A marriage of cd and analog technology?

[mlsstl]

re: teachers salaries (and it's still far better than in the United States where a friend made a whole $21,000 a year in California)....

Your friend needs to look around a bit. The US Bureau of Labor & Statistics reports the average K-12 teacher salary in the US is $47,000 not counting benefits. The average is over $52,000 if you just look at secondary schools. Including benefits increases those income numbers by 25% to 35%.

According to a recent Manhattan Institute study of teacher salaries, public school teachers are paid 11 percent more than the average professional worker. On an hourly wage basis, they earn more than accountants, medical scientists, architects and civil engineers.

In fact, it has been widely reported in the press lately that the average publicly employed worker in the US now earns about double the average private sector income when total compensation is included.

See, everyone whines!

[theaudiohobby]

And, at this point vinyl is still 100% of the original signal where digital, well, is not.

As a matter of fact, it isn't, not even close.

It's interesting that if digital is so great no one wants to associate their gear with that term "digital", I've yet to see some one advertise, "our player sounds so digital", but you always see the ultimate compliment, "this player sounds analog, or, more like analog".

voila! , romanticism

[Feanor]

Feanor

Well I would think downloading would be greener, no? I mean CD's were never had much of a keep sake factor with the puny art work and take out a magnifying glass to read the tiny ass print.
....

You're preaching to the converted, of course, RGA.

I listen almost exclusively to computer files nowaday. I have a dedicated XP computer that I use to read mostly FLAC or ALAC but also MP3 files for a gigabit LAN-connected Windows Home Server machine. You can see a high-level diagram of this under my signature.

I don't have a really huge collection; only about 700 classical and another 200 or so albums (listened to mostly by other family members). These are mostly ripped CDs. All this occupies about 700 MB and I have another terabyte or so available on the WHS.

I use Foobar2000 as my player and it is higly flexible. I can find any piece in a few seconds by sorting the whole collection in any of a number of sequences. And I can create new, custom sort sequences easily.

Here's a pic of the Foobar interface set up the way I like it. Note the sort sequence here happens to be genre, then composer, then album.
...

[Smokey]

And, at this point vinyl is still 100% of the original signal where digital, well, is not.

You apparently forgot a stumbling block in vinyl chain call RIAA equalization where signal is attenuated at the pressing (lows are atteunated and highs are boosted), and then de-equalized by phono preamp (lows are boosted and highs are atteunated). If anything, the tolerations in these EQ processes take away signal originallity.

[Mr Peabody]

You apparently forgot a stumbling block in vinyl chain call RIAA equalization where signal is attenuated at the pressing (lows are atteunated and highs are boosted), and then de-equalized by phono preamp (lows are boosted and highs are atteunated). If anything, the tolerations in these EQ processes take away signal originallity.

But it doesn't take away bits. And I'd think the engineers had mastering the LP under control..

[theaudiohobby]

But it doesn't take away bits. And I'd think the engineers had mastering the LP under control..

There is more to linearity than bits, vinyl is inherently lossy compared to digital and there is not much engineers can do about it, vinyl is not even in the race if high resolution digital is considered. RIAA compensation highlights some of the inherent limitations of the medium such as its decreased linearity at the frequency extremes.

[theaudiohobby]

If anything, the tolerations in these EQ processes take away signal originallity.

Exactly!

[mlsstl]

The RIAA equalization curve has an emphasis/deemphasis range of 40 dB over the 20 to 20,000 Hz range to which it applies. That's a very big range that must be dealt with; this gives lots of opportunities for significant errors in both disc creation and playback.

I've heard LPs that sound wonderful, LPs that sound terrible and many that are merely mediocre. Same thing with CDs. Sometimes it is easy to forget the storage format is far less important than the care that is used in making and copying the music for distribution.

[RGA]

Your friend needs to look around a bit. The US Bureau of Labor & Statistics reports the average K-12 teacher salary in the US is $47,000 not counting benefits. The average is over $52,000 if you just look at secondary schools. Including benefits increases those income numbers by 25% to 35%.

According to a recent Manhattan Institute study of teacher salaries, public school teachers are paid 11 percent more than the average professional worker. On an hourly wage basis, they earn more than accountants, medical scientists, architects and civil engineers.

In fact, it has been widely reported in the press lately that the average publicly employed worker in the US now earns about double the average private sector income when total compensation is included.

See, everyone whines!

Thanks - I did not mention that this was a Kindergarten teacher and this was 5 years ago. Another person noted that the salary can be decent once you've held the job for 10 years. The average teacher salary is generally high because a large portion of the teacher workforce is older and have been doing it for many years. The starting salaries I saw were all in the low $30,000 range with a couple of exception states that have a veyr high cost of living - and Alaska.

The benefits are less impressive from a Canadian Perspective since we all get free medical, teacher or not, homeless person or not.

But it is certainly nice to see that salaries are rising - it's difficult to tell a kid to value education is their teacher is being paid less than a janitor (which was the case in one U.S. State a few years back).

