-
SACD and DVD-A dead, are CD's it?
With SACD's and DVD-Audio dead are CD's going to be the best we can get? When SACD's and DVD-A's out years ago I was excited that we would be able to get higher resolution audio. Are CD's going to be the highest we are going to get? Is there anything in the works using maybe Blurays?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffKnob
With SACD's and DVD-Audio dead are CD's going to be the best we can get? When SACD's and DVD-A's out years ago I was excited that we would be able to get higher resolution audio. Are CD's going to be the highest we are going to get? Is there anything in the works using maybe Blurays?
Well, SACD isn't entirely dead if you like classical music, but otherwise for sure. And of course DVD-A is totally kaput.
Blu-Ray works great for music, but were are the recordings? There are some but not many and I doubt that many are forthcoming. Looks like download is the most likely source of hi-rez but there aren't many of these either.
Let's face it: the audiophile market is a small niche and the content purveyors have been distracted by vinyl, i.e. for some reason they feel this is all the audiophiles want.
-
I have heard of companies doing research using file formats based on the blue ray audio setup but I have not heard much about the mass market accepting it. I think a lot of the problem is that fact that cd has been out for so long and is cheap and easy to produce and most people if they are not getting their music by downloading it are totally fine with CD's quality. If more people could ot took the time to hear and know the difference between formats and request higher definition in there audio it might happen but then with downloaded music being the most popular music media today I would think they would put more time into high def downloads and not high def disks even though I do both and there are times when I still prefer disk media because it just has a more real feel to it. It really think that a blue ray type high def format might come out in music direct catalogs and the such but I don't think that you will see them at wal mart any time soon.
-
I was thinking that bluray would be the easiest way to bring something to the market as it already supports the highres. I think part of the problem with SACD or DVD-A is that specific players needed to be bought and they were more expensive than most people would want to spend to make the transition. If they could do one side as a regular CD for people to use in their cars or regular player and then a bluray side for the bigger systems, it could see more adoption. Of course this is all dependant on the studios starting with good recordings that will even take advantage of the higher resolution.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffKnob
With SACD's and DVD-Audio dead are CD's going to be the best we can get?
I agree SACD's and DVD-A are dead formats so being the green eco-friendly person that I am I encourage all AR members here to please send me your SACD's and DVD-A discs rather than let them clutter up some landfill somewhere. While you are at it please send me any cassettes and laserdiscs you also may have lying around. I will make sure all materials sent to me are properly disposed of.......... :biggrin5:
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by thekid
I agree SACD's and DVD-A are dead formats so being the green eco-friendly person that I am I encourage all AR members here to please send me your SACD's and DVD-A discs rather than let them clutter up some landfill somewhere. While you are at it please send me any cassettes and laserdiscs you also may have lying around. I will make sure all materials sent to me are properly disposed of.......... :biggrin5:
Yer just a little too late..I just gave away 'bout 100 cassettes (Chrome & Metal) to the coworker I sold my HK deck to.
-
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by thekid
I agree SACD's and DVD-A are dead formats so being the green eco-friendly person that I am I encourage all AR members here to please send me your SACD's and DVD-A discs rather than let them clutter up some landfill somewhere. While you are at it please send me any cassettes and laserdiscs you also may have lying around. I will make sure all materials sent to me are properly disposed of.......... :biggrin5:
DARN! And I TOSSED all of my laserdisc, would have been glad to helicopter the
several tons worth over to your house and dump it ON THE ROOF.
Tell ya what, I wasnt dumb enough to try Selectavision (needlevision), but a friend was.
Look for four or five crates to be heading your way, along with six thousand copies of
Learning Mandarin the easy way on long playing records, about fifty records to a
copy.
AND theres those ten thousand Hungarian opera 78's that uncle Julius left me...:1:
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
DARN! And I TOSSED all of my laserdisc, would have been glad to helicopter the
several tons worth over to your house and dump it ON THE ROOF.
Tell ya what, I wasnt dumb enough to try Selectavision (needlevision), but a friend was.
Look for four or five crates to be heading your way, along with six thousand copies of
Learning Mandarin the easy way on long playing records, about fifty records to a
copy.
AND theres those ten thousand Hungarian opera 78's that uncle Julius left me...:1:
Thanks Pix!
I will look for the truck rolling up the street.
Soon I will be able to order my take out just like the pros....... :D
Have a Happy T-Day!
-
SACD is far from dead. I have twice as many titles to choose from now than I did a few years ago.
I can see how those who don't care for jazz or classical might think it's dead.
By the way, I hear there's a new format on the horizon. Something called reel to reel?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poultrygeist
SACD is far from dead. I have twice as many titles to choose from now than I did a few years ago.
I can see how those who don't care for jazz or classical might think it's dead.
By the way, I hear there's a new format on the horizon. Something called reel to reel?
You're right re. SACD.
