High Definition Audio.
 

Don Pearce wrote in message news:49900568.397070406@localhost...
On Mon, 09 Feb 2009 10:25:37 +0000, Roger Thorpe

wrote:

Without starting a debate about whether HD audio is really needed, would
anyone here like to attempt a prediction of the likely sound carrier of
the future?

With something 188 million iPods sold and then all of the competitive
hardware of a similar nature, it would seem that there is a small trend
towards portable digital music players. ;-)

Furthermore, there are claims that the sales of connectivity and
amplification equipment that allow portable players to act as fixed-location
players has exceeded that of all other component audio components (including
speakers) for the past year or more.

I'm not very good at this myself (I said that CDs would never catch on)

I purchased among the very first CD players that were sold in my city.

and backed the SACD horse a few years ago.

I have a *universal* player (SACD,DVD, CD, DVD-A)

I can see that Dolby True HD
and DTS HD are likely candidates for physical media, however the
copy-proof characteristics of SACD were what I thought would make it a
winner for the publishers.

Analog recording is now so good so cheap that as a practical matter, nothing
that can be converted to a line level analog signal is copy-proof.

Is there any activity in a different, secure blu-ray format?

I'm under the impression that Dolby True HD and DTS HD (which are container
file formats, and not just one data format) will be how Blu Ray does audio,
other than the legacy formats. There is interest in *universal* Blu Ray
players.

However, Blu Ray is a physical media distribution format, which makes it
very limited. Downloads of audio and now video are a major trend. It
appears to me that audio without video is a concept that is fading, slowly.

CD already has a definition way beyond that of the human auditory
system, which is why attempts at higher definition have not caught on.

Exactly. DVD-A and SACD were solutions looking for a problem.

Quite the contrary in fact, most recent changes in the delivery of
music have been heading towards lower definition.

There are many conflicting trends. As media and transmission costs come
down, extreme amounts of data compression as a trend seems to be fading
away. The other night I was listening on a web site that offered "limited
resolution teaser downloads of entire songs". I don't know what their format
was, but I was tempted to do an analog capture locally and do just *one*
download.

High Definition Audio.
 

Don Pearce wrote in message news:49910a41.398311562@localhost...

It is pretty much impossible to compare CD to SACD. You will hear
differences, but they are nothing to do with the medium, but rather
the mastering of the recording. SACD releases are, I'm afraid, rather
closely associated with the "smiley face" eq curve which places
greater emphasis on extreme bass and treble. The result is a sound
with a little more fizz and thump which can in the short term sound
better - it soon gets tiring though, I'm afraid.

A relevant comparison that is easy to do, which involves playing a SACD or
DVD-A. Intermittently and under listener control t a device is inserted
that transcodes the "Hi rez" data into CD format. This has been described in
at least two AES papers, and the result was that experienced listeners could
*not* detect the insertion of the transcoder in a blind test.

This test has also been done with live analog music in a recording studio on
several occasions. Same results.

I'm not sure how rapid the adoption of mp3 is for classical music is. It
strikes me that this is the one area where physical media might survive
longer, with the importance of the sleeve notes, particularly the
libretto. But when the CD shops go, I suppose all that will go too.

Brick-and-mortar stores selling music only or music primarily, have
completely disappeared in most parts of the US. Pre-recorded media is still
sold over the web or in regional superstores.

High Definition Audio.
 

On Mon, 9 Feb 2009 07:37:54 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

It is pretty much impossible to compare CD to SACD. You will hear
differences, but they are nothing to do with the medium, but rather
the mastering of the recording. SACD releases are, I'm afraid, rather
closely associated with the "smiley face" eq curve which places
greater emphasis on extreme bass and treble. The result is a sound
with a little more fizz and thump which can in the short term sound
better - it soon gets tiring though, I'm afraid.

A relevant comparison that is easy to do, which involves playing a SACD or
DVD-A. Intermittently and under listener control t a device is inserted
that transcodes the "Hi rez" data into CD format. This has been described in
at least two AES papers, and the result was that experienced listeners could
*not* detect the insertion of the transcoder in a blind test.

Yes, I know that one - one can also record the line out from the SACD
player onto a CD with similar results provided it is done well.
Neither is a trivial matter for a quick home test by the non-technical
though.

d

High Definition Audio.
 

In the past the classical listener was always the early adopter,
driving the technology forwards. That situation existed up to and
including the CD. But the classical listener is generally a little
more intelligent and canny than other music followers, and since the
trend moved away from increasing quality, he has refused to follow.
The early adopters now are generally children listening to highly
compressed pop.

In the past, developments in technology:

* were often big step changes
* required investment in new equipment
* came at a relatively slow pace

New developments:

* are typically more incremental
* require more minor investments in new hardware
* arrive thick and fast

No wonder they tend to be picked up by the kidz.

