Post by HV January 23, 2009 (141 of 321)
|
|
DSD said:
Hi HV,
I checked out the site and it says you can get downloads in the FLAC format for $2.00 extra but it does not say what resolution? The way the FAQs read I am guessing it is lossless 44.1kHz FLAC. Hi-Rez FLAC files are usually 24 Bit 96kHz and I can't seem to find any of those at www.zunior.com
Thanks in advance,
Teresa
www.zunior.com is only 44.1 kHz 16 bit Flac download . No Hi-res at this moment.
|
|
|
Post by raffells January 24, 2009 (142 of 321)
|
|
TerraEpon said:
It's xenophobic to follow the law?
I mean, I think it's really silly that you can import a disc but can't DL just because of where you are physically sitting, but /xenophobic/ is insulting to them, when it's not their fault one bit. Copyright laws are so messed up and so different between countries, that legal digital DLs need to have location restrictions.
Thanks for your considered reply.
I was just highlighting that the situation and attitudes have not changed much in certain parts of the Free world?.Over 50 years ago it was almost impossible to get vinyl 45s or lps from over there without huge restrictive tarrifs both on export and import duties.It was no suprise that Liverpool (a passenger port ) was the hub of music in the UK.
It would also not be so bad if America did not persue action outside their own boundries in protecting their own set of rules re copyright.Suggest you look at some Torrent forums.? Interesting to know if the same applies in reverse.
However It was meant as a further reminder to follow up on Bissies earlier comment on another thread re USA having a different set of rules to the rest of the world re their sacds.
As with most things thereare many ways around it.Nowadays for great travellers the problems is easily overcome and as you have said ,it makes their individual copyright laws an ass.Its even easier via internet means.
It must be a touchy subject in certain places and knowhere in its "Oxford" description does it imply that its an insulting word?.,
Dont know how the term "Everybody" could be interpreted from my comments.Just over reaction?.
Their are a lot of people on this forum who dont declare their wherabouts ? I am curious as to why that is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
bissie said:
Hello,
this is Robert from BIS, aka bissie.
In the current business climate even we have to look at bean-counting.
Since we release all our SACD:s as Hybrids and since we don't charge a premium, but absorb the extra costs for recording, editing, mastering and production of an SACD, selling at the same price as a RBCD,
*I would be extremely interested in knowing how many EXTRA copies we sell because of the SACD option.*
Dear Robert,
I for one no longer buy RBCD's (unless there is an overriding reason). I have quite a collection of over 2000. Started in 1983. So I have more than I can practically listen to. The main reason for shifting to SACD is the recorded quality. I am unfortunate in that I seem to be more sensitive to distortion than others. Especially the older RBCD's now sound so ugly that I no longer listen to them. In spite of the artistic content. And, perhaps most important: As my hearing gets worse (I'm 69) I seem to be profiting from the higher resolution of SACD. An enourmous help! Over the last couple of years I have bought / replaced some 500 titles. Now, let me be clear as to the SACD quality: It is not all gold that blinks out there. Unfortunately, some labels don't seem to be up to the mark and some (no names) cheat as far as I can judge. BIS stand out, as do some other well known labels in this field (most of us know which one's), and also quite a number of smaller labels! I do realise that, not only under the actual economic situation, but also because of the iPod-mania, the ripping and the illegal copying over the internet, producers of quality stuff face stiff and unequal competition. That's most regrettable. (I have often wondered why producers have not 'en masse' changed over to the SACD format, sice they can be played on an ordinary CD player and.. cannot be copied). BIS, KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK. GO ON PRODUCING SACD TO THE SAME HIGH STANDARD. I WILL REMAIN A FAITHFUL CUSTOMER. IF YOU WERE TO STOP I WOULD NO LONGER BUY. Does that answer your question? Sorry for this lengthy reply and the funny English. It is not my mother tongue!
Best wishes,
Adrian (Blangy-le-Château, France)
|
|
|
Post by Peter January 25, 2009 (144 of 321)
|
|
Your English is far less funny than my French!
To add to Dave's point about the US's take on copyright - it does come across very much as provincial to me. I own the copyright to a collection of works; it seems people in the US can publish these without any reference to me, nor pay any royalties. The legal costs on any action I consider will be nearly infinitely more than monies due to me.
|
|
|
Post by bissie January 25, 2009 (145 of 321)
|
|
Peter said:
Your English is far less funny than my French!
To add to Dave's point about the US's take on copyright - it does come across very much as provincial to me. I own the copyright to a collection of works; it seems people in the US can publish these without any reference to me, nor pay any royalties. The legal costs on any action I consider will be nearly infinitely more than monies due to me.
Dear Peter,
not really the theme of this thread, but I can help you there:
the copyrights in the US are 95 years AFTER FIRST PUBLICATION IN THE US.
If a work hasn't been published there it is not copyrighted - there.