Reel to reel? Pull-ease. I gave up on that in 1974. :frown2:
-
I am scratching my head on the comments on Bluray and audio. There are plenty of Bluray high resolution recordings out there...plenty of them. I own over a hundred, and my collection is growing weekly. Some have video, some don't. If you don't like the video, shut off your monitor after starting up the recording. I do that usually after the first view. All of these recordings are true high resolution recording, defiantly better than anything I have heard on DVD-A, and at least equaling or besting most recordings on SACD(at least from a technical basis).
While SACD isn't quite dead, it is an unsupported format abandon by Sony. Sony is no longer supporting the format with upgrades and improvements, so the only thing keeping the format alive now is a trickle of recordings that simulate the last breath of a dying human. DVD-A is gone. CD is on its way out as well, and downloads are replacing it very quickly.
Right now, the future of high resolution music lies in downloads and Bluray disc. I use both, but I prefer Bluray's because they sound better than the downloads I have. More and more music is coming out on Bluray, and I think when the music industry stabilizes(which may take a while), the record companies will take a long look at Bluray, and probably begin to put more music on the format. Once we get out of this recession(and yes we are still in one), things will stabilize, and we will begin to see where the industry is going. Right now the entire music industry is just flailing in the wind, and seeming almost direction less in their actions. While Itunes is cool, I think it is basically killing the concept of an album.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
I am scratching my head on the comments on Bluray and audio. There are plenty of Bluray high resolution recordings out there...plenty of them. ....
I suppose it depends on what you mean by "plenty".
So at my favorite classical recordings source, ArkivMusic, has 10's of thousands of CD titles, over 4400 DVD (some of which are actually Blu-ray), over 3000 SACD titles, and ... how many Blu-Ray per se?? It's hard to tell: Arkiv doesn't even have an easy way to search for them. However I finally discovered they have 207 Blu-ray or which virtually all are opera videos, (not that there's anything wrong with opera videos).
Same story at other classical recordings sites, e.g. MDT lists 207 Blu-rays, but again, almost all are opera videos. Crotchet, another UK classical vendor, lists 211 Blu-ray, almost all opera videos. Presto Classical 205 Blu-ray offering, but again almost all are opera videos or live concert videos.
-
I'm not dead yet
I have only a handful of SACD's but they sound sooo good. It is a real shame the format did not take off. DVD-A is even more strange my lexus plays them but I don't have any of the disks. I can play some SACD's in the car but it must be playing the CD layer which some SACD disks have.
What I do not understand is in the car the SACD disk (Dire Straits BIA) still sounds sooo good but it cannot be playing SACD as it is a DVD-A player. so how does is sound so much better than all my other disks if it only playing the CD layer.
also I am getting a new bluray and will want a universal player for SACD just to have it most likely it will be the new Oppo
thanks for any comments
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by thekid
I agree SACD's and DVD-A are dead formats so being the green eco-friendly person that I am I encourage all AR members here to please send me your SACD's and DVD-A discs rather than let them clutter up some landfill somewhere. While you are at it please send me any cassettes and laserdiscs you also may have lying around. I will make sure all materials sent to me are properly disposed of.......... :biggrin5:
You said it before I could. Being quick on the draw is probably how you find such great deals.:biggrin5:
With that said, please send me half of your old LP's, SACD's, DVD-A's, LD's, Cassettes, RtR's etc. Send the other half to thekid. He did ask first.
I'll pay the shipping for anything I receive.:ihih:
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by lomarica
I have only a handful of SACD's but they sound sooo good. It is a real shame the format did not take off. DVD-A is even more strange my lexus plays them but I don't have any of the disks. I can play some SACD's in the car but it must be playing the CD layer which some SACD disks have.
What I do not understand is in the car the SACD disk (Dire Straits BIA) still sounds sooo good but it cannot be playing SACD as it is a DVD-A player. so how does is sound so much better than all my other disks if it only playing the CD layer.
also I am getting a new bluray and will want a universal player for SACD just to have it most likely it will be the new Oppo
thanks for any comments
Have you tried both layers on your home (?) system? If so, have you noticed the same differences? I have heard that the 44/16 track on many hybrid SACD's is the SACD mix processed to 2x44/16. That would make them different from the regular CD.
-
its a HYBRID sacd/cd with readable layers for each format. its possible that when it was remastered for sacd that the new remix (which doesnt always guarantee improved sound) is responsible for that pleasantry. another possibility may be that DVDA players upsample like some sacd players which truly does improve sound.
do you have the old BIA cd for comparison?
i think STT will agree that part of the prob with sacd was the lack of readily available mixing/editing equipment that handled DSD sources. i think its a travesty that sony did not support the format by releasing ALL titles in hybrid format so retailers wouldnt have a problem selling their inventories.
because of that, i was able to score the billie holliday sacd 'lady in satin' for $5 at the now defunct Wherehouse record store on devonshire and balboa. as a non hybrid sacd, it could not be played on a regular cdp and probably returned for that reason.
i supported sacd right from the start and didnt mind paying about $14 for one new which was the list price for most CDs which in my opinion have never been worth that inflated price. the artist's share went down with the advent of cd and the temporary wane in the LP. the cost of production went down which put more dollars in the pockets of the record companies and less where it belonged-in the pockets of the artist.
i felt that the improved sound was worth that much but sony didnt support the format as well as some of us consumers. well, CRAP!
now i also bemoan the death of dvda but only so many formats can exist as evidenced by the fate of the quad format war. wont the manufacturers ever learn?
