[soundboy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Len Beta isn't a good example, but LaserDisc and DAT are valid. LaserDisc has been around for a long time, but it never picked up steam the way DVD did, and it took forever to get rolling. LD has always been relegated to a niche market, unlike DVD which hit critical mass market appeal in record time. In 3 years time, DVD had more available titles then LD over the past 20 years. LD simply demonstrated no substantial advantage to the average consumer. The same is true for SACD and DVD-A. DAT was aimed at consumers for approximately a five year period. Consumer interest simply never materialized. Now it's rarely talked about outside of specialized industries.

The advantages of DVD over Laserdisc were obvious to the mass market consumers....low price and a compact package. LD was always more expensive than videotape and it takes up a lot of space for storage. However, it was aimed for the videophile....widescreen, supplementary material, Dolby Digital surround sound, etc.... the mass consumers aren't aware of these things until the advent of DVD.

It's surprising that both LD and Beta stopped production only last year.....and DAT is still around.

 

[Jon L]

And another thing. My ultimate hope for hi-res is eventually to be able to download 24/192 tracks of my choice to my PC for reasonable price. I am still tired of buying albums that have 1 or 2 good tracks only, CD or hi-res.

No mountain of CD/SACD/DVD cases cluttering up my room. I'll just play my hi-res tracks right off of my hard drive-->high quality PC server-->audiophile system. How sweet that would be.

But that will NEVER happen due to Music Industry's near-paranoia over copy-protection issues. To this day, SACD and DVD-A are not allowed to be stored in hard-drive format and will likely never be allowed.

I would be content for now to download lossless files from Apple iTunes store, except the darn store is only AAC. There are wav file sites available, fortunately..

 

[Alex Altorfer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oliver DAC would be a better example.

I take it that you meant "DCC" (Digital Compact Cassette). Its players were backward compatible, playing analog compact cassette tapes. Why this format wasn't successful defies comprehension.

 

[TWIFOSP]

We need a digital format that contains as much signal data as the original analog sound wave

 

[Oliver :)]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex Altorfer I take it that you meant "DCC" (Digital Compact Cassette). Its players were backward compatible, playing analog compact cassette tapes. Why this format wasn't successful defies comprehension.

*slapsforehead* DCC, of course, somehow "audiocassette" lingered in my mind.

I guess DCC failed because MD was more convenient, more CD-like. No winding, no abrasion, better editing, smaller...

 

[Alex Altorfer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oliver *slapsforehead* DCC, of course, somehow "audiocassette" lingered in my mind. I guess DCC failed because MD was more convenient, more CD-like. No winding, no abrasion, better editing, smaller...

MD is still around because of the Japanese market only. Everywhere else MD is an abysmal failure. I suspect those great formats were poorly marketed. DCC players were horribly expensive too. Now, let's see how HI-MD performs in the marketplace.

 

[Oliver :)]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex Altorfer MD is still around because of the Japanese market only. Everywhere else MD is an abysmal failure. I suspect those great formats were poorly marketed. DCC players were horribly expensive too. Now, let's see how HI-MD performs in the marketplace.

Couldn't care less about HI-MD. iPod outconvenienced MD, and nothing SONY has can outperform iPod + iTunes synergy.
Actually I had quite a couple of great years with MD, and quite a few people in Germany still seem to have them. Had two portable recorders, CD/MD Combo in the car, stationary deck... most of which is still there but sees next to zero use. The only thing I miss is the battery-life & knowing that I can pick up my portable right now after not touching it for months and there will still be plenty of juice in it. At least the deck will be reactivated for its DAC

once I set up AirTunes.

 

[Alex Altorfer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oliver Couldn't care less about HI-MD. iPod outconvenienced MD, and nothing SONY has can outperform iPod + iTunes synergy. Actually I had quite a couple of great years with MD, and quite a few people in Germany still seem to have them. Had two portable recorders, CD/MD Combo in the car, stationary deck... most of which is still there but sees next to zero use. The only thing I miss is the battery-life & knowing that I can pick up my portable right now after not touching it for months and there will still be plenty of juice in it. At least the deck will be reactivated for its DAC once I set up AirTunes.

Yeah, I'm a longtime MacUser and I lust after iPod's real badly. Gotta get me one.

 

[Oliver :)]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex Altorfer Yeah, I'm a longtime MacUser and I lust after iPod's real badly. Gotta get me one.

