Should Sound Quality of Computer Audio be improved

PO,

I don't see your logic. Are you assuming that the artist wants their music to sound bad? They want you to hear them sound mediocre? They want to go out of business?

The point is recording quality is higher than ever. There is a possibility of it going to the final frontier with the latest non PCM digital systems. Sure.

So how do you not get better SQ? (engineering/mastering choices aside)

How are you not getting value? You don't even have to drive to the shop.

Hypocracy? I didn't say sound quality doesn't matter. I am trying to let you see that the quality is already better than ever, and what we are talking about are subtle differences. Differences in sample rates you will hardly ever know, as the recording is the recording. Those choices were made by the record producer. It's all about the recording. Not just the sample rate.

You will never know what the same guys would have sounded like recorded via a different system. You just have what they recorded. And now without extra processes.

I dont really understand your profit argument? I haven't noticed records getting more expensive. I see a new way that records are sold. More direct than ever.

I don't understand your quip at computer manufacturing profit? Seems you were happy giving cash to a guy selling a CD player.

Thanks again Hfisher3380, not too many worries about the initial pitfalls for me though - I'm currently far too broke to make all my mistakes first with cash anyway (my situation normal). And I firmly believe that time is on my side and there's no real rush to come to an effective understanding of it all right away, I can bide my time and learn - which for me is really nothing new when it comes to audio anyway. And as for the work, well, I'm a longtime, diehard tweaker already. But, I do appreciate your response all the same. I've always had the awareness that this would be the next thing...yeah, I'm sure discs will go away eventually, but I'm not panicking in the meantime and I want to thank all of you for giving me a lot to look at as I go along.

Can we all just agree that Petty needs to develop his own stinkin format... he's the engineer... (drives trains)
I just don't understand why he continually beats down us dummy's that aren't smart enough to do this computer stuff properly.... Petty, Please, Please, Please fix it and save us all.

Petty, Petty, Petty...your latest diatribe is just more twisted logic. We are no more be blamed for the failures of SACD/DVDa than we are for the failure of 8-track or Beta. If enough people don't buy into a format, the format fails, pure and simple. That, my friend, is how a "Market" works.

Just like you, we are free to choose whatever format we want - and many of us are choosing computer audio. Why you have chosen to make this personal I haven't the faintest clue.

Why did vinyl outlive cassette - and why might it eventually outlive redbook CD? Why did laser disc never really make it? Why is there no reel-to-reel at HMV? How come I can never find any digital audio cassettes? What about 3D Blu-Ray - who's to blame for that slow market introduction?

There is no conspiracy here - the market decides these things. This is how the world works. You're wasting an awful lot of energy on this. No need to work yourself up into a tizzy!

Chadeffect-
"I don't see your logic. Are you assuming that the
Artist wants their Music to sound bad? They want you to
hear them sound mediocre? They want to go out of business?
"I am trying to let you see that quality is already
better than ever, and what we are talking about are subtle
differences. Differences in Sampling Rates that you will
hardly ever know, as the recording is the recording. Those
choices were made by the record producer. It is all about
the recording. Not just about the Sampling Rate".
I try to add these two statements together, and they
appear to null each other out. Can I hear subtle differences that would be an indication that the Artist wants their Music to sound bad? Can I not hear these subtle
differences, therefore the Artist doesn't care what the
Music Sounds like. You are arguing out of both sides of
your mouth. You can't have it both ways.
Keep it simple. Would the Artist prefer listening to
DXD or a 24/192 Download of his own Music? I guess he
wouldn't have much choice if "Soon all New Music will only
be available as Music Downloads". Do we have one Format for
the Artist, and one Format for the Consumer? If this is the
case WE get the short end of the stick with 24/192 Computer
Downloads of the Artists Music. What if the Artist prefers
Analog, Vinyl, MLP, SACD, DVD-Audio (24/96, 24/192), Blue-
Ray Audio. What if the Artist judges these as better
sounding on Disk via DXD, than on a 24/192 Download. What
are you going to do, shoot the Artist to keep it quiet?
Tell the Artist that he can only listen to a 24/192
Computer File of his own Music when DXD offers 3-4 times
more resolution? MLP even offers 24/192 in four to six
channels. I don't see alot of four to six channels of 24/192 Releases available on HD-Tracks! Two Channel 24/192
High Rez. Downloading is a step down- Recording Quality
higher than ever? Do you even know what it is that you are trying to sell us? If you don't even know, feel free to fume all you want to because some of us won't buy it!
There is the Profit! Paying the same for an MLP Multi-
Channel 24/96, 24/192 Disk than a 2-Channel 24/192 Download. I guess if we were dummed down we would buy that for a dollar. Some of us can actually add. Here is a
News Flash, you can also RECORD at a higher sampling rate.
Based on your opinion this makes no difference in the
Recording? No difference in New Music, nor New Recordings?
It is all about the Recording. Not just about the sampling rate? -REALLY??? How you record directly affects the
recording- you think? I thought that I was a Fossil!