Post by Kieron December 28, 2008 (31 of 92)
|
|
I have been reading this post for several days, how depressing it is becoming, reminds me of the great “Digital” debate, here in the UK during the early 1980s.
A “cabal”of audio journalists, working for a group of now defunct Hi-Fi magazines, together with a well known manufacturer of turntables from Scotland, decided to “rubbish” digital before the public were conned into buying anything “digital”.
The word “Digital” became a feared saying.
Digital could damage your health and play havoc with your sex life. Ugly rumours concerning “dither and jitter” were put about!
Wearing a “digital watch” could ruin your hi-fi system.
The MD of the Scottish turntable manufacturer wrote a review for one Hi-Fi magazine. He described the product as “ridiculous, laughable, could not possibly work and excrable”.
Meanwhile, far away in Gothenburg, Sweden a man was seen coming and going carrying technical looking equipment into the concert hall.
On the 21st, 24th January 1983, 6th, 7th May 1983, 23rd, 24th September 1983, 2nd, 4th February 1984, 10th November 1984, 4th, 5th February 1985, 24th, 28th August 1985, 13th, 14th September 1985, 15th, 16th June 1987 and the 19th August 1987 this man was recording the music of Sibelius with the Gothenburg SO and Neeme Jarvi.
His name? Robert von Bahr! The recording equipment? Sony PCM-F1. The same item “reviewed” by the Scottish turntable manufacturer’s MD.
The review was “ridiculous, laughable and excrable”, not the equipment.
Soon, the turntable manufacturer jumped on the “digital” bandwagon and started producing CD players. For many years now, we have been spared the voice of the “Castlemilk Mafia”.
DSD
The 2½ hour discussion could best be described as “techno snake oil and techno bullshit”
2½ minutes would have been to long!
'Super Audio CD was the closest we ever head to the master tape and what did we do? We buried it”.
Would probably agree with that.
"I agree with you redbook has always sounded awful."
IMHO wrong! How awful? Quantify the awfulness!
The rest of the quotes are puerile and not worthy of any further comment.
Perhaps contributors to this forum might care to reveal any “interest” they have in SACD/CD.
Are you a user? (Drugs, no).
Are you a dealer? (No not drugs).
Are you a distributor? (Oh not again!).
Are you concerned in the manufacture of SACD/CD?
Are you concerned into researching aspects of SACD/CD?
Are you a charlatan?
Which one are YOU?
Ciarain.
|
|
|
Post by DSD December 28, 2008 (32 of 92)
|
|
flyingdutchman said:
The "many of us" who find it uncomfortable are only a few (such as you and a few others such as your parrot Hiro). The multitude of others find it perfectly acceptable (as has been shown in the billions of CDs sold). SACD is certainly better, but use common sense and fact, not idiotic self-delusions. There are great CDs out (such as put out by Ondine, BIS, Chandos, Hyperion, and NAXOS). The cds of the 80s are not the cds of today; neither are the players that play them.
Actually as stupid as your posts are, there is one thing that comes close to being correct and that is there is one thing that is putting the nail in SACDs coffin, BUT it isn't CD...it's called cheap and easy MP3 192kbs downloads. You want to go on a diatribe against CDs, then pick out the true enemy. The reason CD and SACD are dying (and CD is dying or don't you read, listen to the tv, or surf the internet?) isn't because of CDs being more and more popular; it's because cheap low-rez downloads are more and more popular. Evidence of this is in the closing down of numerous record stores--there's only one left in the Seattle area--Silver Platters--and that story is true everywhere around America. Only in Europe and Japan have I heard and seen CD (and SACD) stores still surviving. Even Bmgmusic.com is closing up shop (they no longer accept new members) because of the attack on CD from low-rez downloads.
Honestly, are you as out to lunch in person as you appear here and on Audioasylum? Your idiotic comments regarding cd and your already well-documented trashing and disposing of your SACD collection (twice!!!) and your players is known among most in these parts.
You mention Reinecke (albeit minor piano pieces that are combined with many other composers). Ok, where are his symphonies or his piano concertos--something more substantial than a small smattering of his production? Have you even heard or seen his symphonies or concertos on LP or SACD? I haven't.
