View Single Post
Old 01-29-2013, 07:12 PM
bermuda's Avatar
bermuda bermuda is online now
Drummerworld Pro Drummer - Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,551
Default Re: Assume sound quality is equal: Digital or Analog?

Originally Posted by BacteriumFendYoke View Post
I don't mind buying CDs and I continue to do so because they're just about good enough but it's high time that physical disks were upgraded to 96/24. It annoys me that DVDs often have higher-quality sound than CDs and in a lot of cases are much cheaper to buy. Using a DVD format for music would alleviate most of the issues with people needing to buy new equipment. SACD was a good idea but required specialised players to take advantage of the format and there weren't ever enough good new releases taking advantage of the format.
At that time, listeners didn't really get the concept of hi-def audio, and CDs certainly sounded good enough and presented an obvious advantage to vinyl's frailties and lack of portability. Ever see a Discman for an LP? Actually, there was one way back... also an attempt or two at a car player. Just silly and gimmicky really.

But in just the last 5 years, the advatages of "hi def" have become quite clear in the visual context with better screens and content for TVs and devices. Perhaps there's a better understanding and a new willingness to accept hi-def audio again. Agreed that a DVD player has already replaced CD players for many people, and BD movies are often cheaper than CDs as well.

Our most recent album was released as a CD, LP, and BD with uncompressed audio. Happily, there were videos for every song on the album, so there's something to see in addition to just listening. But it's that kind of value added benefit that will make such a format attractive for those who might otherwise just buy the CD or downloads. And it's an introduction to the use of a BD player as a hi-def audio player.

I'm ready, my hearing is still good enough to tell the difference!

Reply With Quote