How loud do you listen?

[tube fan]

Just curious. Where did you hear a DXD master?

I would aver that the problem remains with the industry failing to provide to the consumer what formats exist.

Of course, the main problem with "high res" digital is the lack of recordings. It will NEVER be possible to have true high res versions of my favorite jazz recordings, which are decades old.

[E-Stat]

The Magico Q5 room played high res digital, and it was NOT impressive.

We're not talking about the same thing. I don't know of any commercially available DXD recordings. They do, however, exist and run at least double the resolution of SACD and 192/24.

And yes, the ongoing problem with high rez digital is due to two things:

1. It represents under 2% of the released content any given year
2. Most of it is limited to disk playback - which will NEVER become popular with Y Gen / Milennials.

[tube fan]

We're not talking about the same thing. I don't know of any commercially available DXD recordings. They do, however, exist and run at least double the resolution of SACD and 192/24.

And yes, the ongoing problem with high rez digital is due to two things:

1. It represents under 2% of the released content any given year
2. Most of it is limited to disk playback - which will NEVER become popular with Y Gen / Milennials.

Then, I humbly ask: WHAT IS THE POINT!!!

[E-Stat]

Then, I humbly ask: WHAT IS THE POINT!!!

Don't you love the irony of Sir T's observation?

Yesterday, I went to a music store and bought five used records and a CD.

[tube fan]

Don't you love the irony of Sir T's observation?

Yesterday, I went to a music store and bought five used records and a CD.

I have about 2,000 vinyl records and 90 CDs. So far, I have NO high res downloads, and don't want any. I'll just to keep listening to my Miles, Coltrane, Evans, Monk, etc ORIGINAL VINYL records. Is there ANY great music in "high res"?

[JoeE SP9]

I have about 2,000 vinyl records and 90 CDs. So far, I have NO high res downloads, and don't want any. I'll just to keep listening to my Miles, Coltrane, Evans, Monk, etc ORIGINAL VINYL records. Is there ANY great music in "high res"?

That depends on what you consider great music. I have downloaded 2 LP's/CD's worth of high res music. I like both CD's(?). You may not like either. It's likely I'll download more. If you're curious the only way to find out is to give it a try. The high res files I have sound fantastic.

My real objection to downloaded music is the lack of a physical carrier. I realize I can burn (I do) high res files to DVD-A. That still restricts playback to either my computer (high res files) or a player that can play DVD-A. Of course this is slightly better than SACD which won't play on a computer. BTW SACD's sound superb.

I really don't care what medium music is on. As long as I can acquire and listen to it I'm happy.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Don't you love the irony of Sir T's observation?

Yesterday, I went to a music store and bought five used records and a CD.

My comments are based on sound quality only, not statistics or a sheeple mentality.

I find it so ironic that you would complain about recording practices, and then buy music on an inaccurate format, and one that has limited resolution. Maybe that is why your comments don't resonant very well with me.

[E-Stat]

I find it so ironic that you would complain about recording practices, and then buy music on an inaccurate format, and one that has limited resolution.Maybe that is why your comments don't resonant very well with me.

Well, call me crazy but my purchases are driven by musical content, not format.

I enjoy "audiophile quality" recordings as well as the next guy so long as I find them interesting to hear.. A high rez multi-channel recording of something that I don't really enjoy has zero value to me, cool as it may be.

Unfortunately, the music industry provides us zero choice. For 99% of released musical content, their question is: "Would you like the CD or the lossy download?"

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Well, call me crazy but my purchases are driven by musical content, not format.

I enjoy "audiophile quality" recordings as well as the next guy so long as I find them interesting to hear.. A high rez multi-channel recording of something that I don't really enjoy has zero value to me, cool as it may be.

Unfortunately, the music industry provides us zero choice. For 99% of released musical content, their question is: "Would you like the CD or the lossy download?"

If you purchases are driven by musical content, then perhaps you should keep your mouth shut about recording and musical quality.