-
We need to stay with one format long enough for the mainstream customer to re-build their libraries but it won't happen. I'm not going to chase wishes and theories. CD works for me and I'm not going to spend to change out for another format. Last time was LP to CD. While that debate continues we have went from digital generation CD, DVD, SACD/DVD-A, Blu Ray in less time than it took to get to stereo from mono.
The industry could build some good will by crediting old formats when buying the new but won't. Imagine what's going to happen to everyone who pony'ed up for multi thousand dollar DACs to be obsoleted by Blu Ray.
If well miked, mixed and recorded, CD can be remarkably good and the lack of genre in the newer formats just loses the spender with the resources to buy.
Vinyl was the only format mature enough to develop fully and keeps the purist loyal today.
IMO
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffKnob
With SACD's and DVD-Audio dead are CD's going to be the best we can get? When SACD's and DVD-A's out years ago I was excited that we would be able to get higher resolution audio. Are CD's going to be the highest we are going to get? Is there anything in the works using maybe Blurays?
Actually, for stereo I'm fine with CD.
Yeah, it's true. Now that I'm old and deaf (above 10kHz), I really can't hear, (or don't care about, which amounts to the same thing), the difference between a well-produced & engineered CD and an SACD. And LPs are people who prefer a particular sort of euphonic filtering over accuracy.
So while the typical SACD sounds better than a typical CD, (in stereo), I attribute that to greater care in the engineering process, not from the actual medium of distribution. I say this after due comparisons of the CD to the SACD stereo layers of hybrid discs. Of course, the are many fantasically good-sounding CDs without SACD versions.
What CD lacks only, IMO, the ability to deliver multi-channel. Let me assert that M/C can do what stereo simply cannot, assuming good record production and a good system to play it on. But then obviously Blu-ray can deliver this as well or better than SACD.
But I'm not hoping that Blu-ray replaces CD -- not, at least, unless I can a rip digital copy from the Blu-ray disc. Currently downloads are not a satisfactory alternative, in as much as the selection of CD-or-better resolution files is far too limited.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feanor
I suppose it depends on what you mean by "plenty".
So at my favorite classical recordings source, ArkivMusic, has 10's of thousands of CD titles, over 4400 DVD (some of which are actually Blu-ray), over 3000 SACD titles, and ... how many Blu-Ray per se?? It's hard to tell: Arkiv doesn't even have an easy way to search for them. However I finally discovered they have 207 Blu-ray or which virtually all are opera videos, (not that there's anything wrong with opera videos).
Same story at other classical recordings sites, e.g. MDT lists 207 Blu-rays, but again, almost all are opera videos. Crotchet, another UK classical vendor, lists 211 Blu-ray, almost all opera videos. Presto Classical 205 Blu-ray offering, but again almost all are opera videos or live concert videos.
I understand where you are coming from, but remember, the Bluray format is just 4 years old. Just like it took time for titles to come out on CD and DVD, it will take time for titles to come out on Bluray. With Bluray spec's being what it is, we have the opportunity to enjoy music at a far higher level(and I mean FAR), than CD and DVD can deliver. If there are folks out there that really love music, this is the format that would get them closer to reality than we have ever heard.
The DXD to Bluray audio recordings I have done in the past, have been absolutely marvelous to the ears. For those of us that have had that audio quality taste, going back to CD just cannot, and will not do it.
As far as ripping is concerned, I am with copy protection on this one. Now that we have seen the devistation of the CD and DVD format behind ripping, it becomes impossible for any digital format to get to a point of maturity that LP has gotten to. Once you can rip it, then the freebie thought process just overwhelms the legit thought process. Let's face it, what we can get for free, we don't want to pay for.
-
Quote:
i think STT will agree that part of the prob with sacd was the lack of readily available mixing/editing equipment that handled DSD sources. i think its a travesty that sony did not support the format by releasing ALL titles in hybrid format so retailers wouldnt have a problem selling their inventories.
I agree with you totally. As a person who invested heavily in SACD(DSD encoders and decoders, extremely high quality production/recording suite), Sony never provided editing and eq for the format in DSD. This meant that we had to convert our DSD stream to PCM to do all of these tasks, and that degraded the quality and resolution of the audio. Then you have to convert the degraded stream back to DSD, which was a major bummer IMO. Now to be sure, the degradation was slight, but I heard it, and it bothered me.
It also would have been helpful for Sony to provide bass management, delay and, and speaker balancing in DSD as well, to maintain the DSD stream's purity through the analog conversion in the player.
While I commend Sony for bringing the format to the public, I give them a "F" for their effort in both the post production, and consumer implementation.
