| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
J-Man 
Prog Reviewer
Joined: August 07 2008
Location: Philadelphia,PA
Status: Offline
Points: 7826
|
 Posted: February 27 2010 at 17:12 |
 JLocke wrote:
J-Man wrote:
JLocke wrote:
^ Jeff, what makes you think a virtually unknown format such as SACD will ever gain an edge over CD? |
It's virtually unknown.... as of right now. 
Once the technology becomes less expensive to make, I'm confident that it will eventually get the edge over the CD. It's not going to happen over night (I think it should take at least 10 years), but the sound quality on SACD's is a hell of a lot better than on CD's, and I think because of that it will eventually edge the CD.
|
^ Yeah, but if CD is going the way of the dodo like you seem to think, why would people be game for yet another version of the very think they just 'moved on' from? 
Now, bear in mind, I'm looking at this situation through the current general opinion. Me personally not believing at all that physical media is dying, can see a more possible way of SACD of HDCD type stuff catching on one day.
However, that technology is already over a decade old. I just don't see how that particular case can be made. Maybe a higher-dynamic physical music form WILL come along one day that blows CD away, but as it stands right now nobody cares about SACD except for the most die-hard of audiophiles. |
I'm not saying that CD will completely "go away", I just predict that SACD will eventually sell more than CD's. The same thing happened with vinyl. Many people still use it and buy it, but CD's have the edge over it. I realize that SACD's have been around for 10 years, but they are so expensive right now that people won't buy them. Once a more efficient way to make SACD is created, I'm sure it will be more widely distributed than it is right now. I don't think CD will ever completely go away, but I think that within the next 10 years more advanced forms of technology will outsell the CD.
|
|
|
 |
WalterDigsTunes
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 11 2007
Location: SanDiegoTijuana
Status: Offline
Points: 4373
|
Posted: February 27 2010 at 17:18 |
|
They still make SACD? I remember seeing come Can remasters being sold for cheap because nobody was buying into the format.
|
|
JLocke
Prog Reviewer
Joined: November 18 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 4900
|
Posted: February 27 2010 at 17:29 |
J-Man wrote:
I'm not saying that CD will completely "go away" |
Really? 'Cause I could have sworn you said this just moments ago:
J-Man wrote:
I honestly think that the CD will be gone by 2019.
|
J-Man wrote:
I realize that SACD's have been around for 10 years, but they are so expensive right now that people won't buy them. Once a more efficient way to make SACD is created, I'm sure it will be more widely distributed than it is right now.
|
Blu-Ray isn't even five years old yet, and it's already becoming more and more affordable. Why? Because people actually care enough to buy it. Cost efficiency comes as a result of customer support, not the other way around. If SACD technology were ever going to gain an edge over standard CD, I would have have expected it to happen by now.
|
|
J-Man
Prog Reviewer
Joined: August 07 2008
Location: Philadelphia,PA
Status: Offline
Points: 7826
|
Posted: February 27 2010 at 20:45 |
|
Blu-ray is a completely different situation. The difference between DVD and blu-ray is HUGE, whereas the difference between CD and SACD is more subtle.
When you add on the fact that SACD is significantly more expensive than CD, you're right - people will not be jumping out of their socks to invest in these. BUT when the technology becomes easier to produce, I would imagine that it will overrun the CD market. Not entirely (just like people still use DVD today), but I think it will become a major way of distributing music eventually.
|
|
|
|
JLocke
Prog Reviewer
Joined: November 18 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 4900
|
Posted: February 27 2010 at 20:53 |
You're repeating points I've already made pretty good arguments for in my last post.
I gave Blu-Ray as an example because it is the same situation from a marketing point of view. I don't really care if the difference between Blu-Ray and DVD is more obvious that the difference between SACD and CD. That wasn't my point at all. My was simple: if people actually gave a damn, SACD would have overtaken CD ages ago, just like Blu-Ray is currently doing with DVD.
The only reason the guys behind Blu-Ray technology have bothered to research ways of making the technology more affordable to produce is because they know they will make a profit. You say once the same happens with SACD, it will really take off, but as I just explained to you, that WON'T happen with SACD unless people support it already. They don't. So why would Sony and Phillips even bother researching more ways of affordably pushing SACD into the market, when Sony is already having success with Blu-Ray? It doesn't make sense.
