Hi-Res Audio Formats on BR & HDDVD

[nightflier]

This rest of your comments are not worth responding to. Its nothing but personal attacks and insults. This is audioreview, a website for audio not personalities.

Real mature, there lil't. I believe it was you who said:

Nightflier, you must be gay,

...in addition to myriad other insults and personal attacks. As a matter of fact, you're the one who started with the attacks both in this thread (that I started) and the last debate that you ruined with your diarrhea of the mouth. Now I'm sure people are fed up with all the point-for-point debates that really have little to do with the original topic, so since I started this thread, I'll see if I can get you to focus a little.

First of all, I have to come clean about one item. I did say that the "disk was dead." I had fogotten that I had said so, and you pointed that out. Fine. But I still stand by the context I was referring to. As a matter of fact, I disagree with every other argument you've made in your last response. But unlike you, apparently, I do have a life, and so for the sake of brevity and the sanity of anyone who has been kind enough to read through the pointless insults, I am going to try and reign this into the most significant points under discussion. I hope that you can be mature enough to stay on point with those, for the benefit of everyone here.

Point #1: My SACD setup is just fine, thank you
I'm not rehashing this because I want to be right, but it pertains directly to my point about comparing SACD to the new hi-res sound formats. The ICBM is the only processing I have in place. I pass the PCM signal directly from my player through the receiver unprocessed to the ICBM. My seating position is as close to the center of the room as possible and the five identical speakers are angled towards that spot. Granted I do not use distance processing, volume adjustment and the center channel is horizontal. And yes, my Outlaw pre/pro can do all this type of processing, but I choose to forgo it, for the sake of allowing the SACD signal to be as unprocessed as possible.

Now, if I had the funds to improve on this, I would, but right now, that is the best I can do. So now, stop being such an arrogant pr*ck and admit that while this is not perfectly according to spec, it is also not so far off as to skew my ability to make out good recordings from bad, whether the bass is adequate or not, and how different that sound is from other processed formats. Stop acting as if I don't know what I'm doing with my setup.

Point #2: Your opinion is too focussed on sales figures
Now this is pretty basic really. You base the success or failure of VOD solely on sales figures. Now several people here and in the other thread have tried to point out to you that paid VOD is not the whole picture, yet you've wasted a whole lot of time and space trying to prove that it is - give it up already - you are wrong. Free VOD content is significant because it occupies people when they could be watching other content (DVD, Cable, BR/HDDVD, etc.). Therefore it competes with these formats, even if the quality differs. Stop being so concerned about being right that you can't see the obvious truth in this and admit that sales figures are only part of the picture.

Point #3: Your contention that there is no music that uses bass below 40Hz
To begin, the idea that you would know every music disk and be able to tell us this is ludicrous - this is your own fantasy, maybe, but you're not that knowledgeable. Not only do I have a number of LPs, RBCDs, HDCDs, SACDs, DVD-As and concert DVDs that do actually make use of the lower frequencies below 40Hz, but I also happen to like and collect them. As I've mentioned, I used to play the organ and while I may not be able to claim having "perfect pitch" (which is highly subjective, anyhow), I do have a trained ear to this type of instrument.

So yes, I have a large collection of organ music from Bach to Franck to Dupre and even the lesser known modern experimental composers. I also have orchestral and religious works you've probably never heard of from Hofhaness to Von Kessels. I also have a decent selection of piano music, also including many unusual modern compositions you probably wouldn't know or care for. Then there's the music that is non-Western and experimental from Mongolian throat singing and percussion instruments outside of the "traditional" symphonic stable such as gongs and bells - yes, I do have some of that too. Finally there is the non-acoustic compositions in modern music from Massive Attack to Groove Armada.

And if you think I don't have the equipment to fully appreciate it, I've had subs in my home from Paradigm, Talon, SVS, Velodyne, and currently have two 5' tall subs gracing my HT room. You can pretty much say that bass is my passion. So before you come here and insult my knowledge about bass, you better check that attitude and rethink your argument.