-
Since nobody has put dibs on minidisc and 8 track, go ahead and send me those.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
....
It also would have been helpful for Sony to provide bass management, delay and, and speaker balancing in DSD as well, to maintain the DSD stream's purity through the analog conversion in the player.
....
Of course, none of this is a problem for Blu-ray. The Audyssey processing on my modest Onkyo receiver has impressed me a whole lot.
Unfortunately my Panasonic BRP doesn't play SACD, (nor does the Onkyo handle DSD). I'd be fine, though, if the player or the receiver converted the DSD directly to PCM to permit subsequent DSP -- rather this than omit the EQ and delay.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffKnob
With SACD's and DVD-Audio dead are CD's going to be the best we can get?
Well, there is still vinyl...
*puts on flamesuit*
but honestly, IMO, vinyl still offers the best resolution & sound quality, but I guess not everyone agrees on that...
and SACD is definitely with one foot in it's grave already, DVD-A has been put under the ground a long time ago.
so that leaves us with Blu-Ray audio discs...
not much going to happen there, it's doomed to end the same as DVD-A, and it's much to expensive. ESPECIALLY compared to the "new rising master", streaming, or media servers, things with hard disk drives in them... "not stuck to a medium".
so to answer your question: CD's are on their way out too. Leaving you with PC stuff...
...and vinyl...
Keep them spinning,
Bert.
-
I think the music industry is going down...
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by basite
Well, there is still vinyl...
*puts on flamesuit*
but honestly, IMO, vinyl still offers the best resolution & sound quality, but I guess not everyone agrees on that...
and SACD is definitely with one foot in it's grave already, DVD-A has been put under the ground a long time ago.
so that leaves us with Blu-Ray audio discs...
not much going to happen there, it's doomed to end the same as DVD-A, and it's much to expensive. ESPECIALLY compared to the "new rising master", streaming, or media servers, things with hard disk drives in them... "not stuck to a medium".
so to answer your question: CD's are on their way out too. Leaving you with PC stuff...
...and vinyl...
Keep them spinning,
Bert.
Bert,
So much is going on with Bluray disc music, it is off your radar, and has no chance of following in the footsteps of DVD-A. There is FAR too much support for that to happen.
Streaming is doing well, but not for high resolution music. You are overselling vinyl, that is for sure. Many of us have turned the page on that medium, and there is no chance of us going back. Digital is here to stay for the masses, and vinyl will remain a niche.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by basite
Well, there is still vinyl...
*puts on flamesuit*
but honestly, IMO, vinyl still offers the best resolution & sound quality, but I guess not everyone agrees on that...
Indeed: please enter a dissenting vote. :prrr:
Quote:
Originally Posted by basite
...
so to answer your question: CD's are on their way out too. Leaving you with PC stuff...
...
Maybe, but don't hold your breath.
-
digital has almost caught up to analog in total quality. still, vinyl offers more value to those of us who will make the effort to play and maintain our LPs.
the downloading requires a learning curve at this time (as does vinyl playback for those new to it) and makes the older audiophile/music lover hesitant to buy into it. its still under development for the consumer in terms of ease of use and cost of equipment and content.
vinyl and digital lovers thrive on the used market for the bulk of their acquisitions, vinyl being more economical.
in the big cities, there is a wealth of used vinyl, much in great shape. CDs are almost always more expensive used or not. plus, used CDs are harder to peruse. used sacd and dvda titles are very rare but i have found a few at good prices.
new vinyl isnt as rare as one might expect and many times quite competitive with digital pricing. bluray players have become NEARLY ubiquitous because of the netflix phenomenon with wifi AND low pricing.
in the meantime, i am still seeking out SACDs and DVDAs as well as the inherently hi rez vinyl.
i am looking forward to bluray audio being mainstream and their cost normalizing.
-
We won't get fooled again...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
As far as ripping is concerned, I am with copy protection on this one. Now that we have seen the devistation of the CD and DVD format behind ripping, it becomes impossible for any digital format to get to a point of maturity that LP has gotten to. Once you can rip it, then the freebie thought process just overwhelms the legit thought process. Let's face it, what we can get for free, we don't want to pay for.
Good point, and I think Happy Camper had the right idea also.
The music industry toasted themselves with the release of CD, and it's ever promising mantra..."Perfect Sound Forever". Well we know now that it's far from perfect, and as mentioned, can be had for free. Woops...
If you could roll back the clock, I would bet most executives would have kept vinyl as the main format. At least this forced consumers to buy a product, and they made some money as a result. They were all toasting themselves when consumers repurchased their libraries, but then spewed when they found out about ripping. "They can what!?!..."
Today, only one person is required to buy a CD and potentially, the rest of us can have it for free. So like Terrence said, how can anything develop when there's nothing to be gained by the companies adapting these technologies.
The other issue is that digital still remains in it's infancy. Like a cat chasing it's tail, they are always looking for the next thing. Like most technologies, "improvements" are forever rolling. Perhaps BD has the disc solution for high rez or perhaps nobody cares and it dies on the vine. Hard to say.