You also mention other minor composers, which is all and good; however, there are numerous others that will not see the light of day in my lifetime or yours (you're in your late 50s, right?). The time is now and maybe even tomorrow. You might be dead tomorrow and you've thrown out a huge number of composers simply because they're on CD. That's simply ignorant, Teresa.
Your response is insulting and degrading!
I am sorry you find the sound quality of CD acceptable. How sad! I feel sorry for you that you assault your ears with those dreadful things! I do hope the SACD recording companies release even more of the unknown and little known composers to save you from these dreadful CDs!
If you claim to be a reader of my posts YOU KNOW I have tried plenty of CDs even so-called audiophile CDs from JVC/s XRCD, XRCD2 and XRCD24, MFSL, Reference Recordings, Telarc, Mapleshade, BIS, Ondine and even the budget labels including Naxos and VoxBox.
I value my remaining time on earth and will not have it ruined by anti-musical, poor sounding redbook CDs! There is NO music on CDs for me, none whatsoever. I only have so much money to spend of software and prefer the musical riches on SACD, with the flood of classical SACD releases I will remain happily broke until I shake off this mortal coil.
You do not seem to understand what is going on in the computer world. MP3's started off at 64kpbps, then they moved to 128kbps, next 192kbps, now 320kbps and MP3's days are numbered as the newest is lossless WAV, IAFF and FLAC files at 1,411kbps and 24/96 downloads at 4,608kbps. As computer memory and speed increases low resolution on the internet will be a thing of the past. There is no doubt at all that the computer world is moving to high resolution.
However the world of physical products is a lot shakier. I agree that CDs will eventually disappear due to Internet downloads but if you are purchasing CDs NOW you will be taking SACDs down with it! Remember every CD you purchase does put another nail in SACDs coffin!
Also remember and this is important! The reason I quit SACDs twice was not because of the sound quality! When I didn't actually have an SACD player I said in print and in person that SACD is the finest that Digital has to offer! It was the damn Sony transports not being able to read hybrid SACDs, first in the DVD-S9000ES and in the Xindak SCD-2. All of my trouble with these two playback units are easy to access in a search on the Audio Asylum so there is no need to go into great detail here. Except to say I now have an SACD player with all the TOC reading problems resolved. The past problems with SACD were mechanical only.
I can't throw out a huge number of composers simply because they're on CD because of their work not being available on SACD or LP I would have never heard them. I do not go out of my way to listen to streaming audio of recordings that are not in a format that I can actually listen to and enjoy.
Music for me is about enjoyment and enriching my life. CDs for me is about coldness, indifference and sometimes outright pain, there is NO enjoyment for me in CDs. And to suggest I and others subjugate ourselves to misery at the hands of CD just to make you feel better is perhaps the most insane suggestion you have ever made.
There is nothing ignorant about wanting to actually enjoy the music one listens to!
|
|
|
Post by stipus December 28, 2008 (33 of 92)
|
|
Kieron said:
I have been reading this post for several days, how depressing it is becoming, reminds me of the great “Digital” debate, here in the UK during the early 1980s.
A “cabal”of audio journalists, working for a group of now defunct Hi-Fi magazines, together with a well known manufacturer of turntables from Scotland, decided to “rubbish” digital before the public were conned into buying anything “digital”.
The word “Digital” became a feared saying.
Digital could damage your health and play havoc with your sex life. Ugly rumours concerning “dither and jitter” were put about!
Wearing a “digital watch” could ruin your hi-fi system.
The MD of the Scottish turntable manufacturer wrote a review for one Hi-Fi magazine. He described the product as “ridiculous, laughable, could not possibly work and excrable”.
Meanwhile, far away in Gothenburg, Sweden a man was seen coming and going carrying technical looking equipment into the concert hall.
On the 21st, 24th January 1983, 6th, 7th May 1983, 23rd, 24th September 1983, 2nd, 4th February 1984, 10th November 1984, 4th, 5th February 1985, 24th, 28th August 1985, 13th, 14th September 1985, 15th, 16th June 1987 and the 19th August 1987 this man was recording the music of Sibelius with the Gothenburg SO and Neeme Jarvi.
His name? Robert von Bahr! The recording equipment? Sony PCM-F1. The same item “reviewed” by the Scottish turntable manufacturer’s MD.
