[doug s.]

Back to the purpose of this thread.....

Is anyone signing the petition?

i hope everyone would rather sign a petition to deep-six it.

ymmv,

doug s.

[Hantra]

Back to the purpose of this thread.....

Is anyone signing the petition?

i hope everyone would rather sign a petition to deep-six it.

ymmv,

doug s.

Screw SACD and screw DVD-A!  I'd sign anything saying screw them both!

 

[Bingenito]

This is good stuff. I hope Sony is reading this thread. You can only screw people so hard before they screw you back.

So to Sony   Screw You

[coleco]

Firstly I don't think the average person doesn't care about high quality. Actually I think they do if it's accessable and cheap and easy to use... ie, they will buy the more expensive reciever and Polk Audio speakers if they think it will sound better. 'Better' I think for the average person is really a general term, they may not understand the technical side, and that's really the difference.

To be honest most companies don't deliver the goods in terms of affordable quality, and as a consequence people don't care cause when they do a listen test and Best Buy, everything sounds the same.

High-rez is a good thing I think, people with embrace it if again, it's easy and the selection is there. 16 bit is crap, anyone that says 16 bit is adequate also probably says retarded stuff like you can't hear the difference with a source that been run through a 16k low pass filter, mp3s sound good, or all amps sound the same.

Problem with recordings on CD is mostly in the mastering.. CDs sounded shitty when they came out cause the idiots didn't re-master the recording for the format.

SACDs probably sound better cause the limited selection represents 'flagship' recordings that have been properly mastered.. when a new high-rez format is widely adopted the same thing will probably happen as what happen when cds came out, they'll just throw the recordings on.

Most records don't even utilize redbook to it's potential.. there's a lot of dynamic range that my pimped out system can handle, but most 'pop' recordings are compressed to shit they sound like crap anyway cause most music is mastered to sound good on a tinny car radio.

[doug s.]

Firstly I don't think the average person doesn't care about high quality. Actually I think they do if it's accessable and cheap and easy to use... ie, they will buy the more expensive reciever and Polk Audio speakers if they think it will sound better. 'Better' I think for the average person is really a general term, they may not understand the technical side, and that's really the difference.

To be honest most companies don't deliver the goods in terms of affordable quality, and as a consequence people don't care cause when they do a listen test and Best Buy, everything sounds the same.

High-rez is a good thing I think, people with embrace it if again, it's easy and the selection is there. 16 bit is crap, anyone that says 16 bit is adequate also probably says retarded stuff like you can't hear the difference with a source that been run through a 16k low pass filter, mp3s sound good, or all amps sound the same.

Problem with recordings on CD is mostly in the mastering.. CDs sounded shitty when they came out cause the idiots didn't re-master the recording for the format.

SACDs probably sound better cause the limited selection represents 'flagship' recordings.. when a new high-rez format is widely adopted the same thing will probably happen as what happen when cds came out, they'll just throw the recordings on.

Most records don't even utilize redbook to it's potential.. there's a lot of dynamic range that my pimped out system can handle, but most 'pop' recordings are compressed to shit they sound like crap anyway cause most music is mastered to sound good on a tinny car radio.

the average person "thinks" they care about high quality sound.  which is why they all think cd sounds better than winyl.  and which is why they're all running out buying ipods in droves, downloading mp3's off the 'net, & raving about how great it sounds.  bottom line - the average person doesn't give a rat's ass about high quality sound.

but, this is no different than audio *ever* was, since the inception of recorded sound.  those of us who want the *best* sound are on the fringes.  the only difference is that, prior to the inception of the cd in 1983, those driving the industry were interested in making the best sound possible, to extract dollars out of the *average* audio consumer.  now, the industry is *only* interested in generating more revenue from developing something cheaper to manufacture.  if it sounds better, it will be a mere coincidence.  in fact, if it doesn't sound *worse*, it will be a mere coincidence.  "hi-rez" will happen *only* if mfr's think they can produce the software cheaper than they can now, & sell it for more money than it costs now.  they have no incentive to re-vamp the entire manufacturing chain yust for better sound.  which is why sacd & dvda are both dead, for audio.  

the industry cannot make more on "hi-rez" than they presently make on cd's, & the industry won't take the financial hit to make the infrastructure inwestment for something as stupid as "better sound".  

mp3's have a *much* better chance of becoming the next mainstream format than hi-rez.  the majority of folk think it sounds great, & the profit potential is greater than even that for cd.  in the future, the lunatic fringe audiophiles w/cd players will be thought of much in the same way most folk think about those of us who still prefer spinning winyl.  the masses will yust be downloading their compressed crap off the web onto their computers.

ymmv,

doug s.