You guys know I like vinyl. These days I buy my new or used LP and rip it to my comp in FLAC format. Yes it's only 16/44.1 but hey it sounds great and prevents me from needing to buy a digital version.
The record industry missed the boat with downloading. They thought people would want improved sound on a hard disc, turns out they want to download a file at only 128kbps.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
Bert,
So much is going on with Bluray disc music, it is off your radar, and has no chance of following in the footsteps of DVD-A. There is FAR too much support for that to happen.
well, might very well be...
but no one actually cares except a small amount of freaks like us.
and even if they do "care", they don't know.
And by the time they care and/or know about blu ray audio discs, everyone is downloading music on the Internet.
and btw: What support? "there are much titles available out there on blu ray audio?" yeah, they were there too for DVD-A and SACD, and see where they arrived now...
Quote:
Streaming is doing well, but not for high resolution music. You are overselling vinyl, that is for sure. Many of us have turned the page on that medium, and there is no chance of us going back. Digital is here to stay for the masses, and vinyl will remain a niche.
not yet, but even you might be surprised. I mean, we can stream 1080p movies over the internet without a problem, so I guess music won't be any problem at all, just wait and see...
alot of receivers, blu ray players, even dvd players, ... & all media servers have network connectivity, and applications for those are growing quickly...
This is both the "problem" and the advantage of digital. it doesn't need to be on a disc. well, maybe a hard disk, but not a disc-disc, like a blu ray disc...
why be so stuck to a medium? the masses don't want a "large collection" of discs lying around in house, and why should they? they don't care about quality, and they have everything they want on their ipod.
What you're naming with blu ray audio is not revolutionary, it's not spectacular, it's not refreshing, it's not even new. it's just yet again "something different", "just another disc that's taking up space in my living room". Most people won't even notice it (again: except us, audio nuts...).
Face it: for the masses, at the moment there are 2 options: "cd's" or "can I download it for my ipod?", and indeed, that small (but growing) niche market of vinyl nuts (I must admit: like me).
so again, I stick to my point, it's already dead.
and vinyl, even though you and many others (unfortunately) think that it's overrated: it's still here, sales have increased drastically over the years, and (this is important), to my ears (young, good, trained ears), it still sounds the most natural & "true" than all other mediums.
and to all those with the argument that "digital is nearly as good as analog now", well, it's not there yet, the day it will, I'll go digital for sure, but the day isn't here yet.
Keep them spinning,
Bert.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
As far as ripping is concerned, I am with copy protection on this one. Now that we have seen the devistation of the CD and DVD format behind ripping, it becomes impossible for any digital format to get to a point of maturity that LP has gotten to. Once you can rip it, then the freebie thought process just overwhelms the legit thought process. Let's face it, what we can get for free, we don't want to pay for.
Yes! Yes!
very true
and while I support copy protection, in this case, i'd felt ripped off...
why? I go to a shop, buy a blu ray disc album, and come home. I can play it in my blu ray player, but I cannot play it on my ipod. Now I don't own an ipod, because I don't need one, but I do own a laptop with lot's of music on it, easy, when you're working somewhere, and you want some music with you, just grab your headphones...
but the point remains: most people I know own an ipod, and others own other mp3 "and other formats" players. What would they have to do? buy the album twice? once for their blu ray player, and once more for their ipod?
I don't think so...
you could solve this by "adding a free album download", but that kinda kills the purpose of copy protection...
so no thanks...
I've found many new & old titles on vinyl that include a link & code for a free album download, "so you can enjoy your album with your mobile players"...
Great idea!
Just, totally useless on digital formats...
Keep them spinning
Bert.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
As far as ripping is concerned, I am with copy protection on this one. Now that we have seen the devistation of the CD and DVD format behind ripping, it becomes impossible for any digital format to get to a point of maturity that LP has gotten to. Once you can rip it, then the freebie thought process just overwhelms the legit thought process. Let's face it, what we can get for free, we don't want to pay for.
This line of reasoning always reminds me of an episode of The Simpsons in which Homer meets a recording artist (Barry Manilow, if I'm not mistaken) and he says "I'm your number one fan, I taped all your songs off the radio!"...
The RIAA was never able to and will never be able to get every person to pay for every song they listen to... Also, despite all the RIAA's claims that piracy was killing CD sales, the sales statistics just didn't support their claims... I remember when Napster was just gaining popularity and two of my friends introduced me to it... Each of them had downloaded hundreds of songs to their computers and were telling me I was crazy for buying CDs... Here's the thing: neither of them owned more than a handful of CDs before MP3 downloading existed... They just weren't interested in spending money on albums... When it was free, they'd download with wild abandon, but when they had to pay, they'd rather do without...
The idea that all or even most digital pirates are persons who would have otherwise paid for content is nonsense... There's a MAJOR difference between what you would watch or listen to when it is free versus what you would watch or listen to if you had to pay for it...
Copy Protection is just another example of how out of touch the RIAA is with what society wants...