The review was “ridiculous, laughable and excrable”, not the equipment.
Soon, the turntable manufacturer jumped on the “digital” bandwagon and started producing CD players. For many years now, we have been spared the voice of the “Castlemilk Mafia”.
DSD
The 2½ hour discussion could best be described as “techno snake oil and techno bullshit”
2½ minutes would have been to long!
'Super Audio CD was the closest we ever head to the master tape and what did we do? We buried it”.
Would probably agree with that.
"I agree with you redbook has always sounded awful."
IMHO wrong! How awful? Quantify the awfulness!
The rest of the quotes are puerile and not worthy of any further comment.
Perhaps contributors to this forum might care to reveal any “interest” they have in SACD/CD.
Are you a user? (Drugs, no).
Are you a dealer? (No not drugs).
Are you a distributor? (Oh not again!).
Are you concerned in the manufacture of SACD/CD?
Are you concerned into researching aspects of SACD/CD?
Are you a charlatan?
Which one are YOU?
Ciarain.
I'm just a man who felt in love with multichannel music 10 years ago.
SACDs are currently the only solution for me to enjoy multichannel music, and I feel very bad when I see the number of releases going down every month.
However, I have a medium range Hifi system, and it's possible that redbook cds sound better on a very high end $$$$$ stereo system than SACDs on my installation.
This means I still have a solution if I want better quality (who doesn't), but I don't have any solution when I want to find and listen to more multichannel releases.
With more and more people having 5.1 "kits" for their home cinema, it's now time to show them how music can sound on a multichannel system, and re-launch SACD !
Furthermore, SACDs have never been cracked... and majors have desesperatly been looking for a way to protect their music from piracy. They now have everything... a market with lot's of families having 5.1 channels home (even if it's low spec), and a way to protect their releases from piracy. And on a low spec system, it's very easy to show that multichannel sounds a lot better !
Hybrid SACD's are also a good solution to have a compressed CD track that can be copied to MP3 players and car audio, and a SACD track with more dynamic for high end audio systems !
However, the current financial crisis won't help... we need to find "mecenes" willing to invest a lot of money in a SACD re-launch because I bet a petition to Sony won't help at all.
Who is ready to organize the ultimate SACD show for a group of multi-billionaire Emirs, persuade them they can't listen to redbook CDs anymore, so that they put some money in a SACD re-launch ?!
|
|
|
|
|
|
If you like noisy and frictions of LPs and RedBookCDs you are part of a blind mass of millions of peoples all over the world. You live like a one Elvis album title: 50 Millions of Elvis Fans Won't Be Wrong,
now translating to New World Order : 50 Millions of Flies Can't be Wrong Eat Faeces... This is a stiky situation, but not in your mind, cause you like Low Rez Music and prefer do not buy the Best.
The real enemy of SACDs is HiRez DownLoad, this system is the Paradise of the Big Companys, because you can lost all yours hard disks and music files in a simple drop voltage, surge voltage, blackout
energy, virus etc... and you will have to buy all the music files again. You will have to made external backup in DLT tape or BluRay disc of all your files, this is much work and few listen time.
If your backup is a mirror image HardDisk, you have no backup and no security, as your HD and HD-Backup are running together.
I work with mainframe computers for 24 years and can tell you this is a real danger, if you do not use a battery NoBreak. If you use a NoBreak the only risk is a defect in the HardDisk itself or HD circuit board
this is rare but can happen. If you agree with a chance to lost all your music files in a second, the PC MusicServer is for you.
Dear SACD lover, please open your eyes : the SACD disc is the real best, and Won't Get Fooled Again !
|
|
|
Post by TerraEpon December 28, 2008 (35 of 92)
|
|
DSD said:
All fine and good but many of us cannot enjoy music on low resolution CDs as to our ears it is extremely uncomfortable and is more like anti-sound and anti-music.
Doesn't make much sense. Especially considering how many people will eagerly recommend /mono/ recordings, even when there's plenty of streo recordings of the same thing (or even on a original soundtrack vs a rerecording of it). I can't imagine that many people are like you (not that many people are like ME, granted.
But your list of composers is all well and good. But even from the ones you have? I admit I'm not /positive/ on these lists, and any points to them would be great...