Nobody is holding you back

 

[markl]

Quote:

No mountain of CD/SACD/DVD cases cluttering up my room. I'll just play my hi-res tracks right off of my hard drive-->high quality PC server-->audiophile system. How sweet that would be.

Better hope your hard drive doesn't crash! One bad accident, and all is lost. For me, I have WAY too much music to ever rely on that method, I want a durable hard copy that I can keep in pristine condition as a back-up. We'd need an awful lot more memory and storage to contain an entire lossless music collection the size of mine.

 

[Alex Altorfer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oliver Nobody is holding you back

Oh, an economic recession is holding me back.

 

[Ferbose]

Quote:

Originally Posted by markl Better hope your hard drive doesn't crash! One bad accident, and all is lost. For me, I have WAY too much music to ever rely on that method, I want a durable hard copy that I can keep in pristine condition as a back-up. We'd need an awful lot more memory and storage to contain an entire lossless music collection the size of mine.

Good point.
As I gradually become a collector of music, I look forward to enjoying my music collection 40 years from now. Hard disc and CR-R/DVD-R do not ensure reliable long-term storage unless a lot of care is taken. I care about the sound quality of my music and want to enjoy them for a long time. This is not what most consumers need though. But it is not impossible to imagine that SACD could linger on for a long time as a niche product.

 

[Kieran Comito]

I do not have a problem with Hi-rez. Anything that sounds better is good news for the audiophile. My problem is Hi-rez players. I still have 300 cds in my collection and I want a player that can make them sound as good as possible within my budget. I'm not going to go out and rebuy them. I'm sure there are Universal players that can compete with budget cd players or cd players at a certain price point, but overall, quality stand alone cd players or transport/DAC combos are better than Universal players at redbook. Plus, cd players are getting better and better all the time, especially ones at lower prices. Could it be that redbook players are getting so good that they can make a redbook cd sound as good as Hi Rez. Yes, I think it is happening. I always hear coments like "that universal player sure does a good job at redbook". Sure they do a good job and are certainly good enough for 95 % of the population, but for people who hold sound quality as a top priority? I know someone can argue with me that I have not heard all of the universal players, so how would I know? I would argue back, have you heard how many good redbook players and or transport/DAC's are out right now and are coming to the market?

 

[flambo]

You know what is the highest fidelity of all?? Live music. Nothing like it. It is the goal. Yeah, it's inconvinient and expensive. So what. Having a flesh and blood performer on the stage pouring out his/her soul is the essence of music. And I'm not talking about 70000 stadium concerts (though it can be fun in it's own way.) Don't have to worry about bit-rates, capacitors, "not having enough selection," format compatibility, etc. Your favorite performer is dead? Life is ephemeral; catch each moment at it's height and go on living. Recording are a subsitute and at the very best may just give the flavor of a live performance but no more. Enjoy live music. Listen to best possible reproduction available to you at the moment if you can't. Better yet, learn an instrument and make your own music! As far as format goes, the most open format always tends to suceed. PC was successful because it was a very open architecture not because it was better. VHS beta BETA because it was licensed to many manufacture before Sony realized their mistake. CD was successful because it was a very open format. MP3 is popular because it is open and unrestricted, unlike some other formats. SACD and DVD-A are too restrictive and half-heartedly supported to suceed. Something freer and better will come around and bury it.

 

[gradofan]

I love the potential of SACD (haven't tried to DVD-A), but there are some serious flaws with it:

There isn't that great a difference, at least in my system. 5.1 is great, but my system is just stereo, and most music I listen to isn't recorded in surround. Like someone else said, many SACDs are just 16-bit PCMs. Take Norah Jones's "Come Away With Me." The SACD and PCM tracks are identical.

This brings me to another weakness of high-res audio. It requires better mastering. If the music was poorly recorded to begin with (low-budget, lack of skill) or EQ'ed and compressed to all hell -- and that's pretty much all pop music, as well as an increasing amount of every other kind --, then there aren't enough dynamics and a low enough noise floor for hi-def to have any effect, in my opinion.

A lack of high-res CDs and DVDs is of course another downside to starting a new collection. And these DVD-As and SACDs are more expensive than a date with a supermodel. Well, not quite. But at any rate, $20-$25 for an album is a lot, by my standards. I have 300 CDs, and I've gotten 50 free, paid about $4 for 180 of them, and paid sale price ($10-$16) for the rest. If I were to plunk down a Jefferson for even half these albums, I'd be out about three grand.