Sick of the mp3 thing

[greyskull]

betamax VS Vhs springs to mind...

 

[TheDriller]

bandcamp.com lets you upload raw .wavs and customers can purchase whatever format they want. it's what i use for http://www.sloanstewart.com

+1

my only gripe is that the streaming quality is still ballsack compared to either the original uploaded wav file or the downloadable version.

 

[John_C]

Nice to see some good old fashioned idealism and anger.

Time for some music:
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YaLmmE2hVI4&feature=related[/ame]

oh the irony of posting a youtube song in this thread

 

[~BURNY~]

On the bright side, a decently encoded mp3 is miles better than a BASF Chrome Extra II with dolby C.

 

[Audiosprite]

I recently heard that iTunes don't offer it because they 'can't afford the server/bandwidth costs'. Not sure how true that is, but somehow I would think the company who almost single-handedly toppled the music industry, and is now trying to monopolize its digital sales has a bit more responsibility (and cash) than that. Not to mention that the amount of people who would want to use the 'full quality' option would probably be below the 1% mark.

iTunes needs to support FLAC.

The bandwidth excuse has to be bullshit. Digital video game retailers sell several gigabytes of data for less than albums every day, allowing unlimited redownloads, and they're slaying. There's no reason Apple can't spare a couple hundred megs per album.

 

[Dexter_prog]

@Dexter: Does it really have to be called audiophilia? I was hoping there would be unanimous acceptance that this is a problem on an engineering board of all places. It's scary that the day has already come that people have to defend their reasons for wanting CD-quality audio... much less some improvement (like 24/96 releases in the future).

I get your point, I was ranting more about audiophiles than your actual idea, I always get caught up on that.

 

[xFkx]

betamax VS Vhs springs to mind...

you're old...










... and so am I

 

[GarethSE]

The lossless audio on a dvd movie can be up 24-bits/96 kHz.

Aye, how many DVD's do you own where this is the case?

Ah well, Bluray is now abundant and can scratch that lossless itch for us!
The 2nd disc of the Inception bluray had the soundtrack at 5x cd quality. I don't think I stopped dribbling for a single moment of my first listen to it.


Edit: Oh, and just out of curiosity... Now that Youtube has support for HD resolution videos (all the way up to 1080p) does this include support for lossless audio too? I'd assume that's the case, but to hear it in black and white from someone would be cool.

 

[Harry Hughes]

Aye, how many DVD's do you own where this is the case?

Ah well, Bluray is now abundant and can scratch that lossless itch for us!
The 2nd disc of the Inception bluray had the soundtrack at 5x cd quality. I don't think I stopped dribbling for a single moment of my first listen to it.


Edit: Oh, and just out of curiosity... Now that Youtube has support for HD resolution videos (all the way up to 1080p) does this include support for lossless audio too? I'd assume that's the case, but to hear it in black and white from someone would be cool.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure 44100Hz sampling rate and the bit rate of 128kbps in stereo is the best Youtube has to offer.
Nothing stunning, but it's a lot better than the 22050Hz sampling rate, 64kbps bit rate, mono clips that are all around on Youtube.

 

[Star Ark]

The only way I could see an improvement in the quality of audio files to be not only available to the consumers, but popular amongst consumers, is if apple decided to make a some kind of marketing strategy to make lossless formats available on itunes, and put a shitload of promotion behind it, calling them "high fidelity files" or something like that.

they would have to cost more than the regular mp3, which could in itself motivate people to buy them over mp3's, simply for bragging rights, "dude, the latest song sounds soo much better in this new format!! i'm going to buy all of my songs in this format now!" the question is, what could they change to make the average consumer notice a difference?

answer: surround sound mixes. think about it, all of your movies are in surround sound, why not our music? obviously, this already exists, but has not been a success at all for the music industry. that is why you would need a big company like apple to market it. maybe even make surround sound headphones that come with the new iphone or something, in their "premium package." but of course, not too expensive, just enough for the handful of kids at school with rich parents to buy it for them.

bottom line, is its all politics and marketing. they need to create a demand for something people don't know yet that they want. the lables need to look at how bluray and dvds became a success, and copy that.

I think you're onto something with the idea Apple could make lossless trendy with the right marketing.

I don't agree with the surround sound idea, most consumers don't care enough to shell out for special head phones. Also lots of people I know wear buds because they think large headphones look funny and would rather look cool than listen in higher quality. It's frustrating

 

[JBroll]

If it makes you feel any better, I don't buy anything but CDs.

(I also have a small lawn-like thing and frequently tell people to get off of it. It's a bunch of gravel and a fence, but there's something.)

Jeff

 

[GarethSE]

if I'm walking around I will personally take earbuds over headphones purely because theyre clunky as fuck and make me feel like my head's in a box

 

[TheDriller]

 

[drew_drummer]

 

[DanLights]

hahahaha brilliant

 

[GarethSE]

as much as i'm totally on the girl's side there, that's funny as hell hahaha

 

[John_C]

The medium is the message, but at the same time the message is what matters

 

[nwright]

I just find it odd that in an industry that's entirely centered around audio fidelity, that so few... even those of us - engineers - pay heed to these important things.

But your industry works for another industry that perhaps doesn't share the same feelings as you about the supposed need for ultimate fidelity...Or feels compromises in fidelity can be made in order to accomplish a greater goal.

From both a label perspective as well as the "dude in a no name/regional/indie band" perspective that the low overhead and immediate availability and sell of an mp3 to trump the (arguably for most people) loss in fidelity.

IMO a good production encompasses more than just fidelity, and is still easily heard and felt in a lossy format.

As a wannabe engineer, I want my mixes to sound nice and full and clean, yadda yadda...As a dude in a band, I want my art to be easily accessible and appreciated by a wide variety of people. If mp3's accomplish MY goal as an artist, then I can accept that my mixes as an AE may suffer from a lossy format.

In the end, an engineer or producer can cry foul all they want, but it's really up to the artist's and labels (i.e. YOUR clients) to decide how the audio is sold.

 

[coreysMonster]

if all you guys arguing for lossless audio quality think it's so important, why are you arguing about digital audio files? I may be misinformed on this, but hasn't science proven that digital audio has a lower quality then analogue, in that certain frequencies are likely to be lost in the A/D conversion? Isn't that what so many gear nuts claim and pay horrendous amounts of money for? If digital audio has physical limitations and restrictions, then we can't really call any form of digital audio distribution lossless, now can we?

If I'm wrong, please tell me, this is just what I've heard.

 

[John_C]

if all you guys arguing for lossless audio quality think it's so important, why are you arguing about digital audio files? I may be misinformed on this, but hasn't science proven that digital audio has a lower quality then analogue, in that certain frequencies are likely to be lost in the A/D conversion? Isn't that what so many gear nuts claim and pay horrendous amounts of money for? If digital audio has physical limitations and restrictions, then we can't really call any form of digital audio distribution lossless, now can we?

If I'm wrong, please tell me, this is just what I've heard.

Swings and roundabouts. But please lets not go round them right now??