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by basite
well, might very well be...
but no one actually cares except a small amount of freaks like us.
and even if they do "care", they don't know.
And by the time they care and/or know about blu ray audio discs, everyone is downloading music on the Internet.
and btw: What support? "there are much titles available out there on blu ray audio?" yeah, they were there too for DVD-A and SACD, and see where they arrived now...
This is kind of a simplistic response(no offense). There were a multitude of reasons that DVD-A and SACD didn't succeed.
1) Only a segment of the manufacturers supported either. You had a SACD camp, and a DVD-A camp(audio war). That does not exist with Bluray, all of the manufacturers are on board for the format(no competition).
2)Complicated connections. Both DVD-A, and SACD required that you use the analog connection which required 6 cables between the player and the receiver or pre-pro. This was complicated to many folks, and that turned them off. Bluray requires one HDMI cable, and that same cable carries everything you need to explore everything about the Bluray format(i.e high rez music, video, 3D etc)
3)There is already an established familiarity with Bluray disc, that was not there with either SACD or DVD-A. The latter paved the road for multichannel music on disc, and with that people are clamoring for more music on Bluray disc.
4)Bandwidth was a problem with DVD-A, but not with SACD. Bluray disc has bandwidth to spare, one disc able to support everything from 7.1 multichannel to 2.0 channel stereo with no fold down or mix down necessary(as it was with DVD-A). It also does not require a special audio codec like SACD does. PCM audio(which is the basic wrapper for all of audio) is all that is needed, but it also supports DTS-HD Master audio and Dolby TrueHD if you receiver or pre-pro has it.
As to whether one cares about Bluray or not, the answer lies in sales. From what I have been seeing on NDP, sales of Bluray music titles are doing very well, and sometimes quite spectacular. People obviously care about it, even if some others do not.
Quote:
not yet, but even you might be surprised. I mean, we can stream 1080p movies over the internet without a problem, so I guess music won't be any problem at all, just wait and see...
Let us not confuse the wrapper with the actual substance. 1080p on the internet is just the label, it is not technically 1080p. True 1080p requires no filtering whatsoever, but 1080p streams(and only Vudu and Netflix have it by the way), are heavily filtered, heavily compressed, and do not have the visual characteristics of 1080p on disc. There is no way you are going to get the same results with heavily filtered and compressed video traveling through a 10mbps pipeline compared to an unfiltered, slightly compressed video traveling through a 54mbps pipeline. It is not possible. As far as being surprised, no not really. I know the 1080p stream is just a wrapper without the substance.
Quote:
alot of receivers, blu ray players, even dvd players, ... & all media servers have network connectivity, and applications for those are growing quickly...
This is both the "problem" and the advantage of digital. it doesn't need to be on a disc. well, maybe a hard disk, but not a disc-disc, like a blu ray disc...
why be so stuck to a medium? the masses don't want a "large collection" of discs lying around in house, and why should they? they don't care about quality, and they have everything they want on their ipod.
Agreed, but not everyone wants everything on their Ipod. Surveys taken just do not support your comments. When surveys are taken on ownership of the physical disc versus a digital file, the disc always wins. While streaming has become ubiquitous among the tech savvy, that does not describe the masses. While real time streaming(not storage) is easy for everyone, storage is not. Once you start storing what is streamed, the complexities mount. I am not talking about a Itunes drop to a I pod. I am talking high resolution streams to a harddrive, and to your audio system. That is a bridge the masses have not crossed yet, and not many audiophiles either. However, popping a disc loaded with high resolution music(or video) is something that even a 3 year old kid can do.
Quote:
What you're naming with blu ray audio is not revolutionary, it's not spectacular, it's not refreshing, it's not even new. it's just yet again "something different", "just another disc that's taking up space in my living room". Most people won't even notice it (again: except us, audio nuts...).
Face it: for the masses, at the moment there are 2 options: "cd's" or "can I download it for my ipod?", and indeed, that small (but growing) niche market of vinyl nuts (I must admit: like me).
Bert, if it is not revolutionary, can you name another format that can store 1080p film images, 24/192khz audio(and every other variation as well) 3D, and 4K images all on the same disc? Can you name another consumer disc format with 50GB of storage with the ability to grow to 200GB and playable on today's player? While you may downplay Bluray's significance, quite a few others do not. Would you not agree that your perspective is yours, but not everyones?
Quote:
so again, I stick to my point, it's already dead.
and vinyl, even though you and many others (unfortunately) think that it's overrated: it's still here, sales have increased drastically over the years, and (this is important), to my ears (young, good, trained ears), it still sounds the most natural & "true" than all other mediums.
A format that is growing over 100% year over year is not dead, and not even close to it. Vinyl is not growing that fast, and probably never will. Yes sales have increased drastically, but not nowhere near 100% year over year, so it is still a VERY small niche format. Have you listened to every digital format out there? It would appear not based on your comments.
