Coping in an Age of Uncertainty

Brianmgrarcom, You're certainly welcome to your opinion. I am not attempting to start an argument or change anyone elses opinions, I was merely expressing my opinion on this thread. If you like CDs; great, I'm glad you're happy. I have to admit a certain level of cynicism and skepticism in this digital format discussion. Yes, CDs can sound alright if you have an excellent CD (sound quality) and superb playback equipment. As for excellent sounding CDs there are definitely many out there but they are far outnumbered by the mediocre ones. And how many superb playback systems are out there? I would bet a small percentage compared to all the nasty sounding mass market (read cheap) CD players out there. How about the sound of a bad CD on a cheap player? My point is that most poeple don't care or don't know the difference. And, the trend seems to be toward lower resolution formats like MP3. If this is true how can DVDA or SCAD become successful as mass media? Basically I'm saying the demand of the masses does not exist for a higher resolution format. At the same time most audiophiles, including myself, are finding sonic fault wth standard CD word length and sampling frequency. The possiblity exists of course, of creating a demand. But a compelling reason, like the convenience factor of going from LP to CD or VHS to DVD doesn't exist. Even if demand were somehow created a higher resolution would have to be backward compatable. Not to mention the pricing structure of higher resolution formats. If most poeple could care less about sound quality why would they be willing to pay more for software?
Here's are the conditions, in my opinion, that would need to exist before DVDA or SACD could take off.
1. Find some compelling reason or benefit (other than sonic improvement) for consumers to switch to a new digital format in order to create demand.
2. Closely related to above: convince the mass market that the new
format is not merely a marketing ploy to replace old formats and thus increase corporate profits. This one involves trust, a real tough one.
3. Backward compatablity; ie. ability to play CDs. Again, closely related to #2.
4. Pricing structure for high resolution hardware and software similar to current pricing of CDs and equipment.
5. Selection of DVDA, SACD or another format as the industry
standard format for the foreseeable future. No one wants to be the sucker who owns the losers (read Beta) hardware and software.
Remember Minidisc, DAT and the Digital Cassette? Are you a gambler?

Rja, one thing about the ‘net, which has been addressed several times by others as well, it is impersonal. Like you, I am not looking for an argument, I simply shared my thoughts in contrast with yours.

No doubt there are many cheap CD players “out there”, CD has been the man playback method for many years now; when LP was more popular, how many cheapo LP players were there “out there”? A lot. Furthermore, I suspect you can get CD to sound good cheaper than LP. That said, I am not stating LP doesn’t sound good or even that it may still be the best yet, but digital is here and here to stay…and…I don’t miss dealing with LP’s one bit.

It does concern me, a bit, to see the popularity of playback methods like MP3; I agree they are handy but the quality is compromised, obviously.

I do not argue the points you list. If you look back at my previous post(s), you will see that I too ‘scoff’ at the new formats slow progress.

This is my take on the whole CD versus LP question.

The sonic benefit of vinyl is due to the fact it is analog. Analog is often described as more liquid, full and involving. Just another way of saying you are hearing a more detailed and complete presentation.

Digital is an approximation, taken from the analog source (instruments and people), converted into bits for storage and sale to the customer where it must converted back again to analog. These processes contain errors that result in tiny pieces of the music being continually omitted.

Both formats do have their advantages. Digital is error by omission, making it more difficult for some listeners to detect its problems. The errors that exist in vinyl playback are more easily identifiable because they are errors by addition. The most obvious being noise or tracking errors. To achieve perfection in vinyl playback requires an enormous investment in both time and money. Few people have had the opportunity to hear analog at its state of the art limit, leaving the majority convinced that digital is superior.

Perhaps a more important part of this debate should include the mention of software availability. A very young person such as my son, will find their favorite music primarily on CD. My interest in music covers the last half century, and I have more music available on vinyl than I can possible listen to.

Personally, I believe software is of much greater importance than hardware. There is a parallel here that hearkens back to the invasion of the compact disc. There was a period where many end users were hesitant to get on board with the new medium, and happily stockpiled vinyl until such time as the sources dried up, especially regarding newer releases. At that point, users had to decide whether adopting the new format was preferable to scratching around for material on vinyl. Many posters here and indeed, many of my audio freak acquaintances, have two dedicated machines available to them: the turntable and the compact disc player.

Once one of the contending formats rises the top, there will most likely be a considerable period of overlap where rebook versions are still available, but this period will certainly be finite. Additionally, the 'new' format, whatever it will be, will likely exclude a large catalog of existing material. Hence, in order to acquire all the material we will want to listen to, an additional front end component will be necessary to play it.

I tend to view the emerging technology as a potential additional component, not one that would replace any of my current equipment. Maybe my purist nature prevents me from believing a multi-format player won’t be a performance/integration compromise. After all, it has taken more than 20 years to reach CD's current level of 'state of the art!' Thus, my philosophy: I want the best available playback I can achieve NOW. Who knows what is going to happen tomorrow? I don't want to wait for the next big thing to reveal itself and risk missing out on material that may not be available 'later.' This means precisely that I want and have a reference Redbook player that I plan to have around for a very long time. At such time as a 'new' format hinders my ability to obtain the music I desire within my current playback capabilities, I will research the component needed to play that material and buy it. Therefore, I see no reason to be bothered with my equipment options until that time arrives.

If I want the best sound, I'll put on an LP. It trumps dvda sacd or whatever four letters you want to come up with. For the titles not available on vinyl I have a wonderful CD player (Redbook) (Cary 308T) - why in the world would I want a 3rd format? I enjoy music and why would I want to screw that up.

I think most people get angst because they feel they are going to miss the boat. Well the boat is moving very slowly. How many years have these new formats been out? And look at the dismal selection. I don't know if there is more than a couple of releases I'd even want to listen to; so there is no reason to worry. And who's to say another "new" format won't come out soon that is better than SACD and DVD-A, I know for a fact engineers are working on it as I type!

Vinyl is alive and the last CES show had more new analog components than it ever had before for the gentleman who said analog is on its way out. Analog is what digital is trying to approach, how can it be on its way out?

If you like, keep stressing over what is compatible with what. I'll be sitting back in my stereo room lost in my music just enjoying the beauty of it...