Rachael B

Isn't the pressure building for real (new) hi-rez releases by the majors?

Sound & Vision just ran an article about uni players. More low-cost, every-man uni players are on the near horizon. Folks already into the new new formats are already feeling betrayed because the majors behave as refusniks, refusing to release new, current music. Potential adopters ought to be nervous.

The hardware companies are doing their job fairly well in my mind, atleast within' the context of the limitations that have, unfortuneatly, been set in their way from the content providers....analog outputs.

The missing piece in the puzzle is the content providers releasing the music. If they don't, this may completely soil their reputations with much of the public....as if their reputations weren't bad enough already! No matter what's in the silly minds of the content providers, they are running out of excuses and plausibility with the public.

Uni players are going to be cheap and plentiful soon and they basically now refuse to offer satifactory software. First they sabotauged the very lauch of hi-rez audio equipment and now they're sabotauging the very market for the software by defaulting.

The big five are looking more like fool's fools everyday that goes by....

Rachael, the big disc cat! I used to be looking for Hi-Vision Laserdiscs & D-Theater tapes, now I'm looking for HD-DVD's and Blu-rays.

I survived the AFI top 100 Film Challenge! I've seen them all.

favourite saying: hard feelings are for park benches... sit on that!

Lew Crippen

Respectfully, I don’t think that the public as a whole cares at all. Most non-audiophiles with whom I am acquainted basically just think that this is another way to get the public as a whole to buy into something new without a standard—or worse with two standards.

If the public is angry it is with the existence of both SA-CD and DVD-A and the very strong belief that they both won’t survive. If purchasing a universal player is mentioned, I’ve mostly heard the equivalent of ‘don’t they cost a lot of money?’

The amount of software available is not on their minds at all.

¡Time is not my master!

Brian Perry

Quote:

Most non-audiophiles with whom I am acquainted basically just think that this is another way to get the public as a whole to buy into something new without a standard—or worse with two standards.

Even worse, I think most people who consider themselves audiophiles (myself included) refuse to even consider hi-res without a digital interface. I'm of the opinion that CDs can sound very, very good on a decent system, and that the aggravation of setting up hi-res and waiting for the trickle of releases is not worth the hassle.

This is not meant to offend those who have become early adopters or who wish to extoll the virtues of hi-res. It can sound great when implemented properly. I just think that if the industry can't get someone like me on board, they have absolutely no hope of getting much of a customer base.

And due to the increasing concerns over piracy, I can't see a standard digital interface coming about in the near future. As I've said before, my main fear is not that hi-res won't take off; it's that we'll eventually lose redbook CD quality. New-release CDs sound worse than ever, and are usually not mastered to the capability of the format. I know it sounds crazy, but I can see a day when MP3 (or some other lossy formula) becomes the standard quality sold by the studios.

In my mind, it's all become a marketing game with the studios. If Santana's Supernatural were to come out on hi-res, it would no doubt sound superior to the crappy version released on CD. But it wouldn't be a fair comparison because the CD was not mastered to its full potential.

Lee Scoggins

Good thread Rachael, here are my thoughts:

1. I have been saying lately that one way out of the maze is to sell ever cheaper universals and create a dual standard on the software side like Dolby Digital and DTS.

2. I think the upcoming Philips/Harman Kardon car audio players will also help and put pressure for new releases.

3. As recent Sonopress articles show, the disc production capability for hybrids is growing. That should ease costs and create extra room for a heavier release slate.

4. I think time is on our side in that this is one shiny high growth area for music labels that are seeing rather substantial sales declines everywhere else.

The big stumbling block is marketing, and this is probably driven in part by a) poor senior management leadership and b) difficult investment environment from a lack of profits.

************************************************

If I were Sony & Philips I would hold a big press conference at the HiFi show this May and announce the following:

1. We are stepping up "day and date" releases and will put all major releases out in hybrid form.

2. We appreciate all the grass roots audiophile support we have received and have decided to thank these great consumers by issuing any further classic titles in hybrid form only. This will allow all fans to enjoy the great performances.