I love how you completely ignored the part of my post where I called you out on your contradiction, by the way.  |
|
Mr ProgFreak
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 08 2008
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 5195
|
Posted: February 28 2010 at 03:07 |
|
The difference between Blu-Ray video and DVD video is plain to see for anyone who has anywhere near 100% visual acuity (given proper encodings in 720p or 1080p and proper playback equipment). The difference between CD, SACD and even MP3 (given proper encodings) is much less obvious, and even that is an euphemism, since there are numerous studies which show that even under ideal conditions (high end playback equipment, trained/experienced/professional listeners) people can't tell the sources apart.
IMO this is what is killing CD. Not so much that there aren't any better disc formats available, but that MP3 is perfectly sufficient and delivers the same content without so much hassle, and at a lower price.
|
|
JLocke
Prog Reviewer
Joined: November 18 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 4900
|
Posted: February 28 2010 at 03:22 |
|
^ People still like something they can hold. Bottom line. As long as they want that, the companies will still make them available.
|
|
Mr ProgFreak
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 08 2008
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 5195
|
Posted: February 28 2010 at 04:24 |
|
^ Isn't music something to be heard rather than held in your hand? Maybe this insistence on a tangible medium rather comes from the fact that people got used to things being like that in the last 50+ years, than from it being necessary in order to value the actual music.
|
|
harmonium.ro
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin
Joined: August 18 2008
Location: Anna Calvi
Status: Offline
Points: 22989
|
Posted: February 28 2010 at 04:47 |
^ Associating something impalpable with a physical object isn't necessarily a shallow thing, a temporary fashion. Associating music with a physical support might stay longer than anyone would expect - remember when people started making books (the rolled ones, and, much later, the codex)? Many wise people complained that true poetry and knowledge will be lost by "freezing" them in the fashionable but "dead" support of the book, but two and a half thousands years have passed and books are still here to stay. 
|
|
Mr ProgFreak
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 08 2008
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 5195
|
Posted: February 28 2010 at 04:59 |
^ your analogy also works in favor of my argument ... 
|
|
harmonium.ro
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin
Joined: August 18 2008
Location: Anna Calvi
Status: Offline
Points: 22989
|
Posted: February 28 2010 at 05:00 |
|
|
|
Mr ProgFreak
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 08 2008
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 5195
|
Posted: February 28 2010 at 10:12 |
|
|
|
harmonium.ro
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin
Joined: August 18 2008
Location: Anna Calvi
Status: Offline
Points: 22989
|
Posted: February 28 2010 at 11:17 |
^ I never heard anyone complaining about music in itself not being the same anymore, as if its essence was corrupted. I only heard people saying that the experience of listening to music is a much poorer one without the rituals and habits related to their discs/tapes/cassettes. Of course I've also heard people complaining about the sound quality of digital media but that doesn't count
|
|
JLocke
Prog Reviewer
Joined: November 18 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 4900
|
Posted: February 28 2010 at 11:33 |
Mr ProgFreak wrote:
^ Isn't music something to be heard rather than held in your hand? Maybe this insistence on a tangible medium rather comes from the fact that people got used to things being like that in the last 50+ years, than from it being necessary in order to value the actual music.
|
I guess you're right. Let's all just download music to hard drives, iPods and usb cards.
Then, ten years down the road, when those devises and all their backups fail, we'll just buy those digital downloads all over again! Oh, and not to mention we'll have to buy new hard drives, iPods, usb drives several times over, and back all of our music up all over again.
Yeah . . . the future is really going to be convenient, huh?
|
|
Mr ProgFreak
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 08 2008
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 5195
|
Posted: February 28 2010 at 12:20 |
That's quite a straw man argument, and I think you know. At least with digital data we *can* make backups. Back in the 90s when my entire vinyl collection was destroyed by a leaking pipe in the cellar, I certainly would have appreciated a backup.
|
|
JLocke
Prog Reviewer
Joined: November 18 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 4900
|
Posted: February 28 2010 at 12:35 |
Mr ProgFreak wrote:
That's quite a straw man argument, and I think you know.