The music industry gave you a choice by way of SACD and DVD-A, and "audiophiles" rejected it soundly for the lower quality CD, and the inaccurate vinyl disc. Had these formats been supported, there would have been a lot more music destined for it, and we would not be talking about the lack of content on these formats.

Download sites these days have more than just "lossy" downloads. Perhaps more exploration outside of Itunes in is order.

[E-Stat]

If you purchases are driven by musical content, then perhaps you should keep your mouth shut about recording and musical quality.

The two are not always mutually exclusive. Since you don't care about content, then who cares?

IThe music industry gave you a choice by way of SACD and DVD-A, and "audiophiles" rejected it soundly for the lower quality CD, and the inaccurate vinyl disc.

How many times do you need to be told that "audiophiles" aren't responsible for determining what the music industry does? Do you really not understand that the music industry is driven by the masses? The fact that 1% of released music was available in a better sounding format made ZERO difference! The music industry most certainly dropped the ball in trying to introduce a new standard. FAIL.

IHad these formats been supported, there would have been a lot more music destined for it, and we would not be talking about the lack of content on these formats.

I couldn't agree more. When the CD entered the market, it was supported by EVERY label for EVERY release. SACD/DVD-A? 1% !

IDownload sites these days have more than just "lossy" downloads. Perhaps more exploration outside of Itunes in is order.

As I've indicated, that is one of two primary formats. The CD being the other standard. Apparently, you've never tried to locate 99% of recordings that are available today.

That's fine for those who don't give a crap as to what content they buy.

[Feanor]

...
The music industry gave you a choice by way of SACD and DVD-A, and "audiophiles" rejected it soundly for the lower quality CD, and the inaccurate vinyl disc. Had these formats been supported, there would have been a lot more music destined for it, and we would not be talking about the lack of content on these formats. ....

Totally how I feel about it. If audiophiles had embraced hi-rez with enthusiasm mass acceptance and availability of hi-rez would have been much higher. In particular audiophiles continued to embrace the ludicrous LP medium.

I gave up on LPs as soon as I could afford a CD player. Early, valid criticisms of CD technology had largely vanished by the early '90s. Of course the are poor CD and hi-rez recordings but that was certainly true of LPs too.

What we have to understand that there is still a struggle between accuracy (to the recording) and the euphonic. Audiophiles tend to the latter. People like Tube Fan, Poultrygeist, Morricab, and many others, deceive themselves that vinyl and/or tube equipment are more "life-like". Their recollection of live music is idealized and romaniticized; (although poor recordings are the other side of that coin).

[Poultrygeist]

I'm still buying SACD jazz like crazy but have learned what a difference a good tube phono preamp can make.

Before the modded Jolida JD9 I had pretty much given up on vinyl.

[E-Stat]

If audiophiles had embraced hi-rez with enthusiasm mass acceptance and availability of hi-rez would have been much higher. In particular audiophiles continued to embrace the ludicrous LP medium.

So how many billions of dollars do you think were spent by US *audiophiles* around 1999/2000 when SACD and DVD-A were introduced? Five years later? Do you note the contribution by vinyl, aka LP/EP? I realize the thin black line is difficult to see.

For argument's sake, let's use some really optimistic estimates and say audiophiles number 200,000 and every one spent $1000 per year. Is that what you usually spend? $200M represents under 2% of the market. Do you really think the music industry would make a radical change for such a minority?

[Feanor]

So how many billions of dollars do you think were spent by US *audiophiles* around 1999/2000 when SACD and DVD-A were introduced? Five years later? Do you note the contribution by vinyl, aka LP/EP? I realize the thin black line is difficult to see.

For argument's sake, let's use some really optimistic estimates and say audiophiles number 200,000 and every one spent $1000 per year. Is that what you usually spend? $200M represents under 2% of the market. Do you really think the music industry would make a radical change for such a minority?

