The future..??
Posted by: SC on 01 April 2009
Great, though scary, story from Andrew Everard at What HiFi on the preference for MP3 with the younger folk of today.....
I'm reminded of Roy T's shocking conversation in the Uniti thread....
Steve.
I'm reminded of Roy T's shocking conversation in the Uniti thread....
quote:Originally posted by Roy T:
Over Christmas I had the chance to talk with my brother's children (25 & 26) and their friends about music and according to them music is;
- Free except when attending a concert.
- Music is something on an Ipod, a phone or the background to a rented dvd.
- Music is a video on Youtube playing while you browse, twitter or whatever.
- Music is passed about between friends and is not a possession, it is a shared something to pass the time.
- You are considered sad if you have thousands of pounds, dollars or euros invested in hi-fi equipment.
- You are considered sad if you have thousands of pounds, dollars or euros invested in a physical display of your dvd, cds or records.
- Quality music is whatever is playing on your phone or Ipod.
- Quantity vs quality, quantity wins every time.
- To have records older than they are is utterly unbelievable. WTF?
- Welcome to 2009 my friends to the show that never ends.
Steve.
Posted on: 03 April 2009 by ryan_d
Sorry I missed out "might" from the above sentence.
RYan
RYan
Posted on: 03 April 2009 by js
I do dems for 'inexperienced' listeners all the time and am never surprised by their considerable acumen. It's about exposure. The problem is that many think better fi just elitist because thier experience to it is generally just a bigger noise, hose cables and line conditioners. They haven't had a goose bump experience or realized the amount of music actually available in uncompressed recordings. Our best customers didn't start out audiophiles. Those tend to visit the latest toy shops that come and go.
I agree that you need to listen to music that stirs your soul as opposed to lets say some audiophile recordings with less gifted players and contrived perspective but that's different for everyone. I've found that most forms have merit when you can actually here it and get closer to the message. I bet even MR Cyrus and Nsync have a diddy or 2 I would like though I choose not to find them.
I agree that you need to listen to music that stirs your soul as opposed to lets say some audiophile recordings with less gifted players and contrived perspective but that's different for everyone. I've found that most forms have merit when you can actually here it and get closer to the message. I bet even MR Cyrus and Nsync have a diddy or 2 I would like though I choose not to find them.
Posted on: 03 April 2009 by pcstockton
quote:Originally posted by ryan_d:
I think that clarifies the issue of whether you said "I contend"
Ryan
That is REALLY weird... I never use that word and don't even know what it means... English is not my first language afterall.
I even went up to look at my original post yesterday and it didn't say that.
Does anyone have a screen print from 2 days back ?
Posted on: 03 April 2009 by DeltaSigma
The "equipment vs. music" aspect of this discussion reminds me of the 300/500 thread last weekend, which touched on the same issue and appeared to put some posters on the defensive. For the record, I agree with PCS on this point.
Posted on: 03 April 2009 by nap-ster
Whatever happens it will mean spending more (on kit and music)
Posted on: 03 April 2009 by pcstockton
just curious...
Haven't read the 300 v 500 thread, but....
Is believing the CDS3 to be "better" than a 5i elitist? Or simply a widely held opinion?
Haven't read the 300 v 500 thread, but....
Is believing the CDS3 to be "better" than a 5i elitist? Or simply a widely held opinion?
Posted on: 03 April 2009 by DeltaSigma
quote:Originally posted by pcstockton:
just curious...
Haven't read the 300 v 500 thread, but....
Is believing the CDS3 to be "better" than a 5i elitist? Or simply a widely held opinion?
Well, the 300 v 500 thread doesn't exist anymore - it mysteriously disappeared a couple of days ago. But there was some discussion of whether some people were more attracted to this hobby by the possibility of owning expensive kit than by a love of music. Your comparison above of an LP12/series 500 kit with an iPod reminded me of that discussion.
Posted on: 03 April 2009 by Patrick F
I think the 300 vs 500 thread has been pushed to page 8.
as for the future
as for the future
Posted on: 03 April 2009 by DeltaSigma
quote:Originally posted by patevil:
I think the 300 vs 500 thread has been pushed to page 8.
I know that there is another thread called "300 v 500", which still exists. However, the actual title of the thread I was referring to was "If the 300 is SO GOOD, why would I expect a major improvement in my setup with a 500?", and it was being actively discussed last weekend. That thread disappeared a couple of days ago.
My apologies for temporarily derailing this thread - just wanted to clarify my earlier comment.
Posted on: 03 April 2009 by kuma
Are mp3s still a buck a tune?
What's the average cost of an entire album for mp3 files?
What's the average cost of an entire album for mp3 files?