At least with digital data we *can* make backups. Back in the 90s when my entire vinyl collection was destroyed by a leaking pipe in the cellar, I certainly would have appreciated a backup.
|
. . . aaaaand with Compact Disc, if handled properly, my album collection will outlive me by a significant number of years.
So for those of us who enjoy the entire package (artwork, liner notes, the ability to place it on a shelf, etc.), all we have to do is make sure we properly store our music in a safe place, and we won't NEED to back anything up. Of course, us guys can back our collection up digitally as well if we wish, but then the digital backups are merely for storing in case of emergency and listening to music away from home. When I'm at home, I can still break out the actual disc and pop it in the stereo.
I don't build straw men when I argue. If I didn't think I had a valid viewpoint, I wouldn't have chimed in to begin with.
Look, you're going to defend your position regardless of what anybody else says, because you believe that you are on the correct side of the argument. I on the other hand merely state my case and if you don't agree, well then okay. I can understand the arguments on your side; I just don't personally agree with them. I say that physical media isn't going to die because a significant number of people still want that, but if you want to own all-digital, easily-corruptible data versions of your entire music collection, be my guest.
|
|
Ludjak
Forum Groupie
Joined: August 31 2008
Location: Croatia
Status: Offline
Points: 73
|
Posted: February 28 2010 at 12:38 |
|
I wouldn't mind at all if vinyl replaces the CD, which is a reasonable option for the record companies if they want to keep their customers (it's much more difficult to copy a vinyl record than a CD). I'm not really fond of mp3, I mostly listen to music in mp3 because it's more convenient, but I do not by any means prefer it over physical media.
|
|
Mr ProgFreak
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 08 2008
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 5195
|
Posted: February 28 2010 at 12:53 |
JLocke wrote:
Mr ProgFreak wrote:
That's quite a straw man argument, and I think you know.
At least with digital data we *can* make backups. Back in the 90s when my entire vinyl collection was destroyed by a leaking pipe in the cellar, I certainly would have appreciated a backup.
|
. . . aaaaand with Compact Disc, if handled properly, my album collection will outlive me by a significant number of years.
So for those of us who enjoy the entire package (artwork, liner notes, the ability to place it on a shelf, etc.), all we have to do is make sure we properly store our music in a safe place, and we won't NEED to back anything up. Of course, us guys can back our collection up digitally as well if we wish, but then the digital backups are merely for storing in case of emergency and listening to music away from home. When I'm at home, I can still break out the actual disc and pop it in the stereo.
I don't build straw men when I argue. If I didn't think I had a valid viewpoint, I wouldn't have chimed in to begin with.
Look, you're going to defend your position regardless of what anybody else says, because you believe that you are on the correct side of the argument. I on the other hand merely state my case and if you don't agree, well then okay. I can understand the arguments on your side; I just don't personally agree with them. I say that physical media isn't going to die because a significant number of people still want that, but if you want to own all-digital, easily-corruptible data versions of your entire music collection, be my guest. |
Your straw man, in my opinion, was the notion that with digital downloads you'll
have more trouble over the years than with CDs. I just think that it's obvious that this is not true. Put your files on a USB stick or a SD card and activate the write protection switch, and the data is as safe as anything you have on CD. And if ever in your lifetime computers won't have these interfaces anymore, you can be sure that there will be cheap replacements and plenty of time to copy your files. And while I don't think that anything you could say about the topic could change my mind, of course I'm always open to consider the possibility that I'm wrong. Feel free to point out any errors in my arguments, and I'll gladly re-evaluate my position. It seems to me though that all the technical issues aside, some people need something tangible while others don't.
|
|
JLocke
Prog Reviewer
Joined: November 18 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 4900
|
Posted: February 28 2010 at 13:00 |
Ludjak wrote:
I wouldn't mind at all if vinyl replaces the CD, which is a reasonable option for the record companies if they want to keep their customers (it's much more difficult to copy a vinyl record than a CD). I'm not really fond of mp3, I mostly listen to music in mp3 because it's more convenient, but I do not by any means prefer it over physical media. |
Vinyl is a whole other problem, though. I've been over this with folks before, but Vinyl is incredibly tricky to manage. First, if you are a really die-hard audiophile, you'll probably want an old-school, manually-controlled player, in which case you have to constantly make sure the rotation speed is consistent. Another thing to consider is that in order to get rid of those pops and ticks as you play the record itself, you need to own a special cleaner that costs a lot of money these days. Otherwise your music will sound like it's been recorded in the middle of a warzone.