3. We have reached a deal with AMC/Regal/Loews movie theaters and will be showing a new Super Audio surround demo starring The Rock and several of his favorite special effects. Watch for this 5 minute trailer coming soon to your local cineplex.

4. We have also decided to discount our royalty rate for the next five years by 10% to allow even more independent labels to enjoy the benefits of higher definition sound.

5. Sony's Qualia brand has reached an agreement to include a new special version of Ed Meitner's latest generation chips in its new Super Audio flagship-the 007. Six early samples of the premiere product will be initially shown and reviewed by the major high end and mainstream HT magazines.

Boy I can dream can't I.

no fears alone at night she's sailing through the crowd
in her ears the phones are tight and the music's playing loud
~skateaway

Brian Perry

Quote:

The big stumbling block is marketing, and this is probably driven in part by a) poor senior management leadership and b) difficult investment environment from a lack of profits

But it's hard to market something that has fundamental flaws without being less than honest or even outright deceptive.

The marketing of CDs, other than the "perfect sound forever" mantra, was fairly honest. They could be promoted as extremely durable, portable, programmable, etc. and all those qualites were absolutely apparent to everyone and indisputable. With hi-res on the other hand, to achieve the ONLY benefit over CD (potentially improved sound quality) the marketing people have to avoid mentioning that you need more cables, you will probably have difficulty with bass management and time alignment, and most of your ancillary equipment might not be good enough to notice a difference. Plus, of course, the discs cost more and new releases are miniscule.

I don't see how you can market it with a straight face.

Lee Scoggins

Huh? What fundamental flaws? I think its a great format and it's even gotten easier to work with in the studio.



Brian, I frankly feel this is an web-based myth. I have heard great improvements on even the most modest of systems. Look at the DAV90 and other HTIBs, for example. There is a big difference when you go from redbook of say a Norah Jones and then play the Super Audio version.

The disc prices are coming down but there are a few extra costs involved and the format is young so fewer economies of scale have kicked in. This happens with any new technology, of course. There is also a growth in the rate of title releases. According to David Kawakami, there are 3 new Super Audio titles released every day.

no fears alone at night she's sailing through the crowd
in her ears the phones are tight and the music's playing loud
~skateaway

Brian Perry

Quote:

What fundamental flaws? I think its a great format and it's even gotten easier to work with in the studio.

It may be the easiest thing in the world to work with in the studio, but it isn't consumer friendly, for the reasons I mentioned.

Quote:

most of your ancillary equipment might not be good enough to notice a difference -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Brian, I frankly feel this is an web-based myth. I have heard great improvements on even the most modest of systems. Look at the DAV90 and other HTIBs, for example. There is a big difference when you go from redbook of say a Norah Jones and then play the Super Audio version.

But as I alluded to, is the better sound a result of the format? My main point is that I am skeptical that every last technological ounce is being squeezed out of the recordings being transferred to redbook CDs.

As for modest systems producing an improvement, I'd like to hear it. Most modest systems don't have five identical full-range speakers (necessitating bass management) equally spaced from the listener (necessitating time alignment). Nor do they have S/N ratios over 95 dB, the limits already surpassed by CD. So the increased resolution gained by hi-res is often negated by other limitations.

Marc Colella

Lee,

in this thread:

http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htfo...hreadid=174816 ,

someone mentioned that in a blind test people preferred the sound of CD over SACD (using Norah Jones as a test), and you responded with:


You seem to be conflicting your own opinion.

When people have the opinion that the CD sounds better than the SACD, you state that you need a "high resolution stereo system" - but claim that a "modest system" is all that is needed to hear "great improvements" in sound quality with SACD.

Angelo.M

Michael St. Clair

While I love the Flaming Lips disc, those two-fer releases don't make sense for the studios. One copy to keep, one to give to your Redbook friend. This could decrease total sales.