[Johnny2Bad]

How about for cold starts? Better hi rez fuel for cold starts?

Nope. The fuel formulas change depending on season anyway ... they will modify certain components of gasoline, increasing those that vaporize at a lower temp, in winter. That happens no matter where you live ... they modify for your local temps. There is no real ability to "store" gasoline in the system ... you see huge tanks but that's just enough for just-in-time use  ... the fuel at the pump is, at most, three months old, and probably only a month or less. Strange as it may seem, there are bacteria that eat gas (and shit "wax") so it starts go go bad pretty much as soon as it leaves the refinery.

As long as it's relatively fresh gas, run 'er.

The best thing to do in winter to aid starting is to keep the tank no less than half full, and do a full fill when you do add ... that keeps water from condensing on the vehicle's fuel tank walls, where it will eventually end up in the bottom of the tank. I'm speaking as a guy who routinely runs a vehicle in -35~45F in winter, and have never had to use gas-line anitfreeze (basically, methyl hydrate, another way of saying "alcohol").

And now, somewhat back on topic, I'm pretty sure that even if HiRez files cost not a nano-payment more than mp3s, the "masses" would balk at the file size. Go ahead and try to change their way of thinking ... a few will get it ... but in the end it's futile. They're happy with what the have and don't care much anyway. 90% of iPod owners don't know you can play 16/44 on every model. If people "really" cared about quality, Beta would have smoked VHS, LaserDisk would have smoked videotape at BlockBuster, and Wall-Mart would be bankrupt.

[Atlplasma]

I don't know that everyone in the younger generation is a lost cause. We hosted a young couple last weekend, and they had an ipod with a couple of thousand tunes. We talked for a bit about how compression is all about throwing away information that a listener doesn't "need." They kind of got it. When I played two versions of a Rolling Stones album (16/44.1 and 24/192), they could hear the difference. (Throwing a low rez version into the mix would have made it crystal clear, but I didn't want to go through that extra step.)

[vhiner]

Vhiner, no offense but George (zybar) is not asking whether all hirez music is worth it, or if some good redbook outshines some poor or upconverted hirez offerings!  He is asking how one explains the concept of hirez music to the interested bystander (reducing this discussion to "the masses are idiots" is not what George meant). 

Ted,

No offense taken, but I think you've misunderstood the point of my post (or I didn't express my idea clearly enough)

I don't think the masses are idiots at all when it comes to hi rez...by no means. I  certainly do not think of my wife as an idiot because she often hears differences when I make audio upgrades. I think her disappointment in hi res is because it really isn't the HOLY GRAIL some say it is.  The point of my antecdote is that even *I*  don't think hi res experience comes close to the experience of high definition television and I appreciate high rez music. Why set up newbies for disappointment when they're skeptical anyway? You can find threads all over this circle of people pointing out that hi resolution audio is often disappointing because it's so poorly produced. If someone goes to HDtracks and downloads some of the "hi rez" they're selling and expects to have a "high definition TV experience" they're going to feel very ripped off. Respectfully, I don't think the comparison is going to win many converts. That said, I certainly don't begrudge anyone their efforts to interest people in the highest quality sound.

[ted_b]

I am very disappointed that so many AC'ers are willing, in this thread, to voice their concern and displeasure with hirez, and even go as far as saying that the video analogy is "weak" or inappropriate.....yet not one of them offer any better suggestions for helping George explain hirez to his friends and co-workers.  It's easy to complain; but please..then have a solution!

[vhiner]

Ted,

I'm sorry you're disappointed. No one's attacking anyone that I can see, but I would hope there's room here for expressing disappointment with an inanimate medium and the marketing of it. I think high resolution audio can be great. I wish every record company on the planet would start using it tomorrow so that the real pros couls show the world how the technology is properly applied

I understand your and others' frustration over getting others on the bandwagon. It's a challenge when so many don't appreciate the difference between Mp3 and redbook. However, the solution is not going to be telling people that the bandwagon you want them to board is a jet aircraft.

I wish Apple would get involved because they know how to sell ice to eskimos. (no offense to any indigenous people from Alaska intended by that remark) 

[Napalm]

I am very disappointed that so many AC'ers are willing, in this thread, to voice their concern and displeasure with hirez,

As far as I'm concerned I'm not displeased with hirez but with the "quality" standards of the recording studios and the recorded music industry in general.

As for the hi-rez equipment, I think it's worth having it even if you're playing 16/44.1 material. At least for being able, in upsample mode, to move the low pass filter from 22kHz to 44kHz, so its effects on phase would likely be less audible.

As for analogies, SD vs HD video works for me. Problem is that currently the audio industry is using the equivalent of Fisher Price webcams when recording so the results are appalling in either SD or HD format.

Nap.

[vhiner]

As for analogies, SD vs HD video works for me. Problem is that currently the audio industry is using the equivalent of Fisher Price webcams when recording so the results are appalling in either SD or HD format.

Nap.
[/quote]

Good point! Consistent quality would help the product match the marketing.

