Post by Sam November 24, 2007 (51 of 62)
|
|
Dan Popp said:
So my take is that the old saw, "you can't write on a CD with a ballpoint pen" is a myth. You can certainly *write* whatever you like on the top of the CD with no damage. What you can't do is treat the CD like a piece of wood and the pen like a pocketknife and make a carving in it, and expect it to play normally.
Thanks for reporting the results of your experiments. I agree completely that it is "engraving" which is the problem and not the ballpoint pen per se. It's just that using a ballpoint makes "engraving" possible and tempting, since it doesn't write very well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And back to high-res music rather than the old debate about the robustness of CD's?
Has anyone actually downloaded high-res music and did they get desired results?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post by Lindberg December 22, 2007 (54 of 62)
|
|
As a supplement to SACD we are considering to offer the 2L-catalogue as high resolution audio files. Prior to entering a commercially available download service we invite you to join us in a test. Please share your practical experience and feel free to suggest alternative encodings to us. Enjoy the music!
http://www.2L.no/hires/index.html
|
|
|
Post by Stanbury December 22, 2007 (55 of 62)
|
|
Lindberg said:
As a supplement to SACD we are considering to offer the 2L-catalogue as high resolution audio files. Prior to entering a commercially available download service we invite you to join us in a test. Please share your practical experience and feel free to suggest alternative encodings to us.
The FLAC in 5.1 24/96 of Mozart (9:24 min track), takes about 35 min to download over my "hi-speed" internet connection. I would need a faster download method to get really interested in this method of audio distribution.
|
|
|
Post by Lindberg December 23, 2007 (56 of 62)
|
|
Stanbury said:
The FLAC in 5.1 24/96 of Mozart (9:24 min track), takes about 35 min to download over my "hi-speed" internet connection. I would need a faster download method to get really interested in this method of audio distribution.
FLAC 5.1 in 24/48kHz would reduce download time to 50 % - Is that an option? Are there other lossless encodings that we should explore?
|
|
|
Post by raffells December 23, 2007 (57 of 62)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post by Julien December 23, 2007 (58 of 62)
|
|
Stanbury said:
The FLAC in 5.1 24/96 of Mozart (9:24 min track), takes about 35 min to download over my "hi-speed" internet connection. I would need a faster download method to get really interested in this method of audio distribution.
I do not see how that is a problem, especially when you usually wait for days for a CD to arrive. The downloading runs in the background, doesn't influence your computer, and it's not like watching video on Youtube, it will be yours for life!
|
|
|
Post by Stanbury December 23, 2007 (59 of 62)
|
|
Julien said:
I do not see how that is a problem, especially when you usually wait for days for a CD to arrive. The downloading runs in the background, doesn't influence your computer, and it's not like watching video on Youtube, it will be yours for life!
You have a point there! Now, how can I get the signal into my mch audio system? I guess I'll need a 6-channel DAC that can handle a 24/96 FLAC. Any suggestions in the sub-$1K range? Come to think of it, my Denon DVD player (2930) can handle quite a variety of formats. Perhaps I can burn a DVD in a suitable format.
|
|
|
Post by sacd user December 23, 2007 (60 of 62)
|
|
Lindberg said:
FLAC 5.1 in 24/48kHz would reduce download time to 50 % - Is that an option? Are there other lossless encodings that we should explore?
For download possibilities, I suggest you look at www.itrax.com which include several options today.
|
|