You need to get in touch with HFA (Harry Fox Agency) and register your works or contact some publisher there with own possibilities of cashing in copyrights, who will register the works, and then you can lean back and count the Dollars.
Best - Robert
|
|
|
Post by Peter January 25, 2009 (146 of 321)
|
|
bissie said:
Dear Peter,
not really the theme of this thread, but I can help you there:
the copyrights in the US are 95 years AFTER FIRST PUBLICATION IN THE US.
If a work hasn't been published there it is not copyrighted - there.
You need to get in touch with HFA (Harry Fox Agency) and register your works or contact some publisher there with own possibilities of cashing in copyrights, who will register the works, and then you can lean back and count the Dollars.
Best - Robert
Robert
Many thanks for your advice - much appreciated.
Peter
|
|
|
Post by Aeryn Sun January 25, 2009 (147 of 321)
|
|
I would have to agree with most here, if it isn't in SACD format, I'm probably not going to buy it. The movement to SACD has reinvigorated my music buying insofar as I have quite a few recordings in RBCD format already, that have been carefully chosen with regards to the quality of the conducting, with sound a secondary requirement. Among my favorite recordings of standard fare in RBCD are the Mercury Living Presence recordings, which opened my eyes to musical fare that I would not have normally purchased. The same is now true for SACD, I am buying carefully to replace my RBCD (where possible) collection, and I am finding new music that I was unaware of that I am now enjoying. It seems to me incredible that more back catalog material is not released in SACD format, I would think it a real money maker for the industry. Surely the RCA Living Stereo recordings did well for RCA. One point to note, the industry did engage whole heartedly in the Quad thing in the '70s, and I am guessing that the industry saw it as a good thing, otherwise all of the many recordings would not have been made. And the industry has moved to recording at higher bit rates for years, as well as re-releasing older material in 20 bit or higher resolution that is then downsampled to RBCD, not rebuying that nonsense! While I would not dump my Furtwangler recordings, I find that the SACD format material to be more rewarding soundwise, and there is new material coming out that increases my interest enough to part with my ever-dwindling cash supply to experience the music in a more satisfying manner, after all, thats what it is about, yes?
|
|
|
Post by fagior68 January 26, 2009 (148 of 321)
|
|
DSD said:
Hi Robert,
I do not buy ANY Redbook CDs ever as I do not like how they sound and they provide absolutely no enjoyment for me. Indeed just the opposite Redbook CDs have a high level of listener fatigue. The strings are strident, and the overall sound is cold and dry. Some CDs are worse than others but none are what I would characterize as good.
I love BIS SACDs but I am sorry to say I would purchase zero BIS CDs.
I would say 95% of my purchases are SACDs. The remaining 5% is divided by DVD-Audios, 24 Bit 96kHz DVDs and 24 Bit 96kHz hi-rez downloads.
Some of those colleagues of yours such as Hyperion I believe made the wrong choice, they will get no music sales from me and I think they will lose big in the long run. But that is just my opinion. I enjoy the Hyperion SACDs I have and it is a shame there won't be anymore.
If the choice is a price increase or losing the SACD layer I would pay the price increase.
Hope this helps,
Teresa
Totally agree. Better a price increase than loosing SACD layer.
|
|
|
Post by bissie January 26, 2009 (149 of 321)
|
|
fagior68 said:
Totally agree. Better a price increase than loosing SACD layer.
Well, as I have said many times now, single inventory makes a price increase impossible.
May I take this opportunity to thank everyone that has taken the time to answer to this thread. It is nice to know that there is a hard-core fraction of the music-buying public that really care - like we do - about sound quality. The bad news obviously is that this fraction is so small that it alone cannot compensate for the extra costs of producing SACD:s to even a small part.
We will have to have a long and hard think about this, since times aren't particularly good for the music business, either. On the other hand, we are so proud of our recordings that it feels almost like cheating to bring them out in any other medium than the ultimate. Let's see how long we can keep this up. Your faithful custom will/would/could certainly make a difference.
Best - Robert
|
|
|
|
|
|
bissie said:
Well, as I have said many times now, single inventory makes a price increase impossible.
May I take this opportunity to thank everyone that has taken the time to answer to this thread. It is nice to know that there is a hard-core fraction of the music-buying public that really care - like we do - about sound quality. The bad news obviously is that this fraction is so small that it alone cannot compensate for the extra costs of producing SACD:s to even a small part.
We will have to have a long and hard think about this, since times aren't particularly good for the music business, either. On the other hand, we are so proud of our recordings that it feels almost like cheating to bring them out in any other medium than the ultimate. Let's see how long we can keep this up. Your faithful custom will/would/could certainly make a difference.
Best - Robert
Well, don't give it up, Robert. I was the one who complained to you about Musical Heritage Society. Those discs are going back to them because they aren't SACDs.
|
|
