Vote

WHAT IT ALL COMES DOWN TO IS HOW CLOSE TO LIVE MUSIC OUR REPRODUCTION SOUND LIKE?

Im only 18! I'd say implimenting CDs, DVDs, 5.1 channel sound, and SACD are some pretty major steps . . . .

1. Prices for hifi systems have gone down 2. Digital technologies are welcome (inc. CD, DVD, Suround systems) 3. Cable technology is much better

I'm still listening to my music over a mid-fi system that I've had longer than I care to think. I was able to upgrade to new speakers over the last week, and can't believ the improvement. I can't wait till they're broken in.

There have certainly been improvements in every component category - from source to speakers (including the wires that tie every thing together). Of course, the good stuff has also become VERY pricey. All this technology should add to musical enjoyment. On the other hand, I enjoyed music every bit as much in the 70

Two points. 1.) The public in the mid-fi and lowfi arena has been better served for their dollar with the digital revolution. They'd much rather hear music through a low/med priced Technics CD rig than a Technics turntable from 20 years back. In the high-end the advancement of music resolution has been more incremental. If digital has done anything it has at least reduced the noise floor. Its other touted benefits are highly arguable. 2.) In pro-audio and recording technology we are all decidedly worse off. For the most part, since the early 80s recordings of all genres have become increasingly characterless. The great engineers and producers of the past had a way of stamping an individual sound and aura to the artists they worked with. And this with a technology that is considered to be "crude" in todays terms. Maybe if I could get past the bad sound of today's productions I'd find something worth listening to.

Listen to what was being sold as hifi 30 years ago would for the most part would not pass todays audioplile, expectations except for the very best tube amplifiers of the day, forget about loudspeakers except forthe electrostatics of the days. Humbly, yours R. Guy Tr

The source has been the best gain, speakers and amps improve at a lesser pace. What seems to be the question, what digital standard is next.

Beside the equipment, the newer CDs definitely sound better.

While most of the industry, having forgotten what music sounds like, is busily stitching the emperor's new digital clothes, the very best ocmponents are allowing us to hear things in 40-year-old LPs that their engineers couldn't have known were on the tape. Good recordings have never sounded this realistic.

We believe audio has improved tremendously. Twenty years represents a new fresh breath of life in the audio realm. We now have the introduction of two wonderful formats, SACD and DVD-A, and We are not really sure either one will ever really take flight! Our personal preference would be SACD, however few will invest in this format with such a limited musical selection. If a multi-billion dollar corporation is going to introduce a stunning new technology which will revolutionize CD playback, we must be immediately furnished with an abundance of wonderful music. Damn, is that so hard to understand. Additionally, a $25-$29 price tag per disc WILL NOT help their efforts either. We are confident DVD-A is also a wonderful"audio" technology, however their marketing strategy has been worse than SACD. People get tired, We are tired! Either introduce a new product and support it with every fiber of your corporate being, or let us stick to beautifully mastered CDs and HDCDs.

The technology has improved; the marketing and awarenes to consumers has not

The pas 25 years we have seen a major improvement but as we get a more original sound the improvements will be less dramatic.

Mid-fi gear is getting really, really good for the money. It's also bringing high-end interest to the masses. That mid-fi stuff is good enough to know there's better, if you will.

Advancements in technology have brought us better products such as loudspeakers and cables. Better knowledge and understanding of proper room placement have brought us closer to the real thing but I still prefer the natural sound of the open reel tape medium.

To paraphrase Herbert von Karajan before CD everything else is gaslight.

I just cannot enjoy music, not even from SACD as I used from my $1000 record player-twenty years ago!!!!!!

Given the popularity of surround sound, MP3, and computer audio. I'd say we are no futher than quadrophonics and 8 tracks of the 70's. The focus these day seems to be convient to use of flash and bang DSP multi channel recievers, and cheap, convient digital recording mediums, rather than well engineered accurate playback systems. I can't even count the number of times I asked for demostration of given piece of equipment and the rep will have an DVD player hooked up to it on the front end.

I think that it is possible to get much better sound today than it was twenty years ago, but the performance of systems in average homes is probably significantly worse. Low-end home-theater systems are dismal for music reproduction, particularly the subwoofers.

Source material still has the problem of who produces and mixes. A great lp will easily beat a compressed and flat cd. A great cd will stretch the limits of an audio system. Imaging, depth, dynamics and response have all gotten better due to really good amps, preamps,cartridges,cd/sacdand interconnects. The weakest and area most in need of improvement or let's say a need for a different approach is speakers. Unless you take over a room in your home and maximize it for the kind of speakers you decide sound good to you, you can't do the source any justice. The need for multiple channels or maybe a way to decouple the room from the sound coming from whatever reproducer you have needs to take a quantum leap like digital has the potential to do. A non-mechanical transducer? Even electrostatics flex something to make a sound. Hill plasma? NOT. Hey, it's a new century. Who will be the next Paul Klipcsh or James Lansing or Jim Winey? They are out there somewhere.

Better sound is within reach of a greater segment of the population. However, the one thing that has remained the same? The fact that OUTSTANDING sound is available to only the truly wealthy, or the truly lucky.

Most of the improvements have come in the last decade or so, especially in digital formats.

I think most of the improvements have been made in the entry level (cheap) gear. Today's high end doesn't seem to blow me away like the best stuff 20 years ago.

The technology of the components has improved due to the advance of all forms of technology. Speaker windings can be that much more precise, etc. Additional channels will be a part of reproduction for the future. Even though I still love my analog music and buy vinyl it will only be here for a short time longer. It will go the way of reel to reel tape and 78's. Those who claim to be audio purists and have a snobbish attitude towards anything but 2 channel should study acoustics. There is no way a system can create reality from one or two channels. As the technology improves the ability to recreate the illusion of reality will improve.

The major improvement will come when more SACD's and players are available, and affordable.

no comment

night and day!!!!

Today's technology (DVD-Audio, SACD, powerful, clean sounding amplifiers, better speakers)finally allows us to get pretty close to the real thing - life performance.

Looked at from a technical viewpoint, audio has made great strides in the last 20 years. Of course a lot of this technical improvement has come from trying to make CDs sound like music. Looked at from the viewpoint of musical satisfaction with the system, I'm not so sure. I think I was just as happy 30 years ago with my Marantz 8b amp, Dyanaco preamp, and Thorens turntable.

We're losing the flexibility of bass & treble controls and a bypass on the high-end equipment.