If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   Manufacturers solve problem of permanent CD collections   (cnn.com) divider line 169
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

25486 clicks; posted to Main » on 14 Oct 2002 at 5:15 AM (11 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



169 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2002-10-13 10:30:49 PM
Maybe this is good news. If these things get going CD prices will drop, hopefully, that is if the RIAA will allow that to happen. Probably not. I buy used CDs anyway, they usually are just fine and really cheap.
 
sos
2002-10-13 11:28:50 PM
Of course. The new discs hold more data. More room for their copy protection, and a reason to dump CD's that Philips has the patent on and won't allow the copy protection crap on. They'll work with the designers of the new format to include it in the design, and we can forget about fair use. Eventually, they will stop making CDs, and force us to switch over, and the prices of the new discs will be $20 forever. Damn I hate the RIAA.
 
2002-10-13 11:31:51 PM
Both DVD-Audio and SACDs can hold several times the data contained on regular CDs. They are also multichannel (surround sound), instead of the two-channel (stereo) CDs. (Some SACDs are two-channel, made to enhance stereo sound.)
So, it's the same thing, only with a higher quality, which for now is only a big issue if you're a serious audiophile. It holds more, but record companies aren't using all of the available space now. So, more bucks, not much more bang.
 
2002-10-13 11:47:09 PM
I'll just keep buying C.D.'s used if I have to.
No problems there.
Tons of older music I need anyways...
 
2002-10-14 01:22:47 AM
Sure.....but will people still be able to rip mp3s (or whatever the format will be) or copy them "inexpensively" for "personal use"?

Oh yeah, fark Hilary Rosen and the RIAA.
 
2002-10-14 01:55:35 AM
People have to be able to afford it if they're going to listen to it. Bottom line, same as when everything went from vinyl/cassetes to CD. As much as I love my favorite bands, I can't afford equipment where the cost to play the music is equivalent to hiring them to play for me in my living room/car/at work/wherever I want to hear it. CDs will do just fine for now. Call me in a few years when all this fancy-schmancy stuff is reasonably priced.
 
2002-10-14 05:20:11 AM
and in 10 years when we switch to (true) optical disks (crystal hard drives and such) where will all the dvd-audiophiles be?
 
2002-10-14 05:26:37 AM
Hopefully either SACD or DVD-A will become the standard, not both (most likely DVD-A).
 
2002-10-14 05:28:52 AM
Actually, IMO, the way it's looking right now the next evolutionary step for music storage will move away from permanent disc-type storage and more towards non-permanent rewriteable file formats like the MP3, which sit either on computer hard drives or removable storage media like CompactFlash, SmartMedia, the iPod/portable MP3 player/PDA, etc. I think this will happen regardless of whether or not RIAA is able to find some way of encrypting copy protection onto the files. People just like it better when their music is easily movable. Why carry around a cumbersome CD case of thirty of your favorite albums plus a portable CD player when you can store it all on your PDA/cell phone/hip gadget along with your photos, address book, to-do list and a bunch of other stuff plus do your email, check your bank account balance, order movie tickets, read news headlines etc. etc.
 
2002-10-14 05:29:29 AM
SACDs have CDs SAC'D.

why am i still up at this hour? oh yeah, work.
 
2002-10-14 05:30:31 AM
I hate audiophiles. Their hearing is controlled by their imagination, give them the same recording twice, saying that the 2nd playing is from a SACD, and they'll "notice the difference".

MP3's sound just fine to me, and no need to ever upgrade anything other than my (free) jukebox program.
 
2002-10-14 05:31:23 AM
Where will the audiophiles still be in 10 years? Probably still listening to vinyl...
 
2002-10-14 05:34:52 AM
I have no problem with the sound quality of CDs. Most people don't. But there will always be that 1% who just have to have the latest thing because they can afford it. This will fall flat on it's arse.

DAC anyone?
 
