Although Kaplan's post is right on target as far as the music is concerned he seems to be stuck in the past along with most of the Stereophile staff. Reissuing jazz LPs that barely sold many copies when they were originally issued on expensive audiophile vinyl is most definitely not a good recipe for success. You are quite right about making these recordings available as flac downloads - minimal overhead and a much lower threshold for success.

But then again, as far as Stereophile is concerned the future of music and high end audio is in overpriced vinyl, SACDs and the associated playback equipment not in high resolution downloads and their associated playback equipment.

Quote:
But then again, as far as Stereophile is concerned the future of music and high end audio is in overpriced vinyl, SACDs and the associated playback equipment not in high resolution downloads and their associated playback equipment.

That's not correct. John Atkinson, Jon Iverson, and Wes Phillips, for instance, furiously promote high resolution downloads as the future of high end audio. Which of our writers has offered "overpriced vinyl" as the future of high end audio?

Quote:
That's not correct. John Atkinson, Jon Iverson, and Wes Phillips, for instance, furiously promote high resolution downloads as the future of high end audio. Which of our writers has offered "overpriced vinyl" as the future of high end audio?

Have you looked at any of the magazine's covers lately? By the way, I did add the words "playback equipment" to the things considered as the future of high end audio.

Stephen please understand that I dearly love vinyl and that nothing sounds better than a high quality pressing of a fully analog production played back on a good turntable but vinyl is most definitely NOT the future of high end audio. And I also love the sound of SACDs and high resolution DVD-Audio discs but neither are they the future of high end audio. And perhaps you're right regarding John Atkinson, Jon Iverson, and Wes Phillips and their passion for high resolution downloads (I think that you would be since you know them personally) but the fact remains that to the average Stereophile reader (and I'm an average Stereophile reader: white male in his mid 50's), Stereophile does very little to "promote high resolution downloads as the future of high end audio" other than the occasional review of an external DAC or music streaming device.

I'll give you an idea to bring to JA - a blog about the ups and downs of high end computer based audio system. Hey, I'll even write it. Now that would be activily promoting "high resolution downloads as the future of high end audio".

Quote:
I'll give you an idea to bring to JA - a blog about the ups and downs of high end computer based audio system.

This is something we've discussed, but the problem, like with most good ideas, is finding the resources to get it done properly and the budget to pay for it.

Quote:
This is something we've discussed, but the problem, like with most good ideas, is finding the resources to get it done properly and the budget to pay for it.

So does mean that whomever writes this kind of blog would get:

1) To download those ridiculously expensive Linn high resolution files and soon to be almost as expensive HD Tracks files?

2) To audition many of the various music streaming devices and systems, such as the Sooloos and the Linn Klimax?

3) To test out computers and hard drives, such as media center PCs, Macs, Home servers, Drobos and other external hard drives?

4) To play with many of the different audio software tools available, such as dbPowerAmp, EAC, FLAC, iTunes, Windows Media Player, etc.

5) To audition many of the various external DACs on the market?

If so, then by all means sign me up since I'm already doing just about all of the above. But all kidding aside, I am very interested in pursuing something along these lines and would love to discuss things with you and JA.

Quote:
FWIW, (vanishingly little, I know) I would read it avidly.

Computer Audiophile works the territory jazzfan is referring to, and I'm a fan, but there's only so much they can do.

I would love to see much, much more on this topic.

s.

I'm sorry to say that The Computer Audiophile does a terrible job. His biases are numerous and wears them all on sleeve. He does not like any of the SqueezeBox family of products and is a complete ass kisser to any Apple. Not liking the SqueezeBox products I could forgive since after all a SqueezeBox Classic without an external DAC is no better sounding than the average big box store's mid-priced CD player but ass kissing for Apple goes well beyond forgiveness. From an audiophile perspective iTunes is a complete disaster and should be avoided at all costs. Plus his knowledge of how to create (as in rip from CD) and work with digital audio files is spotty at best.

Hopefully if and when Stereophile decides to jump into the field of high end computer based audio (with both feet rather than just a couple of toes) they will do so without all the biases and ass kissing that limit The Computer Audiophile's otherwise useful information.

Quote:
I hadn't noticed the stuff you raise objections about, and was mostly responding to the way he handles the forums, which tends to be (last time I looked) low key and respectful. Also, I thought he'd been fairly non-partisan about Mac vs. PC. I remember he did a piece on building an audiophile pc.

Anyway, I was delighted to see the current issue of S'phile review usb streamers, and am even reading the computer audio advertising section.

s.

It could be that I'm just somewhat more sensitive about these issues than others are or it could be I'm just somewhat more knowledgeable about these issues than the average audiophile is (present company excluded ) so I know when he's just blowing smoke. Either way based solely on your opinion I'll give the Computer Audiophile site another and closer look.