But hey, that's just me. I know a lot of people just love their crackly, broken music because that's what they are used to. They'll swear up and down that it sounds better, and nobody can convince them otherwise.
I think that is probably what MrProgFreak is getting at: we tend to cling to our past times as if they are life support, when in reality the future we refuse to live in simply makes our enjoyment of things even easier and more convenient to achieve.
In theory, I agree with that, but again, for the reasons I have mentioned, I personally think all-digital media is even more unreliable that CD ever thought of being. Yeah, it's convenient, but HDDs have a 50% failure rate, don't ya know. I'm not going to trust my music with such an unreliable system such as digital media storage.
Maybe someday it will be more perfected. When that happens, I'll be more trusting of this. I just want to make sure all that great music I payed for won't be disappearing into thin air simply because I don't have the time to constantly be backing it up somewhere.
|
|
JLocke
Prog Reviewer
Joined: November 18 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 4900
|
Posted: February 28 2010 at 13:08 |
Mr ProgFreak wrote:
JLocke wrote:
Mr ProgFreak wrote:
That's quite a straw man argument, and I think you know.
At least with digital data we *can* make backups. Back in the 90s when my entire vinyl collection was destroyed by a leaking pipe in the cellar, I certainly would have appreciated a backup.
|
. . . aaaaand with Compact Disc, if handled properly, my album collection will outlive me by a significant number of years.
So for those of us who enjoy the entire package (artwork, liner notes, the ability to place it on a shelf, etc.), all we have to do is make sure we properly store our music in a safe place, and we won't NEED to back anything up. Of course, us guys can back our collection up digitally as well if we wish, but then the digital backups are merely for storing in case of emergency and listening to music away from home. When I'm at home, I can still break out the actual disc and pop it in the stereo.
I don't build straw men when I argue. If I didn't think I had a valid viewpoint, I wouldn't have chimed in to begin with.
Look, you're going to defend your position regardless of what anybody else says, because you believe that you are on the correct side of the argument. I on the other hand merely state my case and if you don't agree, well then okay. I can understand the arguments on your side; I just don't personally agree with them. I say that physical media isn't going to die because a significant number of people still want that, but if you want to own all-digital, easily-corruptible data versions of your entire music collection, be my guest. |
Your straw man, in my opinion, was the notion that with digital downloads you'll
have more trouble over the years than with CDs. I just think that it's obvious that this is not true. Put your files on a USB stick or a SD card and activate the write protection switch, and the data is as safe as anything you have on CD. And if ever in your lifetime computers won't have these interfaces anymore, you can be sure that there will be cheap replacements and plenty of time to copy your files.
And while I don't think that anything you could say about the topic could change my mind, of course I'm always open to consider the possibility that I'm wrong. Feel free to point out any errors in my arguments, and I'll gladly re-evaluate my position.
It seems to me though that all the technical issues aside, some people need something tangible while others don't.
|
USB sticks and SD cards are nowhere near as safe and reliable as the disc format when you take into account how easy it is to misplace something so tiny. I have heard more than one story about somebody leaving their USB card in their jeans, then forgetting about it and putting it in the wash. True, it may stil survive that, but what if it doesn't? How many Gbs of music could be lost in an instant just by one careless mistake?
And yes, you are right about needing something tangible as well. I believe the album experience is more than just the music. Cearly the music itself is the most important part, but think about all those Yes fans who equate their listening experience with the Roger Dean posters that came with the packaging. Think about all that respect Pink Floyd and The Beatles got for the cover art of DSotM and Sgt. Pepper respectively. You honestly don't believe that contributed to the memorability of it at all?
Last point: If every person were like you, and simply wanted to just listen to music and not actually own a physical album, what's stopping everybody from just downloading everything for free? For some people, the very selling point of music IS the deluxe packaging. May sound crazy to you, but not to those of us who don't see the point in paying for thin air.
|
|
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
New decade, end of the CD?