Posted on: 03 April 2009 by Patrick F
about 9.99 on itunes
Posted on: 03 April 2009 by kuma
on all titles?
Posted on: 03 April 2009 by Patrick F
most. but not anything obscure
Posted on: 03 April 2009 by Mike in PA, USA
Actually, a few months ago iTunes went to uncompressed filed and no DRM for titles from the three major labels and may others. Still about $1/tune and $10/album. I searched for discussion of this on the forum here but couldn't find any - maybe I missed it.
Posted on: 03 April 2009 by kuma
Ah..
So, still used records are cheaper! ( 1-8$, but averaging 2-3$ for an entire album including the obscure ones! )
The only exceptions is rare 45 dance singles, but I doubt those are not available on mp3, I bet.
A few years ago, I browsed through the iTune store and thought to myself, what a *rip*!
Record companies never change trying to overcharge consumer just as they did/do with CDs.
So, still used records are cheaper! ( 1-8$, but averaging 2-3$ for an entire album including the obscure ones! )
The only exceptions is rare 45 dance singles, but I doubt those are not available on mp3, I bet.
A few years ago, I browsed through the iTune store and thought to myself, what a *rip*!
Record companies never change trying to overcharge consumer just as they did/do with CDs.
Posted on: 03 April 2009 by pcstockton
quote:Originally posted by Mike in PA, USA:
Actually, a few months ago iTunes went to uncompressed filed.
Oh still VERY compressed. You cannot get a whiff of a quality bit rate or codec from Apple.
DRM is gone, yes. and they upped the bitrate to 256kbps, still far from the "best" mp3 and quite unlistenable. Funny they haven't embraced VBRs since they obviously have an issue with bandwidth or they would at least give you 320 mp3s.
In any case, still VERY compressed, WAV not available.
Support your local record store and buy the actual CD for close to the same price as Itunes, rip and enjoy the actual WAV files on your iPod.
Itunes is highway robbery.
Posted on: 03 April 2009 by Mike in PA, USA
You're right. I actually have only purchased one "CD" from itunes, and while I wouldn't call it "unlistenable", it as smooth as the music I have ripped from the disks I own - and taking a look at the file sizes reveals how compressed it is.
Fool me once...
Fool me once...
Posted on: 03 April 2009 by kuma
*smooth* was the problems with the higher bit rate MP3 files I have listened to. ( anything below 128kpb induced ear fatigue and headache after a longer listening )
I was expecting something bright (remember early days of CDs? ), but instead what I got was the smooth music with no life.
If I used a decent DAC, it gets better, but lost bits can't restore lost dynamics, I guess.
I was expecting something bright (remember early days of CDs? ), but instead what I got was the smooth music with no life.
If I used a decent DAC, it gets better, but lost bits can't restore lost dynamics, I guess.
Posted on: 03 April 2009 by spacey
there is a new lossless mp3 out called mp3HD it is backwards compatable. lets hope this is where the future of this format is, then we need worry not about what format/player we use.
Posted on: 03 April 2009 by kuma
quote:Originally posted by r-tee:
there is a new lossless mp3 out called mp3HD it is backwards compatable.
Posted on: 03 April 2009 by winkyincanada
quote:Originally posted by pcstockton:quote:Originally posted by Mike in PA, USA:
Actually, a few months ago iTunes went to uncompressed filed.
Support your local record store and buy the actual CD for close to the same price as Itunes, rip and enjoy the actual WAV files on your iPod.
Itunes is highway robbery.
Concur.
Posted on: 04 April 2009 by Bruce Woodhouse
quote:Originally posted by winkyincanada:quote:Originally posted by pcstockton:quote:Originally posted by Mike in PA, USA:
Actually, a few months ago iTunes went to uncompressed filed.
Support your local record store and buy the actual CD for close to the same price as Itunes, rip and enjoy the actual WAV files on your iPod.
Itunes is highway robbery.
Concur.
Used to. Not possible anymore. No independent record shop within 50miles I'm aware of.
Bruce
Posted on: 04 April 2009 by Adam Meredith
quote:Originally posted by pcstockton:quote:Originally posted by ryan_d:
I think that clarifies the issue of whether you said "I contend"
Ryan
That is REALLY weird... I never use that word and don't even know what it means...
I even went up to look at my original post yesterday and it didn't say that.
Does anyone have a screen print from 2 days back?
http://forums.naim-audio.com/e...772931917#8772931917.
Posted on: 04 April 2009 by pcstockton
I know, I know.... I was just kidding.
I still think someone has my login and password and posts for me sometimes.
I still think someone has my login and password and posts for me sometimes.
Posted on: 04 April 2009 by kuma
Ask your dog, pc.