HighDef finally going big?

From that article:

"For nine in ten consumers, sound quality is the most important component of a quality audio experience, CEA research suggests. And nearly 40% of consumers with a moderate interest in audio say they are willing to pay more for high quality audio electronics devices."

I don't believe the first sentence, if "consumers" are "iTunes Store customers."  But what I do believe is that some are interested in chasing the "willing to pay more" customers.  Simple math MAY show that the incremental cost of offering "hi res" versions of some downloads is overcome by the incremental revenue.

My biggest worry is that "hi res" will simply become a numbers game, regardless of the actual quality of the product.  I guess it pretty much is -- just browse the HDTracks site.  The only thing I know are the numbers.  While many scoff at it, sites with reviews such as the SH forum remain about the only way to separate the good sounding hi res releases from the rest.  That, or trust the supplier, such as Naim Music.  But suppliers such as Naim Music really are not going to be more than niche players with niche products; good, but niche.

I'm not sure how they can come to that conclusion given the vague nature if the question.

Did 40% of consumers say 'yes' to:

"High quality electronic devices that play audio"

or

"Electronic devices that play high quality audio"    

???

The questions is phrased in such a way as to make any definitive conclusion impossible, and therefore meaningless.

BTW, I would say yes to both questions 

A rant:

I'm all with Bart on this. The Music and Electronics industries -- like all businesses for that matter -- want to preserve their profits, and if hi-res is a mean to this end, then they will chase this opportunity. Not to say that all are evil, but as in any market some will go for a niche of high-quality products, and most won't.

Recently I was trying to precisely identify the release of a 24/96 download I had bought from Qobuz during a sale (I bought it because I didn't own this album and it was cheaper than the CD). To my surprise, there was three different version of that same album in 24/96 on their site (I bought the one that was on promotion). Not one, not two, but THREE different instances of the same album at the same high resolution ! (That was Ballads by the John Coltrane Quartet, in case you'd ask.) Finally I was able to identify that it (probably) was the 1995 Impulse! remaster, but I had to triple check on HDtracks, AllMusic and Discogs.

I had never thought that there could be more than one version of an album at the same resolution -- at least not yet --, and I came to this one through a promotion filter, so didn't see the others; and would that help ? If that wasn't enough to have several resolutions of the same album already ! (That can be useful, of course.) More than once on Qobuz I saw an album in 24/96 that HDtracks would also sell in 24/192. Geographic restrictions and local deals, blah.

With a physical copy, at least you have a product number if you want to identify it. And there are good databases and forums available online for this purpose. Most of the time on Amazon -- for instance -- you are able to correctly identify a release before buying it. With a digital download, at the moment, what you have is close to nothing. It's up to the vendor to give you some information, but mostly it's what the labels gave them and the labels don't give much. It's very difficult to know if it's a master that has been up/down/cross/trans/over-sampled and rushed for sale, or if it's something that has been carefully crafted by a pair of golden ears. And as it is expensive, it's still difficult to have reviews of hi-res material. Most of them are about the HDtracks versions, but what if you buy elsewhere like on Qobuz ? How do you know they are the same ? Most tracks don't have any ISRC, and they are not published on the sites anyway.

In most cases, at the moment you don't know what you're buying. (And I'm not even talking about listening to it beforehand !)

For the time being, I'm certainely not buying hi-res albums that I already have. And very rarely reissues of albums that I don't have. For now, I'll stick with these guidelines regarding the buying of hi-res material:

1. It's a new album (and in this case I'm hoping it's a master that is at least as good as the one used for the corresponding CD), OR
2. It's classical music (because I'm willing to think this is still a preserved area, for now), OR
3. It's coming from a specialized label that I trust, OR
4. It's a reissue of an album that I don't have AND I can identify which master it is AND there's no confusion about the available resolutions AND it has good reviews (that I can find...), AND
5. It's on sale (otherwise a CD is cheaper).

Otherwise, and I must say I'm really sorry about that, it's a CD from Amazon.

See point 4 above ? I'm really p*ssed off that buying good music with a good sound can be such a pain in the *rse. So, to say the least, I would not be very enthusiastic to see the majors coming to hi-res if that means that I have to check specialized forums -- like this Music Room or the SH forum -- about everything that's coming out !

And you know what ? I prefer buying music made by kids in a cave or in their room on Bandcamp, even if the 16/44.1 FLAC file is a disguised MP3 sometimes (it happens), it's more fun.

Grrr.

Maurice

Rant over. Grrr!

Sony Music(& earlier Universal Music Group) signed a deal with Acoustic Sounds to sell their hires (DSD) downloads

http://www.audiostream.com/con...nces-deal-sony-music

New Sony hires players

http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/...y-new-high-resolution-audio-products/2762773/

Acoustic Sounds download site

http://www.superhirez.com

Er, Meet Me In London.

A high-res trailblazer for the Naim label.

Now has disappeared.

But 18g vinyl is available for £17.99.

No wonder high-res is not catching on.