2002-10-14 05:35:13 AM
When will mp3s being cumbersome? Will we just be able to tell our souped up computer system/advisor/assistant/lover thing to play a certain song and it just accesses it from this library that has access to every single song ever recorded?
 
2002-10-14 05:35:16 AM
Ophiles tend to annoy me in general.

Especially guitar-, cannabis-, and audio-

Enjoy the thing, you don't need to analyse it. It's like they can't appreciate something purely with feeling - and won't get off on something unless they have 4 pages of statistics in front of them.
 
2002-10-14 05:36:55 AM
Erm... reading my above post I realize I sound like the MP3 is a brand-new technology or something. I wasn't meaning to sound like a master of the Obvious. What I was trying to get at is that when they finally completely phase out the Compact Disc, it's replacement will not be another form of disc or permanent storage, but rather a movable digital file.
 
2002-10-14 05:37:08 AM
I dont believe I will be buying any preformatted music anytime soon, however if I do It will be used CDs.
 
2002-10-14 05:38:22 AM
"...the relative complexity of DVD-Audios and SACDs makes them much harder to copy. "

I'm not worried about DRM crap on this front. Copy schemes will be cracked. In fact, I doubt this is really a move in that direction, because I heard about this stuff years ago. Besides, people will stick with CDs. The majority of music sheep, listening to their packaged pop, have no use for improved sound quality, especially considering the price of a decent setup.
 
2002-10-14 05:39:35 AM
Krik81
Agreed. The problem I see is that most CD's aren't mastered well enough to take advantage of the CD format, let alone SACDs.

If you compare a poorly recorded 80's rock CD with one which has been remastered the difference is like light and day.

And why the hell do I want multichannel music? The music companies just want people to use a format they can control.
 
2002-10-14 05:40:49 AM
i've still got vinyl - all i listen to on my stereo, mostly because my cd player is kaputt... lots of nice jazz. oh - and tons of mp3s on our networked (shared) harddrive... the joy of flatting with computer geeks!
 
2002-10-14 05:43:40 AM
Goatman
That reminds me of a description I read somewhere:

Audiophile: Someone who listens to the equipment instead of the music.
 
2002-10-14 05:44:09 AM
Everybody seems to hate the audiophiles now? How many of you have actually heard music on one of these formats? I have. It really does sound a lot better. And when you say mp3s are just as good as cds... Next time, test it out. Make sure you have some good speakers (altec lansing makes great speakers for cheap) and play an mp3. Then play the same song off of a cd. Sound the same?

It's one of those things where, if you don't know what your missing, it wont matter. Unfortunetly, if you do get to hear the difference, you'll be cursing your lack of monitary wealth everytime you listen to a cd for the next month or so. I do wish I were rich. By the way, this started long before the RIAA started becoming super-assholes, so don't assume its another ploy to limit your rights. Even though I'm sure they'll try to take advantage of that in some way now.
 
2002-10-14 05:49:37 AM
Altec Lansin ADA-880r Dolby Digital surround sound speaker system thank you.

Ill take my mp3s cause they do sound just as good. In fact all my downloaded music sounds just as good.


could be all the gunshots though...
 
2002-10-14 05:50:28 AM
ArnoldLayne is into DVDA
*snicker*
i've got nothing.
 
2002-10-14 05:51:12 AM
Did no-one learn anything from punk?

"Here's three chords - go and start your own band." - Sniffin' Glue.

I'm not talking about taste in music. I'm talking about the pretentious and the pompous.

"I've got KY70 speakers with Wing-Wang overdrive and sub-sect speakers, which means one can really appreciate the triangle played by DeNagio."

How gives a shiat?
 
2002-10-14 05:52:05 AM
Picturecrazy
I'm sure that SACD's sound good and I certainly don't think that MP3's are good quality.

I do however think that most CD's that sound poor do so as a result of poor mastering rather than the limitations of the format.

