Hi all -
I know the format thing has been discussed - SACD, DVD-A, etc. BUT...
I was in the local computer shop last night and OH MY GOSH -
They have 6 Gig portable devices that hold MP3 music data - 120 CDS WORTH. Man, this IS amazing. An entire CD collection (or a decent chunk of one) in a box a tad bigger than a pack of cigarettes, all available at the touch of a button, and portable with no skipping.
AND...
they have other devices that use solid-state removable media. Little cards - about the size of a matchbook but thinner - that hold gobs of music.
So...
What does this technology mean for Naim? For high-end CD reply in general?
Perhaps very little. Folks like those visiting this forum may still want their tunes loud and will want great speakers, amps, and preamps. And when the storage technology settles, and perhaps can store a format better than MP3, Naim could come out with a player with proper power supplies, etc. Maybe the storage block could be removable to allow for in-car use or use on the go with headphones. Heck - no more dodgy transports 
Whatchall think?
- GregB
Insert Witty Signature Line Here
Posted on: 06 April 2001 by Mike Hanson
Convenience is nice, and sometimes I'm willing to live with somewhat inferior sound for that. For example, I have a Jensen 1.5 height CD+Cassette player in my car. It's the only deck I've found that hosts both a CD and Cassette in this mounting size. Since I occasionally listen to cassettes, and I didn't want to be forced to change CDs in the trunk (a.k.a. "boot"), this was my only convenient option. I know that I could get a dedicated CD player that would sound better, and I could fit more CDs in a changer, but I wanted the convenience of having both at my fingertips. Considering this is in the noisy environment of the car, the inferior sound quality is acceptable.
In a similar fashion, if I were a runner, then having a skip-free MP3 player for my work-outs would be a boon. Also, sound quality might not be as important, because I might be running in a noisy environment. However, I still have to download all of my music from CD or wherever, so the convenience is not really there (even though you can hold 120 CDs, which is about 10% of my collection).
However, when we're talking about sitting in front of my stereo at home, I expect excellent sound first, and convenience second. Until there is a replacement for MP3 which sounds just as good or better than CDs, I will not be opting in.
-=> Mike Hanson <=-
Posted on: 06 April 2001 by John C
Popped into Mole Jazz on the way home from work today, browsed through used CDs but resisted temptation, went upstairs and spent 45 mins in "new arrivals" bin, had or overheard the following conversations, Jewish emigration from Holland 1937, a long lost mother in Florida, Art Pepper and why he didnt share pizza with the band in Ronnie Scots, The Teddy Charles band and why why I'm wrong about East Coast Jazz. Bought some LPs.
There is so much more to being a music/hifi lover than downloading. Music is after all a social and for me tactile, active process. Nothing replaces the live music experience but for most people this isnt readily accessible. The danger of audiophilia is its antisocial tendency. The success of this forum is probably due to the need for this social dimension. I love record shops!
John
Posted on: 06 April 2001 by Steve Toy
Long live this forum for its social dimension!
There is no better forum for sensible and even unbiased views, given that non-Naim recommendations are allowed, as long as MUSICAL performance is always priority over non-musical detail, such as background noise. I looked at the What HI*fi! 'site recently, and they rightly pointed out that hearing, for example, the rumble of tube trains in the background of London concert recordings is undesireable, given that they are a distraction which would pass unnoticed if you were actually present at the concert.
Posted on: 06 April 2001 by Jez Quigley
My memory for detail is shot, but I remember reading in the computer trade press that IBM are working on storage that will be be measured in yottabytes (whatever that is, and I'm not sure that I've spelled it correctly) I think it means 10 to the power of 37. This probably means Mike Hanson's and and my Cd collection would fit on one disc! Now that would be some burning session.
Posted on: 07 April 2001 by Chris Brandon
Jez,
I remember reading a similar article some months ago in an I.T. or possibly Scientific journal about a new memory format under development,utilizing completely new and radical ideas,I don't remember the details either,but this new medium was touted as being about the size of a couple of credit cards in thickness,using some kind of "three dimentional" method of working,being many many times faster than what is currently available and also had the capacity to effectivly make the conventional hard-drive a thing of the past.
(I remember "Moores Law" being severely threatenend...but I have not heard,or bothered to find out any more on the subject)
Now imagine the implications....WOW !!!
Regards
Chris
...I want one !
Posted on: 07 April 2001 by Martin Payne
There was a news item in a recent New Scientist that progress was being made towards a robust holographic storage medium.
This would allow a 1cm cube (approx. the size of a sugar cube) to hold about 6Terabytes (6000GB). This would allow over 600,000 minutes at un-compressed CD data rate.
The basic storage mechanism is to arrange data into 'pages', which are stored as holograms within the depth of the cube.
By rotating the cube fractionally, different pages can be stored. The pages are encoded using standard display technologies as used in projectors - LCD or DLP panels. A whole page is encoded in one go - a 1024*768 matrix would store 98,304 bytes at once.
The pages are retrieved by rotating the cube back to exactly the same angle and viewing the hologram, using fairly standard video camera technology.
The following is quoted from the Scientific American Website:-
quote:
"The greatest potential advantage of holographic data storage is its ability to access vast amounts of data rapidly and to transfer it to the computer's central processing unit in parallel at very high rates--billions of bits a second. Such rapid retrieval of large data pages is particularly suited for storing digital images, such as movies, medical images, maps, catalogues and so on. "But especially in the early years of any commercial production, the general public will probably find holographic data storage systems is too bulky and expensive. Although the technology can store huge amounts of material in very small volumes of material, the entire system of lasers, optics, detectors and electronics will initially be rather large. Once the technology is successfully established in one or more business niches, additional technical and manufacturing development, along with economies of scale, could help make holographic devices more affordable and compact. But popular applications of this technology are at least several years away."
Posted on: 09 April 2001 by Greg Beatty
Thanx to all who replied. And I agree with Mike - until it is better than MP3, I see it as a glimpse of the future rather than something to replace my current setup with right now. Even the Big Downgrader on the forum has standards
- GregB
Insert Witty Signature Line Here
