You are here

Log in or register to post comments
Jim Tavegia
Jim Tavegia's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Sep 1 2005 - 4:27pm
Re: SACD mistakes

I think most of us are just bemoaning the thought that a great opportunity was lost (SACD)for a great music delivery system that all current releases could have been offered on. I would not have cared that I could not put it in my computer for playback, even though the idea of a second SACD playback drive for 2 channel would have been nice.

I'm not sure what drove Sony to the decisions they made, especially after all the expensive RD they had to go through. We may never understand fully the marketing logic of it all. Sony often has us all scratching our heads. It is clear that the "think-tanks" at Sony and Marantz/Philips are on different wave lengths.

What we do have is 2496 and 24192 for others to take to the next level of music delivery. I just fear that the pricing will keep it out of the mainstream, but if the suppliers can live within their revenue streams there is little for the rest of us to to but either buy or stop complaining.

I know that my future does not inlude spending $25 - $40 on high def music even if HD video is included. If I didn't have a family to consider, I might, but then I still doubt it. Music at $3 to $6 a song does not work for me.

I still think the future is bright as I know some will offer 2496 at reasonable prices for physical media. I can just sense it.

jazzfan
jazzfan's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 months 1 day ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 8:55am
Re: SACD mistakes

As I have stated in the past the Squeezebox Touch at $300 coupled with a good external DAC (which can be had for well under $1000, if not under $500) will get one into the world of hi-rez downloads without comprise, meaning true "high end" sound. I just read over on the Slim Devices forum that TAS gives the Touch a very positive review in the October issue and I'm fairly certain that the upcoming review of the Touch in the October Stereophile will also be very positive. So I agree that momentum is slowly building for hi-rez downloads and rips (DVD-Audio, needle drops, etc.) to become a serious source for high quality sound for many audiophiles.

JIMV
JIMV's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 1 day ago
Joined: Jan 31 2008 - 1:46pm
Re: SACD mistakes

Thanks...

Grosse Fatigue
Grosse Fatigue's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Nov 22 2007 - 7:04pm
Re: SACD mistakes

I know surround sound is their business but audio is not, video is, and actually I love video concerts, some with DTS, which Stereophile never report on

Stereophile should have had a column a long time ago on concerts on DVD as some of the people buying those DVD actually never watch movies and are not interested in surround sound audio per se: they want the video, too

A column like "Music in the Round" which was started with SACD and high res audio in mind should fare the same fate as SACD

Someone has to save you from yourself
I think that you are totally out of touch in many ways
pooh poohing the CD -killing it!
Hyping turntables in 2010 after hyping SACD
Talking about a revival of casettes
Where do we read that streaming is more exciting than downloading??

Kal Rubinson
Kal Rubinson's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 47 min ago
Joined: Sep 1 2005 - 9:34am
Re: SACD mistakes


Quote:
Stereophile should have had a column a long time ago on concerts on DVD as some of the people buying those DVD actually never watch movies and are not interested in surround sound audio per se: they want the video, too

I agree.

Jim Tavegia
Jim Tavegia's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Sep 1 2005 - 4:27pm
Re: SACD mistakes

I have a growing collection of music videos with the audio better than 16/44.1 and I enjoy watching and listening, but all were purchased for less than $20 and many under $15 and $10. I know they may not be current releases, but much of the music I like is not "current" either.

And, yes, I will be buying a Squeezebox this fall and will undoubtedly will enjoy the streaming of audio through it. It will be a FM replacement for the most part.

After the crash of my laptop last year and losing my HD files I am less inclined to leave my high resolution ownership to my computer. I know....go buy a back up HD. I hear you. I just like physical media...affordable that is.

Grosse Fatigue
Grosse Fatigue's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Nov 22 2007 - 7:04pm
Re: SACD mistakes

It is a huge market of people who are not interested in movies and never listen to music on a high end rig
Never get reported anywhere...

At Virgin that has a large selection of Live concert DVDs you could immediately tell the difference between the guys interested in concerts versus the videophile guys. They are CD people.. Not high res audiophiles

Look, the only DVD that someone stole from me was an REM

Grosse Fatigue
Grosse Fatigue's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Nov 22 2007 - 7:04pm
Re: SACD mistakes

True

The Squeezebox is the future and it is incredibly fun to use

One of the most exciting experience I have had is listening to some obscure but exquisite small scale classical music that sometimes one never buys and you have never heard of.

Surfing music with a Squeezbox to me has replaced surfing the internet on my computer
It is huge, much bigger than downloading

Editor
Editor's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 10 months ago
Joined: Sep 1 2005 - 8:56am
Re: SACD mistakes


Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
Question: what does the pricing schedule quote above refer to?

New Soundkeeper recording

<snip> The cheapest hi-rez (24/96) is still double the price of the standard resolution CD and all this for a format that many people feel is overkill.

In Barry Diament's defense, he does allow people to compare the sound quality of the higher-rez versions with the Red Book. If you don't hear an improvement in sound quality, then the pricing becomes moot. If you do hear an improvement, then it is an individual decision as to whether the increase in price is justified by that improvement. Classic capitalism in practice.


Quote:
And what's up with idea that individually burned CD-Rs will sound better than a mass produced CD - unless the CD is defective and makes the CD player's error correction have to work overtime there is really no basis for this claim and the higher price.

Back when CD-R was first introduced (and I remember paying $30 _each_ for a 63-minute blank), we did some comparisons between a commercial CD and a CD-R copy and the copy did sound better. I did file comparisons and the bits were the same on both discs, so all we could think of was that as the CD-R has a pre-written data spiral, modulated with a constant 500Hz tone to allow the write laser to burn the data at the correct place on the spiral, there was less time-base error on the CD-R copy, hence less jitter-related artefacts in the reconstructed analog signal.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

Grosse Fatigue
Grosse Fatigue's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Nov 22 2007 - 7:04pm
Re: SACD mistakes

I loved my Denon jukeboxes but in time they would always wear and tear, scratch my CDs badly so with an Alesis CDR I would copy a CD and leave the original unused in its jewel box; indeed the CDR copy sounded always better than the original CD.

JennyMarley
JennyMarley's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 3 days ago
Joined: Sep 4 2014 - 1:45pm
android phones in Kenya

If the message attachments, users simply use the document viewer to open these files. Perfection continues HTC Phones Kenya in demo applications Java. Thus, users can watch videos and images TFT screen phones. Mobile phones have a very high resolution display that makes viewing each shade and contrast colored icons on the screen. So if the game is played on the HTC phones are so cheerful and help gamers enjoy the games that we are their feelings.

Pages

  • X
    Enter your Stereophile.com username.
    Enter the password that accompanies your username.
    Loading