I have a nice separates system, and the particuarly well recorded CD's I have sound fabulous. If the recording industry put more effort into remastering classic albums rather than pushing a new format, consumers would benefit.
 
2002-10-14 05:55:38 AM
that article has so many myths in it, its gotta be from cnn.

""A good vinyl setup will get you a little better to the real performance than a compact disc set up," says Iverson, and DVD-Audio and SACDs are "certainly a better sounding format than CDs." "

what do you know, I happen to have one handy to cut and paste. Not only has this been proven to be false by useing tools that hear sounds the human ear can't hear, The compact disc's raw format can produce a sound that, honestly, the human ear cant detect any different from a dvd or any other higher quality medium. The only true reason we acknowledge dvd audio is superior is in multi channel mode, but if it only 2 channels.. stick it on regular cd.

Then of course theres the fact that vinyle playback is literally destroying the record, and the record is vulnerable to dust in the grooves. Also turntable mechanisms are not digitaly controled like a cd's drive motor is (not to mention the speed of the drive motor has no impact on the playback speed of the audio anyways) so playback speeds could be wrong.
 
2002-10-14 05:59:32 AM
Hey, have you all heard of 8-track? It's waay superior to tapes and vynl!
 
2002-10-14 06:12:41 AM
Both formats will join DCC, DAT, and other useless formats in the "who gives a fark" scrapile of history.
 
2002-10-14 06:19:34 AM
Has anyone here ever microwaved a CD? It's the fourth coolest thing to microwave (after grape halves, marshmallows, and gremlins). The trick is to use your roommate's microwave when he's out of the apartment.
 
2002-10-14 06:28:32 AM
This isn't much different to quadrophonic records and tapes from the 70's. I don't think there is much more demand for it now than there was then.

One drawback is that if you move away from the center of the speaker arrangements, you actually begin losing sounds from the music because the balance is off.

That can happen with stereo records too, but the problem is greatly lessened. Get an early stereo Beatles song and turn down one channel to get the idea.

What will really kill this is the lack of portablity. People like headphones but don't have five ears.
 
2002-10-14 06:39:15 AM
What will really kill this is the lack of portablity. People like headphones but don't have five ears.

You can buy surround headphones that work via psychoacoustics. Due to an outboard decoder I don't think any are portable yet.
 
2002-10-14 06:41:29 AM
What will really kill this is the lack of portablity. People like headphones but don't have five ears.

Then again, they could use that nifty S-Force that Silent Hill 2 uses.

Just in case you didn't know already, S-Force creates a simulated surround-sound feel via basic stereo speakers.
 
2002-10-14 06:50:50 AM
Well, since they said the reason we can't download music is because we're actually buying the intellectual property when we buy a CD, rather than the disc itself.. I suppose that means they'll be giving us free upgrades to these new formats? Right? Since we already own a copy of the intellectual property? Right?

*silence*
 
2002-10-14 07:02:04 AM
Even if they do channel the multitracks into two speakers for headphones, I think it has too many drawbacks to interest the casual users, who make up the vast majority. It will go the way of quadrophonics in the 70's. people don't care enough to want more than two channels really.
 
2002-10-14 07:05:50 AM
Hmmmm, Digital Video Digital Audio..... shouldn't that be abbreviated DVDA not DVD Audio" like they did in the article? Or do they not use that one cause it means Double Vaginal Double Anal?!?!?!?! Hahahahahaha Gotta give a hats off to Matt Stone and Trey Parker on making that a household phrase ;)
 
2002-10-14 07:24:24 AM
Looks like I'm gonna have to buy the White Album again.
 
2002-10-14 07:26:55 AM
when do the burners come out?

/pirate
 
2002-10-14 07:49:11 AM
hmmm...
 
2002-10-14 07:50:50 AM
I think surround audio will sell. It's not like the quadraphonic sound of the 70s -- I've heard quad wasn't that great. I have several live music performances on DVD and I really enjoy the concert-like sound.
 