Quote:
and to all those with the argument that "digital is nearly as good as analog now", well, it's not there yet, the day it will, I'll go digital for sure, but the day isn't here yet.
Keep them spinning,
Bert.
I hate to bust your bubble Bert, but digital audio long surpassed what any analog format could do quality wise, and technically as well. 24/192khz surpasses what any analog system can deliver in terms of resolution and quality. DXD wipes analog off the face of the earth. If you have heard any music at 24/192khz and still think vinyl sounds better, then your young hearing is not all that trained. As a person who has actually compared analog and various resolutions of digital in a studio environment with the same recording, I can tell you the only thing vinyl or analog has going for it is a bunch of emotions based on familiarness, and nothing more than that.
What is funny to me is that all of these analog versus digital comparison have been done with the highest resolution of analog, versus the lowest of digital. How fair is that? When you have done a comparison of the same recording in analog(vinyl if you will)versus 24/192khz digital or 24/952.4khz DXD digital files then come talk to me. But if you are using CD as a source of the comparison, you have not heard all digital can deliver, and the comparison isn't all that equal.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ajani
This line of reasoning always reminds me of an episode of The Simpsons in which Homer meets a recording artist (Barry Manilow, if I'm not mistaken) and he says "I'm your number one fan, I taped all your songs off the radio!"...
The RIAA was never able to and will never be able to get every person to pay for every song they listen to... Also, despite all the RIAA's claims that piracy was killing CD sales, the sales statistics just didn't support their claims... I remember when Napster was just gaining popularity and two of my friends introduced me to it... Each of them had downloaded hundreds of songs to their computers and were telling me I was crazy for buying CDs... Here's the thing: neither of them owned more than a handful of CDs before MP3 downloading existed... They just weren't interested in spending money on albums... When it was free, they'd download with wild abandon, but when they had to pay, they'd rather do without...
This is exactly why copy protection is needed, and exactly what I have stated. There is this stupid belief that we can get everything for free, and it will keep coming. If this mentality was to become standard fare, then it would become impossible to continue recording and distributing music period. Then there would be nothing left to distribute for free, as there would be no reason for a artist to write their music, or a studio to go through the expense of recording it and distributing it.
Quote:
The idea that all or even most digital pirates are persons who would have otherwise paid for content is nonsense... There's a MAJOR difference between what you would watch or listen to when it is free versus what you would watch or listen to if you had to pay for it...
Copy Protection is just another example of how out of touch the RIAA is with what society wants...
The RIAA cannot give society what it wants, or everyone would go out of business and there would be no product. It is just that simple. If society got what it wanted, no commerce would exist. If you were an artists that worked hard to create a product, would you just give it away for free? No way in hell you would. If you were a studio that paid more than a million dollars to record and distribute a product, would you distribute it for free? Hell no you wouldn't, you would go bankrupt after the first product was released. What society wants is unrealistic and just plain impossible.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ajani
...
The RIAA was never able to and will never be able to get every person to pay for every song they listen to... Also, despite all the RIAA's claims that piracy was killing CD sales, the sales statistics just didn't support their claims... I remember when Napster was just gaining popularity and two of my friends introduced me to it... Each of them had downloaded hundreds of songs to their computers and were telling me I was crazy for buying CDs... Here's the thing: neither of them owned more than a handful of CDs before MP3 downloading existed... They just weren't interested in spending money on albums... When it was free, they'd download with wild abandon, but when they had to pay, they'd rather do without...
The idea that all or even most digital pirates are persons who would have otherwise paid for content is nonsense... There's a MAJOR difference between what you would watch or listen to when it is free versus what you would watch or listen to if you had to pay for it...
...
I'm rather torn on this subject. Yes, I agree with Ajani that the position of RIAA and similar bodies that industry revenue loss = no.of pirated copies X retail price is totally bogus.
On the other hand I'm with STtT that it's a proven economic fact that goods and service become available when and only when people in general are willing to pay for them.
Part of the problem is that the recording industry is pricing their download copies 'way too high. IMO, there would be a lot less piracy of songs if they were, say, 20 cents a download instead of a buck. What's more, it's likely their total revenue would actually increase -- in microeconomic terms, the demand is a lot more flexible than they assume, especially when you take into consideration non-NA and European countries where $1 is still a whole lot of money.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
This is exactly why copy protection is needed, and exactly what I have stated. There is this stupid belief that we can get everything for free, and it will keep coming. If this mentality was to become standard fare, then it would become impossible to continue recording and distributing music period. Then there would be nothing left to distribute for free, as there would be no reason for a artist to write their music, or a studio to go through the expense of recording it and distributing it.
The RIAA cannot give society what it wants, or everyone would go out of business and there would be no product. It is just that simple. If society got what it wanted, no commerce would exist. If you were an artists that worked hard to create a product, would you just give it away for free? No way in hell you would. If you were a studio that paid more than a million dollars to record and distribute a product, would you distribute it for free? Hell no you wouldn't, you would go bankrupt after the first product was released. What society wants is unrealistic and just plain impossible.