[hmen]

It's very simple. Convenience and miniturization are more important to the average consumer than sound quality. That's why ipods and bose are so successful.

[rosconey]

only because they dont understand sound quality-till they hear good sound they are ignorant fools who buy whats advertised the most

[doug s.]

only because they dont understand sound quality-till they hear good sound they are ignorant fools who buy whats advertised the most

most folk - even when they *do* hear good sound - yust do not care.  even those who recognize it is in fact better.  while they may be ignorant fools, there is the possibility that they *aren't* ignorant - they yust may not be interested in seriously listening to prerecorded music.  'course anyone not interested in listening to prerecorded music is a fool!  

doug s.

[Rocket]

Hi Guys,

Can someone inform me what Xr Cd is?

Regards

Rod

[Bingenito]

XRCD info

http://www.xrcd.net/Shopping/process.asp

[BeeBop]

It's very simple. Convenience and miniturization are more important to the average consumer than sound quality. That's why ipods and bose are so successful.

Very true. Most of those who are interested in good sound only take themselves to the point where they can say and think that they have a great system. So the most successful audio equipment companies are the ones who have the biggest advertising budget. The average consumer doesn't invest the time, money and effort that an audiophile does. Most have other enthusiasms. Sony and many other companies seem to live in some sort of Wizard of Oz world where everybody is willing to lay out megabucks to buy speakers, multichannel electronics and replace their entire collection (again). I have actually seen people enthusing about 10 channel systems. Good grief.

uh beebop...  ya forgot one - redbook cd.    
proof that sony *can* make a crappy product become dominant - *if* it's in their financial interest to do so.    

Shouldn't that be "cwappy"?.

CD became successful because it is an open standard - unlike Beta, minidisc and SACD, which Sony and Philips tried to keep to themselves. This forced others to come out with competing formats. As far as CD quality goes, we now have CD players that do a very good job of reproducing sound; recording quality has improved considerably in the last 10 years.

There is so much choice of very good music on CD and I can get such good sound from my equipment that I do not see any value in saving SACD. Afraid I am going to have to decline.

[GHM]

I feel SACD is just a compensation for poor play back systems to begin with. The disc are hyped to overcome the quality of the equipment being used.There are now redbook recordings that are just as good when played on a decent front end.

I for one vote No for SACD.

[EMM801]

I feel bad for all those people.  Because none of them are going to get their way.  They're a tiny minority and they're going to be bulldozed by the rest of the market.  Even if 20,000 people signed that thing Sony wouldn't budge.  Their eyes are on the account books, not online petitions.  

With CD we reached the nadair of what Joe Consumer wants from audio.  All They care about is having no surface noise.  Once it was gone they were sold.  None of the other tweaky audiophile stuff beyond that means jac ...

Unfortunately, I agree almost completely with everything nathanm said. The people who don't give a rat's ass about sound quality as long as there is plenty of "thunderous bass" and they don't have to align a cartridge or even brush a needle were well represented in the focus groups which were used to determine the MP3 standard- simply put, how much sound could be thrown away before it bothered enough people to hurt business. And if all that most people are exposed to is sound from highly compressed lossy "perceptual encoded" sources, what incentive is there for hi-res formats? They won't sound much different on the cruddy little earbuds or the "800-watt   car stereo. Nor is there any incentive for equipment makers to improve the performance of their product- or maybe even to continue to make it at all.

First time I heard a good audio system, which was long before digital, the hair stood up on the back of my neck. It sounded real. And it wasn't a "high end" system by a longshot either- a pair of AR4a's, budget Dual turntable, Shure M91E like 1,000,000 others. It made me stop in my tracks. By contrast, most HT's I hear, even "hi-end" stuff, with their highly compressed lossy Dolby Digital and THX sound, just make me want to keep walking.

Audio today is all about selling you a box with as many lights and buttons as possible, playing through as many speakers as possible, preferably with hi-dollar cables to hook it all up. Companies like Radio Shack and Best Buy sell Monster speaker/welding cables to people on the claim of better sound! Just think how good those MP3's will sound now...

[BeeBop]

Yeah. When you go into one of the places that sell these rigs and ask for a demo the first thing they do is crank the volume waaaaay up.

[-Richard-]

The entire purpose behind the creation
of SACD was to create a media that was
"copy protected"...Sony and all the corporations
now dominating the world of enterprise at the
moment have a green light to privatize our lives
in the most insidious ways imaginable...