2002-10-14 07:51:21 AM
Tzzhc4: The V in DVD stands for Versatile, not video. So you have the DVD-Video format and the DVD-Audio format. /smartass

Actually the reason why Philips and Sony started making the SACD is because the CD patent is about to expire. They have made such a shiatload of money of the CD, that they think a new patent will keep that river of money running strong. I now this because I am actually working on the SACD discs in Philips (ok, not right now, I'm farking). Right now a lot of hybrid discs are being produced that have a CD layer so they can be played on regular CD players, and an SACD layer so they can be played on SACD players. The strong point of SACD over DVD-Audio (from a corporate point of view) is that there will never be computer SACD drives, so cracking them is impossible or will require a lot of electronics skills.

My apologies if I sound like a marketing tool :)
 
2002-10-14 07:57:25 AM
PandaPorn,
The strong point of SACD over DVD-Audio (from a corporate point of view) is that there will never be computer SACD drives, so cracking them is impossible or will require a lot of electronics skills.
I think you are wrong about there never being computer SACD drives. I can think of at least two different reasons for this:People will want to play their CDs through the computer like they do now.SACDs can store much more information than CDs, so there will be a demand for it.
There probably are more reasons, but I think these two suffice.
 
2002-10-14 08:01:17 AM
PandaPorn:

As far as I can tell, DVD is not officially an acronym. It has been referred to as Digital Video Disc and Digital Versatile Disc, but only DVD is correct/legal/whatever.
 
2002-10-14 08:06:41 AM
Pandaporn: Do you mean that it's impossible to make a CDROM drive that reads SACDs (doubt it)? Or that Phillips and Sony won't give a manufacturing license to companies that produce CDROM drives for PCs? What about when those guys finally agree on a digital out standard for multichannel audio instead of this 6-channel analog bollox? I can just run a TOSLINK digital cable from the back of my SACD player to a suitable soundcard to make a copy, right? And how long after the next generation of HIFI hard disk recorders are released before they're hacked and modded to allow connection to PC?

--
jc
 
2002-10-14 08:12:46 AM
"Jazz great Dave Brubeck recently heard a remastered SACD version of his classic album "Time Out." The difference, he said, was startling.

"Nobody was even aware that there were limitations --

now you can really hear that before you weren't hearing anything,"

says Brubeck. "You can hear the individual instruments better, and in a more natural way, as if you were hearing them live." "

so, apparently if you heard a Dave Brubeck cd you only heard silence? wow Pootietang don't need no music!


This will be crap because all the masters were recorded in 2 channel sound and they are artificially making them multichannel when they are remastering them. Sounds unnatural if anything.

Won't really take off unless bands today record multichannel albums that are natural.
 
2002-10-14 08:17:18 AM
When are holographic storage systems going to be commerical ?
I remember seeing documentaries about them about 10 years ago.
 
2002-10-14 08:25:22 AM
The whole point of napster (in my opinion) was that CD, cassette and record prices would stop marking up 700%.

Now they companies go ahead and make new more expensive standards. They just don't get it. MP3 sounds BAD, but everyone had adopted it as their standard based on price alone.
 
2002-10-14 08:30:45 AM
DVDA?! this is the name they are going with?
 
2002-10-14 08:31:41 AM
I don't know JeffMD, there is a significant difference between the LPs and the CDs of two particular Supertramp recordings I have. The vinyl definitely sounds better.
 
2002-10-14 08:35:12 AM
Tensionfilter: The reason that people claim to "hear more" isn't because of the multichannel, it's because SACD has a greater dynamic range than CD (you get higher treble and lower bass), so stuff that may have been missed out in the transition from analog master to CD are no longer missed.

I'm not going to bother with this stuff either, at least not yet. The first generation of players that can do CD / HDCD / SACD *and* DVD-A etc are just appearing, so I'll just get one of these when the prices begin to drop.

--
jc
 
Displayed 50 of 169 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report