Interestingly, in the States they often pay teachers for their extra-curricular programs as some sort of bonus. They do not do this in Canada. So it is quite possible that if you run the after school soccer club and the newspaper and chess club etc you could make a fair bit of cash. Personally, I see no problem with that approach because I never really understood why teachers were "expected to volunteer" (which is a funny way to volunteer since it's kind of forced) to run after school sports programs while Jimmy's lawyer, banker, engineer, doctor, whatever mom or dad could just as easily "volunteer" for such programs (some do as well). Some schools don't always have a staff that really have the knowledge or ability in a given extra-curricualr activity - or the money. I am seeing more of that community thing going which is nice - hope it keeps improving.

[Feanor]

Your friend needs to look around a bit. The US Bureau of Labor & Statistics reports the average K-12 teacher salary in the US is $47,000 not counting benefits. The average is over $52,000 if you just look at secondary schools. Including benefits increases those income numbers by 25% to 35%.

According to a recent Manhattan Institute study of teacher salaries, public school teachers are paid 11 percent more than the average professional worker. On an hourly wage basis, they earn more than accountants, medical scientists, architects and civil engineers.

In fact, it has been widely reported in the press lately that the average publicly employed worker in the US now earns about double the average private sector income when total compensation is included.

See, everyone whines!

I can't attest to the situation of teachers in particular, either in US or Canada. However both North American countries are in an historic interval of secular decline. This is nothing new: it has been going on for 30 years though it has accelerated in the last decade. This tend is disproportionately experienced by working class, including technical/professionals, (or call 'em "middle class" if you like). It is caused by globalization plus the end of abundant natural resources, (e.g. oil), from domestic sources, especialy in the US.

However I believe the public sector workers, many of whom are unionized, have been to some extent protected from these trends by contracts or public sector policies that gear salaries and benefits to inflation. This is not the case in the private sector. E.g. in my job as a systems analyst, I received the same nominal salary from 2000 until my retirement this year. Not only did I take a de facto 25% pay cut based on my base salary in that period, I also ceased to received bonuses that I had earned early on. This was no fault of mine other than that as a near-retirement worker I no longer received "plum" assignments, (because it was inportant to "bring along" younger workers).

[mlsstl]

I should note that, many years ago, I taught school for a couple of years so I'm quite familiar with the profession. My starting salary was $7,100. But that was another life.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

But it doesn't take away bits. And I'd think the engineers had mastering the LP under control..

It is still an art only a few have mastered. Regardless if it takes away bits or not, getting things exactly right is a tedious processes where there is plenty of room to make mistakes.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Well I would think downloading would be greener, no? I mean CD's were never had much of a keep sake factor with the puny art work and take out a magnifying glass to read the tiny ass print. So if you're going to simply load the CD into a machine like the Soolos/hard drive system then you may as well bypass the CD all together if you can get a lossless perfect copy of the CD.

This is a pretty common myth, but downloading is not greener than physical product. Even when you take into consideration the manufacturering of the disc itself, transportation to both the warehouse and store, the physical disc is more green than the download. With Apple Itunes, it takes 17 computers to complete an Itunes download. With Amazon it takes 21 computers to complete the same task. Even with the new low heat, and managed electricity usage of the newer blade servers, downloads are extreme power consumers.

[Feanor]

This is a pretty common myth, but downloading is not greener than physical product. Even when you take into consideration the manufacturering of the disc itself, transportation to both the warehouse and store, the physical disc is more green than the download. With Apple Itunes, it takes 17 computers to complete an Itunes download. With Amazon it takes 21 computers to complete the same task. Even with the new low heat, and managed electricity usage of the newer blade servers, downloads are extreme power consumers.

These statements are invalid in their implication -- I say after careful consideration and 40 years in the IT business. For one thing the number of computers, while possibly true if you trace the full path of a dowload, conveys a wrong notion. So yes, maybe it takes 21 computers to support a download from Amazon: it takes the same 21 computers to support millions downloads.

[E-Stat]

it takes the same 21 computers to support a million downloads.

Absolutely. As I observed that charging more for downloading an album is not related to their cost.

rw

[Geoffcin]

Absolutely. As I observed that charging more for downloading an album is not related to their cost.

rw

This is nothing new for the recording industry. I remember them charging more for CD's when they were first introduced with the excuse used that CD's cost more to produce. They kept the premium in force long after CD's became incredibly cheap to produce. When the big scandle about this lie led to a class action lawsuit they trotted out their big-time lawers and eventually won. Basically on the grounds that they can charge what they want for any format and there's nothing that anyone else can say about it.

[E-Stat]

This is nothing new for the recording industry.

I have no problem with the industry pricing intellectual property any way they wish. It is just disingenuous for anyone to think that the infrastructure for downloading is more expensive than what is required to produce, distribute, and stock physical media. Especially with the assertion that such consumes less energy in the supply chain. Even paper is extremely expensive to handle and distribute. Which is why the overwhelmingly preferential method for fund transfers and distribution of all sorts of documents is now using electronic means (which is my area of expertise).

rw

[Geoffcin]

I have no problem with the industry pricing intellectual property any way they wish. It is just disingenuous for anyone to think that the infrastructure for downloading is more expensive than what is required to produce, distribute, and stock physical media. Especially with the assertion that such consumes less energy in the supply chain. Even paper is extremely expensive to handle and distribute. Which is why the overwhelmingly preferential method for fund transfers and distribution of all sorts of documents is now using electronic means (which is my area of expertise).

rw

Hey, bold faced outright lies worked for them before, did you think they wouldn't try it again? Wait till you see what they have planned for the future!