Tell that to Google... The problem remains that the RIAA is unwilling to get with the times... The typical approach to pricing is the issue... Also the RIAA is just plain greedy and that is a major part of the problem... The pricing for CDs, and in more recent times downloads, has always been a joke... There has never been a real justification for why the prices for albums are so high... So the RIAA geniuses think that high prices and trying to prosecute every pirate is the answer... Good luck with that... Younger generations get that money can be made without charging directly for a service... Just check out the Vloggers on youtube... I would suggest going to youtube and looking up Philip DeFranco or Ray William Johnson, then you'll see persons making money by giving their content away for free... Also look at what Google does...
Even if the RIAA doesn't want to be as radical as Google and distribute for free (which doesn't mean not making loads of money BTW), they should at least consider charging a sensible price for downloads/unlimited streaming... Customers will pay if the price isn't ridiculous...
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feanor
I'm rather torn on this subject. Yes, I agree with Ajani that the position of RIAA and similar bodies that industry revenue loss = no.of pirated copies X retail price is totally bogus.
On the other hand I'm with STtT that it's a proven economic fact that goods and service become available when and only when people in general are willing to pay for them.
Part of the problem is that the recording industry is pricing their download copies 'way too high. IMO, there would be a lot less piracy of songs were, say, 20 cents a download instead of a buck. What's more, it's likely their total revenue would actually increase -- in microeconomic terms, the demand is a lot more flexible than they assume, especially when you take into consideration non-NA and European countries where $1 is still a whole lot of money.
Here's the thing: I have never suggested just giving away content out of the goodness of your heart... The RIAA just needs to adjust their revenue model and they could still make a killing by "giving away" content (see my previous post to Sir T on Google and Youtube Vloggers)... Or at least, as you rightly suggest, charging a reasonable price...
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
Bert, if it is not revolutionary, can you name another format that can store 1080p film images, 24/192khz audio(and every other variation as well) 3D, and 4K images all on the same disc? Can you name another consumer disc format with 50GB of storage with the ability to grow to 200GB and playable on today's player? While you may downplay Bluray's significance, quite a few others do not. Would you not agree that your perspective is yours, but not everyones?
A hard disk drive...
and about the comment regarding "simplicity of use"....
I don't know how old your children, or grandchildren are, if you even have any, but I've seen more than enough 3 and 4 year olds working with simple versions of a pc, very similar to what one can find on a media center. I've seen kids too young to be able to properly write walking around with cellphones and MP3 players, perfectly being able to use them, and if they can do that, it's only a tiny step to media servers & centers.
and on the other end, i've seen and read more than enough stories & experiences from people who's kids have ruined their cd/blu-ray/DVD/VHS/whatever because they simply wouldn't understand that the darned thing was not a toaster.
And while I still disagree about blu ray audio being the next big thing: I most certainly didn't disagree about the fact that it was better than a cd. as a disc format, blu ray is most certainly appealing.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
This is exactly why copy protection is needed, and exactly what I have stated. There is this stupid belief that we can get everything for free, and it will keep coming.
while it is most certainly necessary to lower piracy, copy protection is NOT the way to do it IMHO.
There is not a single copy protection that hasn't been cracked yet, and there probably won't be any, any time soon, without making things so complicated people won't even bother buying albums or movies anymore.
Right now, copy protection is only pissing off the fair & honest buyers trying to put their latest album on their pc or ipod...
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ajani
Here's the thing: I have never suggested just giving away content out of the goodness of your heart... The RIAA just needs to adjust their revenue model and they could still make a killing by "giving away" content
I don't have a dog in the fight regarding the format discussion going on here but AJ does make an interesting point regarding pricing.
I am curious if the model for developing and sustaining bands has changed dramatically enough that the costs to the music companies are not what they were say 30-40 years ago. As I have always understood it back in the day the music company put alot of money out up front finding, developing and promoting the artist. Now it would seem to me that the internet and technology has taken alot of the cost of that out of equation. At the same time radio is no longer a viable option for music companies to introduce new talent and music videos add a cost dimension. Is the net result of these changes substantial enough to lower cost-raise cost or have no affect on cost?
I do know that back in the day the record stores used to have "cut-out" bins where alot of new artist or relative unknowns would end up at half to a third of the cost of other LP's. I am really not aware of a similar situation with CD's or other content and maybe that is somewhat AJ's point. People would often "discover" someone in the "cut-out bin" and then go out and start buying the artists newer stuff at the higher price point. I guess you could argue that iTunes and similar venues somewhat meets that model but I am not sure it is quite the same.
-
not only has the internet made things easier for all, the cost of producing the physical product dropped dramatically with the change to cd from vinyl which is fraught with physical problems such as cutting master acetates. ad infinitum.
dont get me wrong, i LOVE vinyl and still buy new releases of such (like the boz scaggs 'speak low' jazz release). CDs are dramatically cheaper to put out and now even less money ends up in the hands of the artist.
perhaps the impending death of sacd has more to do with the financial risks to be taken by the record companies.
|