Vote

I like to own my music; for that matter I like to own all of my stuff. It feels good working hard for something and then legally owning it, no guilt and extra baggage attached!

It WILL bother me when we reach the recordable DVD-A technology and I will end up being prevented from making copies of the recordings of my own band, whos copyright owner is myself!

If any copy-protection scheme degrades the audio signal, I won't consider buying into DVD-Audio. I'm not interested in making copies; I'm only interested in the highest fidelity this format has to offer. But there's hope: thank goodness Dolby adopted MLP encoding, because Bob Stuart of Meridian has the audiophile's best interest at heart; I'm sure he appreciates what a deal-killer any signal degradation would be.

A bigger question will be whether or not the DVD Audio formats will provide a digital out signal. If they don't, we'll end up with 2 processors - one for DVD Video and a second one built into the DVD Audio transport. Dumb !

Anytime the majors have pushed a copycoding scheme, it has always affwcted sound quality. They could care less about sound, only money matters. If they succeed in get copycoding included, I fear we may be no better off than with the present CD standard.

It only bothers me if the copy-protection afects the sound quality e.g. some types of watermarking.

it can reduse qua lity

I record my collection on cassettes for long trips in the car. If this was not ossible then the format becomes less interesting to me. I must admit that I am in a wait and see mode at present. With all the talk in the press, I have yet to hear any of the new formats. I own two CD players but still listen to LP's over 80% of the time.

It bothers me a little. However, I never have time to make music recordings anymore anyway. I would just play them in the car, work and home ect.

It bothers me a little. When CD began to be recordable, the same issue was brought to mind. Then the audio-grade CDRs were copy-protected. But everybody knows (don't you?) that you can use "professional" or computer-grade CDR and CDRecorders to record pure digital audio. You can also get your consumer recorder modified to handle pro CDRs. So I think it's rather funny to introduce a copy-protection scheme that will be pirated by itself through the computer. Finally, I think that when you really like a singer, you prefer at the end to buy the original record, with the original sleeve and jacket, don't you ? I do.

Only an issue if it degrades the sound

The issue of piracy and copy-protection schemes does not bother me one bit! I do my very best to buy legitimate products and audio software is not the exception. Hopefully, all that will matter is the "sound" of the format. I look forward to the new DVD-A format, but I really hope that the SACD format moves to the forefront. Let's all push the best format, SACD!

Dont let narrow property issues ruin sound progress

What can I do, the small minority who are professional pirates are ruining all digital formats for everyone else.

Assuming the watermarking is COMPLETELY transparent, I wouldn't care a bit. Going towards a DIVX pay per play, however, would completely ruin it for me.

it all depends on the details . . .

Why would I buy the equipment to play anything that includes a watermark, much less replace older CD titles with multi-channel versions that aren't as clean as the CD version. Just because its multi-channel I'm supposed to ignore any watermarking? If it doesn't represent the absolute best digital sound can offer then why bother? Multiple channels of presentation should not represent a reduction of potential. Its not that I want to copy anything, though. If they can incorporate a copy-protection scheme that is audible in the least (like SCMS) then that would be okay.

I don't care as long as I can expect to find transports that provide a digital output for a D/A converter.

Any technological advance (like DAT) is always hindered by those who stand to make or, as they claim, lose the most money. When any format is saddled with any technology that doesn't serve that format's purpose, everyone loses. And then, to add insult to injury, the powers that be decide that it's not the profit-guard---excuse me, COPY-guard technology that consumers don't want, it's high quality we don't care for. And mediocrity reigns supreme.

Lets get it on!

This bothers the hell out of me! I wouldn't even consider the new format unless I can get HIGH-END separates. No single-box crap for me!!!!

I have no problem with a copy-protection scheme that would limit bit-for-bit digital recording to one generation, but more radical methods alarm me somewhat. I would still like the freedom to copy my own media with freedom and ease, and see no reason why this right should be taken from me. We must remember that a right is much easier to give up than to regain. An atmosphere of alarmism has been going around in the past years, and that has made it easier for the powers that be to persuade us that taking away our rights is for our own good. We, as audiophiles, might need therapists, but not babysitters. Care must be taken on these decisions, lest they lead to generalities that we will not like . . .

It's not the "high-quality digital signal" that makes piracy easy, it's the digital copying technology. Since you can't add copy protection to the existing CD format, the industry needs a new format. This is okay provided that the copy protection leads to lower prices and does not invade our privacy---anything else means we're being ripped off.

I have no interest in making copies from discs, so those protection aspects do not bother me. But if copy protection has even the slightest audible side effect(s), I am certain that the format will be dead in the water among audiophiles.

Watermarking the data is the same as adding distortion. Does this sound like a high-quality solution?

i am just looking forward to get better sound.

Will watermarking eliminate piracy? Also, does the cost of copy protection come out of their profit margin, or the consumer's pocket. (Lemme guess.)

IT sounds like the "digital notch" symdrome we had back when CD's were supposed to be perfect sound forever.

There's always a way around it, so it just wastes one's time and money. LD never used it, to its credit.

For the average consumer, a 16 bit/44 kHz digital copy (MD/CD-R etc.) is more than adequate for the car/walkman/boom-box. From the success of MP3, we know that the average consumer may be more interested in the freedom and convenience of digital recording than the ultimate top-end quality. I think that the record companies are over-emphasizing the needs for "bullet-proof" copy protection. Copy protection issues will delay the debut of DVD-Audio. This is one of the main reasons why Sony/Philips are moving ahead with the competitive format - SACD. Copy protection had delayed DVD-Video but there was no competitive format. The longer it take for DVD-Audio to roll-out, the more likely that SACD will pose a threat.