[sts9fan]

A) the masses don't care
B) it's generally not worth the effort

[ted_b]

Let me rephrase:
I am NOT disappointed that smart AC folks realize hirez is a gamble right now, and that we all see that the whole recording industry is in "whore-mode" (not my words, from a leading recording engineer at CES), and has dumbed down to the Mp3 crowd.  The loudness wars have huge battlefield losses.

What I AM disappointed in is that folks who are criticizing analogies and elevator pitches that George is asking for, are not even offering up a better one! 

There are plenty of other threads here to chat about the dumbing down of the recording industry, and the increase in faux hirez stuff we've been offered to-date (I even have a thread asking to report them)...but this thread is simply to help the OP (and others) come up with an elevator pitch on how to explain hirez (the good stuff, obviously) to the uneducated. 

So, yes, I do agree that the sd vs hd video analogy has holes...some big enough to shoot through.  I also offered the idea of "the live event" being a benchmark of dynamics.  Come up with something better?? 

[vhiner]

One way solutions are discovered is through open exchanges about what will and won't work. A less than perfect idea might spark a better one. Criticism of an idea can help correct a duscussion's course. Too much criticism is pointless. That said,  I personally like the " live event" idea and should've said so. Whether the concept would with "the masses" is another matter.

[Napalm]

Come up with something better??

Sure. Use a portable LPCM recorder to give a live demo. Record together with the "victim" some ambient sounds, voices and whatnot in mp3, 16/44.1 and 24/96. Then play them back using some decent headphones (even good earbuds connected to the recorder will do).  The differences are noticeable.

But if you want analogies. Reel-to-reel tape recorders? Good old ones where you could select 9.52 cm/s or 19.05 cm/s tape speed? (for the metric challenged that's 3¾ in/s and 7½ in/s respectively)? Remember the difference?

Nap.

[nathanm]

If the person doesn't understand the concept of bit depth and frequency then it's not anything you're going to explain quickly, because if they do you just state the number differences between formats.  All you can say is "it's higher resolution".  But if they don't know how digital signals are encoded then you have a much longer explanation.  Personally I don't see a shortcut there.

[ted_b]

Vhiner,
You're right about open discussions.  I'll pull back.  My bad.

Nap,
Good one about reel-to-reel.  But then we have the folks who have never heard reel-to-reel, let alone good ones. 

Nathan,
I think you are more correct than I'd like to admit.  It's not easy, and requires more than a 2 min elevator pitch I guess.  Prolly one reason why it's been a tough product intro (like 5 different times).

[zybar]

If the person doesn't understand the concept of bit depth and frequency then it's not anything you're going to explain quickly, because if they do you just state the number differences between formats.  All you can say is "it's higher resolution".  But if they don't know how digital signals are encoded then you have a much longer explanation.  Personally I don't see a shortcut there.

Which is exactly why I started this thread.   

George

[Napalm]

Which is exactly why I started this thread.   

George

George, would you also have difficulties explaining to that "person" the difference between 64kbps and 256kbps MP3? Or 320x200 vs 1920x1080 video? If yes, then all hope is lost. Only a demo would do.

Nap.

[HAL]

The only analogy that I have is that the difference between MP3 and HiRez is like the difference between a cheap AM radio and a great FM tuner.

Problem is that not many folks these day's listen to AM radio and not many more listen to FM.

There are big differences between streaming Internet Radio stations in sound quality.  Maybe that is a better comparison for new listeners. 

[vhiner]

Hal,

I REALLY like the idea of pointing out the differences in streaming audio on the web qas a way of explaining that bits aren't just bits. I've rarely met anyone who doesn't notice and how crappy some of the Internet radio stations sound and how much better Pandora's feed is. My 72-year-old father is *wild* about Pandora because it "sounds so much better than anything else on the web."  His opinion may not be accurate but you get my point.

[HAL]

That is about the best way to describe the differences that I can think of that most people are familiar with today. 

That is what I will use if asked about HiRez as it is pretty simple. 

[vhiner]

I was just reminded of something a very talented real estate broker told me about sales:

"Be helpful and be friendly, but never lean in for the kiss. Share what you sincerely love about what you're selling, but never try to convince. It always backfires."

That's the best positive advice I have.

[brj]

George, would you also have difficulties explaining to that "person" the difference between 64kbps and 256kbps MP3? Or 320x200 vs 1920x1080 video? If yes, then all hope is lost. Only a demo would do.

Keep in mind that it will be much easier to demo the difference on a system such as Zybar's, who has a well treated room and has expended a lot of effort in research and testing to put together a system that works very well together.  Swapping out a "standard resolution" source for a "hi def" source in such a tuned system will show an immediate difference.  Making such a swap in a "mass market" system in an untreated room may show a difference, but it is unlikely to be overwhelmingly impressive.

Showing off a "hi def" TV is much easier, as the visual improvement over standard definition is immediate and obvious even with a $200 blu-ray player and $750 HD TV.  Room treatments?  Turn out the lights!