Audiophiles always were and remain a niche market. Still, marketers are willing to cater to niche markets, and often the choices of "elites" are touted the as aspirational choices for mainstream consumers. Yes, I believe that if audiophiles had whole-heartedly embraced SACD (or DVD-A) there would be far better choice in these media even thought they would likely remain niche.

The combination of classical music + hi-rez is about as niche as you can get. Yet new SACD releases are still pretty common in that genre from smaller labels at least, because of the relatively high acceptance of the medium by classical listeners.

[E-Stat]

. Yes, I believe that if audiophiles had whole-heartedly embraced SACD (or DVD-A) there would be far better choice in these media even thought they would likely remain niche.

So, what percent of the market do YOU think *audiophiles* represent? Including the insignificant contribution of vinyl.

edit: Hi-rez won't go anywhere in the future for GenY and Millenials so long as the industry *requires* disk playback. Disk playback? WTF?

[Feanor]

So, what percent of the market do YOU think *audiophiles* represent? Including the insignificant contribution of vinyl.

edit: Hi-rez won't go anywhere in the future for GenY and Millenials so long as the industry *requires* disk playback. Disk playback? WTF?

I thought I was clear. The audiophile segment was, is, and will remain small. My point is that hi-rez, (within that segment), would by now be affording a much greater choice and availability if it were not for the (logically inexplicable) endurance of the LP.

It would nice to have downloadable multi-channel hi-rez and there is no technical barrier except that imposed by recording industry fear of piracy. But GenY and Millenials? The tiny minority who become audiophiles will by discs if that's what it takes.

[E-Stat]

My point is that hi-rez, (within that segment), would by now be affording a much greater choice and availability if it were not for the (logically inexplicable) endurance of the LP.

Bill, do you notice that the sales of vinyl flat-lined to barely perceptible levels many years before the advent of the SACD and DVD-A.? Adding barely-there to *tiny minority* still results in *tiny minority*.

The tiny minority who become audiophiles will by discs if that's what it takes.

Yes, tiny minority. Like I said, hi-rez will be going nowhere with current record industry thinking.

[Feanor]

Bill, do you notice that the sales of vinyl flat-lined to barely perceptible levels many years before the advent of the SACD and DVD-A.? Adding barely-there to *tiny minority* still results in *tiny minority*.

Yes, tiny minority. Like I said, hi-rez will be going nowhere with current record industry thinking.

I think we agree, afterall, that hi-rez won't be consumer mainstream in the foreseeable future or perhaps ever.

[E-Stat]

I think we agree, afterall, that hi-rez won't be consumer mainstream in the foreseeable future or perhaps ever.

That is the answer. Industry indifference to current technology and generational norms.

It has nothing AT ALL to do with "audiophiles who continued to embrace the ludicrous LP medium.". That number can be counted on the head of a pin.

[tube fan]

That is the answer. Industry indifference to current technology and generational norms.

It has nothing AT ALL to do with "audiophiles who continued to embrace the ludicrous LP medium.". That number can be counted on the head of a pin.

We vinyl lovers may is small in number, but, judging by my experience at recent audio shows, analogue continues to smoke the best digital. My very favorite room used HE speakers, an SET amp, and analogue tape (bought on e-bay). My least favorite room used LE speakers, digital, and 1,000+ watt ss amps.

[Feanor]

We vinyl lovers may is small in number, but, judging by my experience at recent audio shows, analogue continues to smoke the best digital. My very favorite room used HE speakers, an SET amp, and analogue tape (bought on e-bay). My least favorite room used LE speakers, digital, and 1,000+ watt ss amps.

TL, perhaps you'll agree that your continued, personal preference for vinyl reduces demand for digital media including hi-rez.

You & I might differ in our preferences but both of us prefer "niche" media format, and IMO, these formats cannibalize each other.

[RoyY51]

Stumbled across the ol' Rat Shack SPL meter...80 to 85 db. at the 9 ft. listening position.


...just to address the original question...continue on, gentlemen.