greatest LED.
So practice the philosophy seen so often here on this great group of forums – why choose?
BUY BOTH!!