Daugherty - Metropolis Symphony? Nope.
Gillis - Half of the Albany series? Mope
Gottschalk - Any piano music? Nope.
Gould - Symphony for Winds? Don't believe so
Liadov - How many of his fanstically colorful orchestral music, or his piano music is on SACD?
Massenet (he's obscure? WHAT?) - But the suites? Don't think so. Piano music and especially concerto? Nada. Ballets too.
Minkus - Don Quixote is his best work. Not on SACD
Roussel - Adrianne and Bacchus complete? Don't think so
And again, what about Chaminade? Atterberg? Lecuona? Rangstrom? Lowell Liebermann? JPE Hartmann? Lumbye? Eric Coates?
What of Villa-Lobos's symphonies? What of Tchaikovsky's non-not-based ballets? What of Poulenc's piano music? What of, well, anything by Khachaturian beyond a few single movements of Gayane/Spartacus? Shostakovich's theater and film music? Grainger? Medtner? Rodrigo outside his two popular guitar concerti?
I could really go on forever here, and that's just in the classical music sphere where things actually tend to get rerecorded.
|
|
|
Post by DSD December 28, 2008 (36 of 92)
|
|
TerraEpon said:
Doesn't make much sense. Especially considering how many people will eagerly recommend /mono/ recordings, even when there's plenty of streo recordings of the same thing (or even on a original soundtrack vs a rerecording of it). I can't imagine that many people are like you (not that many people are like ME, granted.
But your list of composers is all well and good. But even from the ones you have? I admit I'm not /positive/ on these lists, and any points to them would be great...
Daugherty - Metropolis Symphony? Nope.
Gillis - Half of the Albany series? Mope
Gottschalk - Any piano music? Nope.
Gould - Symphony for Winds? Don't believe so
Liadov - How many of his fanstically colorful orchestral music, or his piano music is on SACD?
Massenet (he's obscure? WHAT?) - But the suites? Don't think so. Piano music and especially concerto? Nada. Ballets too.
Minkus - Don Quixote is his best work. Not on SACD
Roussel - Adrianne and Bacchus complete? Don't think so
And again, what about Chaminade? Atterberg? Lecuona? Rangstrom? Lowell Liebermann? JPE Hartmann? Lumbye? Eric Coates?
What of Villa-Lobos's symphonies? What of Tchaikovsky's non-not-based ballets? What of Poulenc's piano music? What of, well, anything by Khachaturian beyond a few single movements of Gayane/Spartacus? Shostakovich's theater and film music? Grainger? Medtner? Rodrigo outside his two popular guitar concerti?
I could really go on forever here, and that's just in the classical music sphere where things actually tend to get rerecorded.
Like I said I've only got so much money to spend on music and only 8 hours free each day to listen to music and I'm semi-retired. Imagine how little time working people have to listen to music.
Anyway I buy new SACDs every week and using Zeus's site sa-cd.net and the decent streaming audio player at JPC link from this site I listen to samples of new composers and new works appearing on SACD. That takes many, many hours per week. If I were to actually sample what is also on CD I would never have time to actually listen to music. And in the end it is all about music, SACD offers music for me CD does not. It really is that simple.
|
|
|
Post by wolf359 December 29, 2008 (37 of 92)
|
|
Hello everybody , this is my first post although I have been reading this site or a while. As a comparitivly ancient soul, I was around durng the early 70's when quad discs were available and can remember the public apathy to extra incompatible systems, higher priced discs and dual inventory. There is nothing new today that has already not got a precedent. The general public has always gone for cheapness and convienence over quality. When CDs were invented discs and equipment became mass market the price fell and people bought the items. With SACD there is no percieved difference (to the man in the street)after all they are both very similar looking,both play music. In my local HMV they had a copy of michael Jacksons thriller on SACD a few years ago price £25, in the bargain bin £5.99 as a CD, if you did not know which would you buy? Even if you did know would you consider paying 5 times as much for the SACD, this is one of the reasons for the failure of SACD to take off. Sony and Philips invented SACd not as a benefit to us (but as a way to make extra money for themselves) they probably knew even then that the writing was on the wall for CDs as sales were falling even then . The number of physical outlets for discs of all types continues to drop. this christmas my local zavvi has gone in administration along with woolworths, over the years where I live a city of over 250k people is now dependent for physical goods on the local poor overpriced choice of HMV for physical purchases.