Daniele
--
Thanks to a non-paying bidder, the world has an amazing second chance
to own a nearly immaculate BMW C1 (Cardiff, UK). Lucky world!

http://search.ebay.co.uk/220356804658

High Definition Audio.
 

Because classical music is generally far more complex and demanding
than modern pop - it takes a greater degree of intelligence to
understand and appreciate it.

That's true.

I was in the car the other day listening to Radio 3. It took all my
moral strength not to get out and walk home (and I was driving).

When I did get home I was staggered to find on the R3 website that the
syrupy, mushy, hollow medley was Rachmaninov's Symphony no. 2. It could
have been a sententious score from a dishonest and tacky film like
Forrest Gump. Listening to it was like having one's face pushed into a
basin of warmed Coca-Cola concentrate.

Not that I'd really consider late Russian Romanticism to be classical
music, but still, it's by a dead white European and performed by people
dressed all funny.

Daniele
--
Thanks to a non-paying bidder, the world has an amazing second chance
to own a nearly immaculate BMW C1 (Cardiff, UK). Lucky world!

http://search.ebay.co.uk/220356804658

High Definition Audio.
 

On Mon, 9 Feb 2009 13:05:31 +0000,
(D.M. Procida) wrote:

In the past the classical listener was always the early adopter,
driving the technology forwards. That situation existed up to and
including the CD. But the classical listener is generally a little
more intelligent and canny than other music followers, and since the
trend moved away from increasing quality, he has refused to follow.
The early adopters now are generally children listening to highly
compressed pop.

In the past, developments in technology:

* were often big step changes
* required investment in new equipment
* came at a relatively slow pace


I think the point is more that in the past the developments were
always towards better sound reproduction - eg 78 shellac became 33
microgroove, which became stereo, which became CD. Along the way there
was the compact cassette which was largely ignored by the classical
audience because it was audibly worse than its peers.

New developments:

* are typically more incremental
* require more minor investments in new hardware
* arrive thick and fast


Since the CD there has not been a single development that has improved
the sound, so none has been widely adopted by the classical listener.

No wonder they tend to be picked up by the kidz.


Well, if they are going to spell it with a z, they deserve what they
get.

d

High Definition Audio.
 

In article , Eiron
wrote:


One annoying thing about MP3 is that files cannot be seamlessly linked.
As many of my albums do not have a period of silence between tracks I
prefer not to have one inserted by the player. The only solution I have
found so far is to copy a time range spanning the required multiple
tracks from the CD using Goldwave or similar.

I can't see any inherent reason why it is impossible for playing devices to
play sequential mp3 files with no gap. Presumably the problem is that none
of them bother to do so as the designers/programers presume 'tracks' and
'songs' not movements or sections from a longer work where they may be no
gap in the music.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Change 'noise' to 'jcgl' if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

High Definition Audio.
 

In article , Arny
Krueger
wrote:
Don Pearce wrote in message news:49910a41.398311562@localhost...


Brick-and-mortar stores selling music only or music primarily, have
completely disappeared in most parts of the US. Pre-recorded media is
still sold over the web or in regional superstores.

Much like that here in a small town in Scotland! I now buy CD and DVD via
web/email/etc. Not in a store. However I do regret the passing of a
friendly local store with stock you can browse. That said, the nearest
physical stores that remain (20 miles away) are stuffed with pop/rock and
play this at mind-numbing levels, deterring me from using them. They have
almost no jazz, classical, or indian music. No point asking the staff which
cycle of VW symphonies they think best. :-)

I also noted last week that our library has shut down its CD loan
collection. You can still borrow books and DVDs, but no longer CDs.

The problem I see in that is the loss of 'try before you buy' for people
who may be looking for music outwith their previous experience. However the
BBC - and now internet radio - may hopefully help cover that.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Change 'noise' to 'jcgl' if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

High Definition Audio.
 

Since the CD there has not been a single development that has improved
the sound, so none has been widely adopted by the classical listener.

I think that the convenience of the CD, rather than its sound quality,
has been the major factor in its success. I don't think people are that
bothered about sound quality on the whole.

Daniele
--
Thanks to a non-paying bidder, the world has an amazing second chance
to own a nearly immaculate BMW C1 (Cardiff, UK). Lucky world!

http://search.ebay.co.uk/220356804658

High Definition Audio.
 

On Mon, 9 Feb 2009 13:50:07 +0000,
(D.M. Procida) wrote:

Since the CD there has not been a single development that has improved
the sound, so none has been widely adopted by the classical listener.

I think that the convenience of the CD, rather than its sound quality,
has been the major factor in its success. I don't think people are that
bothered about sound quality on the whole.


Probably true for a large part of the market, but not for those I was
talking about.

d