Point #4: BR & HDDVD only make up 5% of the market - that makes BR just 3%
You've been trying to weasel out of that one from the beginning. No amount of spin or doublespeak will change this fact. And then you start up on this idea that BR/HDDVD went from 1% to 5% in something like a year and a half and you compare that to DVD's acceptance, what was that some 15 years ago? Only someone so focussed on only seeing his own side of the argument could miss the fact that the time difference makes this comparison completely irrelevant. Distribution, market factors, promotion technologies, and the internet make this completely inconsequential. Now either you know this and you;re just trying to spread FUD, or you're just not able to see the world outside of your own created reality.

Point #5: Downloading didn't start 3-4 years ago (in 2004)
Now this is another example of your focus on sales. You see, in your small little world downloading only started when $ was being made from it. That is completely false. Downloading music started on bulletin boards, decades ago, well before Napster. Granted it was not MP3 quality and took forever to download, but it existed and the cat was out of the bag. When MP3 and Napster spiked, that is when the problem became too great to ignore. But this was years before 2004. So when you suggest that downloading didn't affect CD sales, you're only looking at the last 3-4 years and that's quite misleading. It suits your argument because you can tie spikes in CD sales to it in 2005 & 2006, but that completely neglects to mention the sad state of affairs during the crucial 1998-2003 period.

Point #6: Microsoft's support of HDDVD is significant
You can dismiss Bill Gates all you want (he doesn't even run the company anymore), but the fact is Microsoft is a very important player here. When Microsoft says jump, everybody from Paramount, to Novell, to Steve Jobs, to everyone of its cross-licensing partners asks how high. Your contention that they are just a PC company is ignorant and short-sided. They would like nothing more than to beat Sony out of the HT market and it's probably the reason why they are pushing HDDVD. Now you may think you can troll around yacking about computers and game consoles with the same arrogance as you do with BR/HDDVD, but the fact is you knowledge about those is limited. Why don't you let others handle that before you really get embarrassed?

Point #7: Classe and Denon upcoming players
Now I think the fact that I did not say that Denon made an HDDVD player has been sorted out. You were wrong about that, won't admit that you were wrong, and are still trying to water it down. Granted, it's a minor point, but you're so bent on never having been wrong, that it's relevant to point it out.

Now the Classe issue is still festering. So let me repeat what I said: I read that Classe was considering the development of a new Universal player. It was in a show report that I thought was in Stereophile, and I have yet to find it, but I will. Now regarding that quote about Classe, it did not come from my friend, it came straight from Classe's sales department. If you'd have bothered to read my words a little better, you would not have been caught with your foot in your mouth, again. They said: "A degree of uncertainty continues to cloud the future of the new blue laser disc formats and it remains unclear which, if any, of these formats will become the dominant technology." So if Classe is saying "it's unclear which, if any, of these formats will become dominant," it's also pretty much what I've been saying too: they are going to wait it out a little longer, so maybe the consumers should too.

Point #8: Confusion about the HDMI spec could very well be deterring sales
First of all, not all players are HDMI 1.3. Second very few people know what the spec covers. Third only a few receivers and disk players are HDMI 1.3 compliant. Fourth, very few sales reps know enough to inform consumers. Fifth very few product boxes and store display specs specify this and if they do, it's not complete information. Sixth, the online and print media are also misinformed and printing contradictory information.

The fact is, there's a huge amount of confusion about it. So I would say those are some pretty strong deterrents to the average consumer. To continue to maintain that these deterrents have absolutely no impact on adoption is just absolutist and wishful thinking. The fact is these details are confusing the customer. But the best part is that you think that the average consumer would buy an earlier spec 1.1 or 1.2 over the 1.3 spec. The reality is, that no matter what the technological details are, people will most often choose the higher spec for the same money. Nobody will buy last year's model for the same money. Your contention that they wouldn't is just and uneducated deduction.

So what do you say lil't? Do you think you can spare us the useless hair-slitting and insults and just address these points? Since you've already hijacked this thread into another debate over BR/HDDVD, the least you can do is answer these important points by the OP. After all, it is his thread.