Quote:
Originally Posted by nautikal /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I have no compassion for record companies and would love to see them go bankrupt. They do not care about music as an art as it just a product to them. They have no problem with destroying the artistic values of music as long as they make more money. It is capitalism in its worst light. Their current position of declining sales is their own fault. If the record companies had joined together to make a service such as iTunes they would be enjoying record profits. Instead, they tried to block the internet as a medium of music distribution. Now they are being reduced to nothing more than an extraneous middle man as services such as iTunes have become the main medium of music sales. So no, I don't feel bad when I pirate music instead of lining the pockets of record companies, because that is all you do when you buy an album. Artists make little money from album sales, and I would much rather support them by buying their merchandise, spreading their music, and attending concerts.
|
Oh dear, you really don't have a clue do you. Regardless of what you think of the record companies they do an invaluable job. They finance the making of recordings and albums. It's true that many musicians do not make much money directly from the sales of recordings but indirectly they do, as the recordings help to build awareness and reputation.
It's a simple equation; less income for the labels = less investment in products. Less investment means fewer products and lower quality. If the companies went bust, it is going to have a massive impact on musicians, the recording studios and the professionals who work in them. The audiophiles on this site are going to find just a handful of high quality releases per year, it would be devistating to the whole industry. The ultimate conclusion would be no industry, no professionals, no professional recordings and little point in web sites like this one.
So, your argument is counter productive, illogical, immoral, illegal and a poor, invalid excuse for common theft!
Quote:
Originally Posted by null_pointer_us /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Actually, when I said "standards," I was thinking more along the lines of some common levels of dynamic ranges (between content producers and device manufacturers) they could shoot for, where the quality would be at least be acceptable, for those of us who expect to find a nice "sweet spot" for the volume knob throughout the movie. In some movies I have to turn the volume up to hear something spoken quietly/whispered, which then makes a sudden scene change where a cannon blast sounds so loud that it's only by luck that my sofa wasn't literally mutilated by the sound waves. Though maybe that's just lousy production? (e.g. lack of needed compression for the sake of lack of compression?) I gather from your 24-bit vs. 16-bit thread there's such a thing as too much dynamic range.
|
What is interesting is that the 16bit standard already has people reaching for their volume control, while others are pushing for 24bit which has a dynamic range several hundred times larger than 16bit!?
The problem with your argument is what you consider to be the "sweet spot". Even as an individual, the sweet spot changes during our lives as our ear drums become less able to adjust to large dynamic ranges. Also, the bigger the listening environment and how it is acoustically treated, will also have a large impact on SQ and dynamic range. Often, the environment has more impact than the speakers and playback equipment installed in the environment. The THX specification attempts to create an acoustical standard between the dubbing stage and the cinema but trying to include home environments is going to be impossible.
I understand what you are asking for and why you are asking for it but it is simply not practically possible at this time and maybe at any time in the future.
G