This thread seems to have two strands running through it , how can SACD survive and prosper and the merits of various formats sound quality.
Sony had a small window of opportunity a few years ago to really push the format but got embroiled in a format war with DVDA to nobodys benefit, in addtion the high price single layer disc almost killed the format stone dead , Ironically the one thing in its favour the the difficulty of copying and ripping and SACD was the one thing that many of the younger generation didn't want because of that.
A petition to sony would do no good IMO they must have had similar on the demise of betamax and minidisc. Let us not forget sonys attitude to the consumer they put worms and virus on RBCD to prevent copying which damaged peoples computers. So I belive Sony are out. On the vinyl front I have several hundred discs which have never come out on CD and I am grateful to be able to copy them onto CD
Blu ray sales are very slow in my neck of the woods and are overpriced, I cannot belive that blue ray audio discs will become a serious proposition. They will be very expensive and to the masses because they will not carry pictures wil seem inferior.
That leaves downloaded content and while that seems attracive it is a retrograde step. I like to physically own a disc and buy on impulse besides the act of downloading can take forever, and who knows whatelse you may have to put up with in the future (ads anyone)
The real failure of SACD is that companies such as Universal pulled the plug and bailed out prematurely leaving us who are intrested in pop and rock with very little choice. that combined with endless reissues of new and improved remasters of ancient albums which we may have anyway dosn't help. If CD is dying could we please have a legacy of the best available recordings on the best available format i.e SACD. It would also be nice if the record companies could go back to thier archives from the 70's dust of the orginal quad tape masters and reissue them using modern technology. There are many quad recordings from the 70s which I would buy in a heartbeat but are unlikely to be issued if ever
So for me the choice is transcribing my old vinyl to CD, getting SACDs when and where I can, and a suggestion to go back to the archives and reissue all the SQ QS CD4 albums they way they were meant to be heard (not going to happen sigh!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
FullRangeMan said:
The real enemy of SACDs is HiRez DownLoad, this system is the Paradise of the Big Companys, because you can lost all yours hard disks and music files in a simple drop voltage, surge voltage, blackout
energy, virus etc... and you will have to buy all the music files again. You will have to made external backup in DLT tape or BluRay disc of all your files, this is much work and few listen time.
If your backup is a mirror image HardDisk, you have no backup and no security, as your HD and HD-Backup are running together.
I work with mainframe computers for 24 years and can tell you this is a real danger, if you do not use a battery NoBreak. If you use a NoBreak the only risk is a defect in the HardDisk itself or HD circuit board
this is rare but can happen. If you agree with a chance to lost all your music files in a second, the PC MusicServer is for you.
Dear SACD lover, please open your eyes : the SACD disc is the real best, and Won't Get Fooled Again !
FullRangeMan,
There are some threats but there are also many opportunities in downloads, as long as they are of course not downgraded to 16/44,1kHz. Today many SACD titles are getting out of print, so Sony could make DSD Master files available for on-line download, that way we could finally get them and it wouldn't cost Sony that much as DSD masters already exist, personally I would be most interested in such an option.
Currently, of course the best choice are SACD discs, but I'll be soon uploading DSD layers from my SACD's into Music Server and will read them natively through DSD DAC...
1999 - SACD's
2009 - DSD Studio Master Files downloads
|
|
|
Post by dobyblue December 29, 2008 (39 of 92)
|
|
wolf359 said:
Blu ray sales are very slow in my neck of the woods and are overpriced, I cannot belive that blue ray audio discs will become a serious proposition. They will be very expensive and to the masses because they will not carry pictures wil seem inferior.
That is where you're wrong, because they will contain pictures, videos, interviews, and downloadable content.
It's not going to be for a few more years though...so for now I'll stick with vinyl.
|
|
|
Post by tailspn December 29, 2008 (40 of 92)
|
|
audioholik said:
Currently, of course the best choice are SACD discs, but I'll be soon uploading DSD layers from my SACD's into Music Server and will read them natively through DSD DAC...
1999 - SACD's
2009 - DSD Studio Master Files downloads
You own a Sonoma Workstation?
|
|