Those who are informed of this creepy
attempt to take over our lives do not think
this is merely a low grade paranoia...
but a fact of life we will have to address
collectively sooner than later...
corporations for example are attempting
to control all the water sources in the world
as I write this and that means that one day
you will not be able to simply turn on the tap
water to fill your thirst but  will have to pay
increasing sums just to satisfy your bodies
need for water...as William Burroughs said
"paranoia is knowing all the facts."

I have a very serious issue with encoded
copy "blockers" that are designed to prevent
the copy of data on the SACD...

I do not like corporations following me
into my living room and guarding a
product that I purchased with my own
money...why shouldn't I be able to rip
CD's and download them into an i-pod
for example for my own enjoyment...not
to give to another mind you but to enjoy
myself in the privacy of my own room...

Young people are not stupid. They look
at the price of an SACD disk that cost perhaps
a few thousand dollars to produce and then
compare that price to a DVD film that cost
millions and millions of dollars to produce
and see they are close to the same price and
realize they are being ripped off by the music
companies.

We have been conditioned to accept these
outrageous prices for SACD's as "normal"...
it is not at all normal and is indeed outrageous.

Sony has enough money to give away all there
SACD's to every one on earth and not even notice
it on their balance sheets at the end of the year...
so why not drop their prices to a realistic $6.00 a
pop...then you would not need to worry over
SACD as a viable alternative media...

I like CD's! I like that any one can produce them
in their garage and get pretty good sound from them...
I own several self-made CD's from jazz musicians
and folk artists that sound damn good!!!!

It is cheap to make and accessible and so far has not
been as insidiously "treated" with copy protected
encoding as SACD is...although unfortunately that
also is changing...

And I agree with BeeBob and GHM that CD sound "...has improved
considerable over the years..." and "...There are now redbook recordings
that are just as good when played on a decent front end..."
nicely said...

With my Omega 8's and a my tubed pentoid amp what I
hear with the lowly CD rivals vinyl in every important way...

Warm regards -Richard-

[Dokter_doug]

Easy to tell who has actually listened to an SACD recorded with a true high-res source, played back on an excellent surround system, and who hasn't.

Never let a lack of information prevent you from offering an opinion...that's my motto. Or whas it...Contempt prior to investigation is an impediment to all learning?

Doug

[PhilNYC]

Easy to tell who has actually listened to an SACD recorded with a true high-res source, played back on an excellent surround system, and who hasn't.
Doug

I'd be curious to see who you would list as having heard SACD per your comment here and who hasn't among the people who have responded to this thread.....

[SWG255]

I think this thread is interesting because of what it says about us, the "audiophiles" or "audio-fools" who care about music reproduction. First, we can't seem to have such a discussion without heaping scorn on one-another's choice of musical formats or equipment. If we can't agree on what we want from our music systems and the media to play on them, how can the record companies?

All of that aside, i did sign the petition, more as a lark than as anything meaningful. It is obvious that only money will influence the media providers to make and support a media format. When one looks at the entertainment market as a whole, the money audiophiles spend is irrelevant, and all our wining about the loss of SACD, the eventual demise of vinyl or whatever other media format one names won't really matter. Fortunately there have always been small media companies interested in producing the best possible sound quality, whether it was the Lp, direct-to-disc, pre-recorded open-reell tape, SACD, DVD-Audio, or the next "hi-res thing", there will be something for us to listen to.

I was an early adopter of SACD, although not on the bleeding edge. I bought my SACD player because it was time to replace my old redbook player, and I figured I'd hear an improvement with both CD and SACD discs. I did and still do. I've modified my Sony SCD-1, and really enjoy music reproduced on it. So, as long as there are SACDs I'm interested in, I'll buy them. i'll also still buy CDs, and one of these days, maybe a "blue-ray" or whatever new-fangled player to play that next big thing.

Signing the petition is like spitting in the wind, but kicking back and listening to tunes is why I spend the money, and I'll be happy to do that in whatever format brings me pleasure as long as i can hear the differences well enough to justify the time, money and effort.

I think we should stop grousing at one another and get on with enjoying the music!

[Dokter_doug]

I'd be curious to see who you would list as having heard SACD per your comment here and who hasn't among the people who have responded to this thread.....

Hmmmm...now having logged onto that link in your signature...

[doug s.]

Easy to tell who has actually listened to an SACD recorded with a true high-res source, played back on an excellent surround system, and who hasn't.

no it's not - you yust *think* it is.  prolly cuz you don't let a lack of information prevent you from offering an opinion.  

Never let a lack of information prevent you from offering an opinion...that's my motto. Or whas it...Contempt prior to investigation is an impediment to all learning?

Doug

which is it?  ya can't have it both ways...  

ymmv,

doug s.