[mlsstl]

Hey, bold faced outright lies worked for them before, did you think they wouldn't try it again? Wait till you see what they have planned for the future!

I can't say I've heard anyone outside this forum claim anything extraordinary concerning higher infrastructure costs for downloading vs physical product distribution.

However, as I noted in a post a few days ago, far too much attention is paid to the unit production cost which is frankly only a very small portion of the equation, whether one is talking physical media or download.

The big question for the music corporations is how do they amortize all of those fixed costs that are present whether they sell 10,000 albums or ten million?

There has always been the problem of generally not knowing in advance which albums are going to be big sellers and which are going to be losers. Now they have the added dynamic of losing album sales to singles. In many ways the industry is in the process of reverting, at least partially, to a pre-1960s state.

I'm just thankful I'm not in the recording industry. It's a lot easier to keep one's serenity watching from the sidelines versus having to depend on it for my livelihood.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I can't say I've heard anyone outside this forum claim anything extraordinary concerning higher infrastructure costs for downloading vs physical product distribution.

However, as I noted in a post a few days ago, far too much attention is paid to the unit production cost which is frankly only a very small portion of the equation, whether one is talking physical media or download.

The big question for the music corporations is how do they amortize all of those fixed costs that are present whether they sell 10,000 albums or ten million?

There has always been the problem of generally not knowing in advance which albums are going to be big sellers and which are going to be losers. Now they have the added dynamic of losing album sales to singles. In many ways the industry is in the process of reverting, at least partially, to a pre-1960s state.

I'm just thankful I'm not in the recording industry. It's a lot easier to keep one's serenity watching from the sidelines versus having to depend on it for my livelihood.

I have to agree with you here. Another thing that trips me out is so many claimed to be so informed on this issue, but don't really have a clue of all what goes into a single download in terms of cost.

8 studios, Amazon and Itunes all furnish their costs to produce or host a product, and a third party concludes that overall costs for producing a disc was cheaper. Amazon and Apple don't dispute the conclusion, but folks here that do not work for any of the parties, are not privy to the information submitted, say their expertise tells them something different. Excuse me if I listen to the folks that actually did the work, rather than those who sit behind keyboards and assume they are correct.

It is no secret that Apple is not making a dime on Itunes, and neither is Amazon on theirs.

[E-Stat]

It is no secret that Apple is not making a dime on Itunes, and neither is Amazon on theirs.

Solely because the music companies have chosen to price their licenses that way. Such has nothing to do with the real costs behind the delivery method.

rw

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Solely because the music companies have chosen to price their licenses that way. Such has nothing to do with the real costs behind the delivery method.

rw

You don't know this for sure do you? The corps director of the Renegades(of which I am affiliated with) is charge of the operations of ITunes, and he has a different answer than you do.

[E-Stat]

I can't say I've heard anyone outside this forum claim anything extraordinary concerning higher infrastructure costs for downloading vs physical product distribution.

Yet, you'll find higher prices for album downloads than CDs on Amazon. Does that make sense from a strictly cost-of-goods question? Clearly, such pricing is driven by the whim of the music companies who license the content, not by a linear markup method.

I agree with you that the problem they have brought on themselves is making everything available as a single. Now they don't know how to handle the monster they created.

rw

[E-Stat]

You don't know this for sure do you? The corps director of the Renegades(of which I am affiliated with) is charge of the operations of ITunes, and he has a different answer than you do.

By all means, tell us how the music industry is somehow different for delivering data than the rest of the world. I wasn't aware that iTunes ever produced, delivered and stocked CDs using identical album licensing. I am, however, aware of how a multi-billion dollar software provider views the issue having worked for them. And, are you aware that Microsoft charges extra if your want physical media from preloaded systems? Why do you think that is the case? Why do you think Blu Ray Live exists? Why do the makers of players choose to deliver firmware updates via downloads rather than sending free CDs? The answers are all related.

rw

[Feanor]

You don't know this for sure do you? The corps director of the Renegades(of which I am affiliated with) is charge of the operations of ITunes, and he has a different answer than you do.

Categorically it is cheaper to distribute data via download rather than physical CD. It all began around whether download was "greener" than hardcopy:; it is, period. The whole "21 computers" thing is a red herring. Dealers' profits are another matter because they depend on many more things than just the data distribution.

It reminds me of the time quite a few years ago when a poller for the Canadian Bankers Association asked me how much more I would be willing to pay to perform my account transactions online. I had the presence of mind to tell her nothing. The online cost is less than .05% of cost of the same transaction in front of a teller, and a gread deal less than 10% (don't remember the exact number) of what it is at an ATM.