Should Sound Quality of Computer Audio be improved


Unable to respond to, "Mach2Music and Amarra: Huge Disappointment"- Thread. Other Members take free pop-shots!
Apparently some have more Freedom Of Speech than others! I
don't know how many times I have said it, I want Computer
Audio to succeed! It will only succeed if Computers are designed from the ground up to reproduce Music (Same minimum standard applied for Equipment of ALL Audio Formats)! This is common sense Audio Engineering Design. Bandaid Modifications cannot be substituted for absence in design to produce Music! Design it right to EARN the right to become a New Audio Format- same as all other Audio Formats! No Freebee's, No Cutting Corners! Lack of design is what's causing such varied results in S.Q. between
listeners of Computer Audio. I see about 50% negative
responses here on these Threads. It will continue to happen unless you fix it! Blaming me won't help! I am an
Engineer, and I can read results! 50/50 success/ failure
rate- you have an inherit Engineering Design Flaw for the
reproduction of Music via Computers! Shock! Suprise- since
they were never designed for Music! So when is someone finally going to properly design the Equipment/Computer
(From the ground up) for Computer Audio? Do we continue
to treat any real criticism as "HERESY" in the lack of
design in Computer Audio for Music? You tell me what I am
allowed to talk about, and we will both know!
pettyofficer
PO,

In answer to "not a word in your response to music sampling rate of these files".

There seems to be little point in going into detail with you as you never seem to grasp the basics. In good faith I shall try again...

Most studio hardware is capable of 24 bit 192k. Some can go higher but not many. At some point in the production process this sample rate gets dithered down usually for your lovely "old" formats you seem so fond of. I.e stereo 44.1k 16 bit for redbook CD.

It would make little difference to the mastering guys or the artist to just upload the file at the native sample rate (the rate it was recorded at).

As I have mentioned about 100 times to you, now that you are downloading the files and playing from HD, as opposed to buying CDs or SACDs etc, the limit is down to the files original native sample rate.

There is little or no reason for high resolution files to cost much more, other than the time taken to store and download the master. Its only an export spec option out of the recording software. This is where you can choose the final outputted sample rate for the making of CDs etc. So the mastering engineer or whomever could leave it native if anyone wanted. It would take no extra process or extra time.

Please remember well recorded crap or high rez crap is still crap. It's the music that matters! Don't get too concerned about the resolution. Think of it as a bonus.

I think we should continue this thread until you grasp the original point of it.

In case you have forgotten "should sound quality of computer audio be improved?" My answer is it is improved already and will continue to improve. Now we are not slaves to robbers who want $20k for a disk reader which can only read 44.1k/16 or if we are lucky DSD. A computer treated correctly can do all that and more as long as you have a decent DAC. Fine tune software for peanuts and spend the money saved on music. Not on a guy who clads an old Philips transport in a billet of aluminium.

I could continue this thread for years. How about you PO? I hope I am being clear enough to not have to explain for years. Anymore questions?
Good points yet again Chadeffect - which will come to no avail. When in doubt, refer to the original question in the thread - "should sound quality of computer audio be improved"? The answer is actually quite simple - YES!! Sound quality of every format should be improved. All the other crap Petty has carried on in this thread is merely smoke and mirrors distracting from this focus.

But once again he has let me down! He PROMISED - oops, I mean THREATENED - to end this thread - yet there he is posting the same old thing.

Please, Petty...I implore you...PLEASE finally follow through with your threat. You made your point 2 pages ago, are not listening to a word we say, and are completely obfuscating your own tired arguments. Please give it a rest - please follow through on your own THREAT once and for all!

I expect that we have heard the last of you. Thanks for dropping by - it was fun while it lasted!
This thread is like my wife's people magazine. You know it is plain stupid, but when it is right in front of you, you sometimes can't help opening up a copy to check on the status of Tom Cruise's divorce.