Am I correct saying that labels withhold 96Khz 24bit so they hold upper hand?

Possibly yes.

EMI explained why they would not be issuing 92/24 releases.

Given the lack of uncrackable copy protection, any issue of 96/24 is effectively selling the master for the cost of a consumer unit.

Once the genei is out then there would be no putting it back, and the copyright owners loose control of their copyright property in reality.

ATRB from George

Aye Jon, it be the gentlemen o' fortune that's stoppin' musical hi res' booty bein' available.
Keelhauling is too good for the lily-livered sons of biscuit eaters IMHO!

quote:

Originally posted by GFFJ:
Possibly yes.

EMI explained why they would not be issuing 92/24 releases.

Given the lack of uncrackable copy protection, any issue of 96/24 is effectively selling the master for the cost of a consumer unit.

ATRB from George

That would explain why an artist like Nine Inch Nails / Trent Reznor has distributed 96/24 audio of his recent independent releases.

Isn't EMI's attitude very reminiscent on their view of DAT when it first came out, if we can't have a monopoly/cartel on distribution, then we are going to block it for others.

DAT failed as a domestic format for music delivery, so I would have to agree Jamie!

Dear James,

I am not considerig the pop side, but if a company had spent tens, even hundreds of thousands of pounds on financing the making of a recording, then I suspect that it makes sense to preserve the master tape from illegal copying by the obvious method of not issuing at a quality indistringuishable from it

If Nine Inch Nails, or anyone else wants to release their recordings in "hi-res" then they must have worked out that the risk of bootlegging is not so serious for the recordings in question.

This is no judgement on my part on the actions of those who hold "hi-res" masters, but only issue CD Redbook standard. But the reasoning is clear enough. Commercial reasons will generally guarantee that the master tends to remain at a higher quality than the public commercial issue, where there is a real risk that bootlegging means that the master no has more value than buying one commercial release unit.

ATB from George

quote:

Originally posted by GFFJ:

If Nine Inch Nails, or anyone else wants to release their recordings in "hi-res" then they must have worked out that the risk of bootlegging is not so serious for the recordings in question.

ATB from George

Hi George

Nine Inch Nails took an interesting way around the problem of bootlegging, they gave their last album away for free through their website in four formats, MP3, 16bit Flac, 24bit Flac, and another I do not remember, probably unmixed instrument tracks for remixers to work with.

This might seem daft, but they have reasoned that there are different markets for their music, and that rather than make the same money from all their fans, they will make what they need from the fans who wish to to own high quality products, and not worry about those who will just grab whatever is cheapest or free (illegal downloads).

The previous album was available in Deluxe and Super-deluxe versions, quality vinyl, multiple formats, beautiful packaging, singed copies, in limited editions at (much) higher prices than a normal CD, but still value for money if you wish to own such a product.

Bands like Nine Inch Nails do also make a great deal of money, possibly the majority of their income, from T-shirts and products available at their concerts and website, as well as through concert tickets.

I quite accept that this is not a model that would work for other types of music, although I quite like the idea of orchestra tour shirts. (I do have a few proms mugs though).

My problem with EMI, and similar companies, is their attitude that any advance in music technology is a threat to their business, and not an opportunity that should be explored. With some imagination they could provide better and better products to their customers, and find a way to profit from this.

Perhaps a subscription service for dedicated customers, beautiful packaging, music deals incorporated with concert tickets.

Imagine if other industries behaved in this way, some did, the car industry in the 1950's before Ralph Nader took them on.

Regards

Jamie

Anti-piracy isn't the reason...

I doubt that consumers (with very few exceptions) value quality above CD red-book. Evidence is the spread of MP3s. If they think 128kbps MP3s are OK they won't see the difference between CD and 96/24 at all.

Basically, pricay is no more of a threat at higher quality levels, given that 44/16 can be copied and distributed without further degradation as it is.

The real reason is that the cost (even if minimal) of creating and distributing the high quality format is almost never matched by anyone's willingness to purchase it. Why should they bother, just for a few audiophools?

Many people are happy to listen to their stuff as a ringtone on their phone ffs. A classmate of mine at uni a few years ago spent the whole year listening to her music on the little speakers on her laptop. When I asked her how she could stand it, she shrugged and said "Meh...I can hear it well enough to sing along, so why would I need to do anything else?".

It perhaps horrifies us on this forum that many, many people feel this way....

Indeed, I would like to add that from what I can see around me is that with a lot of people "quantity comes before quality".

Such a shame...

Regards,
Michel

quote:

Anti-piracy isn't the reason...

I doubt that consumers (with very few exceptions) value quality above CD red-book. Evidence is the spread of MP3s. If they think 128kbps MP3s are OK they won't see the difference between CD and 96/24 at all.

Yes, we have had SACD and DVD-Audio for quite some years now, and it's selling next to nothing.

One can get high qualit downloads from Linn, MusicGiants, B&W Music Club and other places. They doesn't seem to be that worried about piracy.

JohanR

I agree 0.0001% of recorded music is available as a high res' file.

Thanks for your posts, guys.

So am I now correct saying that there is no point in getting stressed that my CD player is only giving me 44.1/16bit of information?

I ask that as part of me is thinking that there is so much extra 'richness' present on the master 96/24 that I'm always missing something. If labels are never going to release their 96/24 there is no need pining for a medium that plays them.

Does that make any sense?

Regards,

Jon

quote:

I ask that as part of me is thinking that there is so much extra 'richness' present on the master 96/24 that I'm always missing something. If labels are never going to release their 96/24 there is no need pining for a medium that plays them.

Of course there is an other way to look at it Jon. So many cd's are so badly produced in the first place that a 96/24 copy of them may be an even greater disappointment than the cheaper commercial release

quote:

Originally posted by Howlinhounddog:

quote:

I ask that as part of me is thinking that there is so much extra 'richness' present on the master 96/24 that I'm always missing something. If labels are never going to release their 96/24 there is no need pining for a medium that plays them.

Of course there is an other way to look at it Jon. So many cd's are so badly produced in the first place that a 96/24 copy of them may be an even greater disappointment than the cheaper commercial release

And would any major want to do a decent remaster/transfer from analogue originals, given the lack of robust copy protection and limited quantity of replay devices?

Jono

As someone who works for one of the major record companies, I can say that winkyincanada is spot on. In fact I don't think I could have set it better myself.

Jamie, it is worth noting that the bands who are fortunate enough to be in the position to offer fans the option of how they would like to pay (or not pay) for their music are only in that position because someone (ie. the record company) invested a lot of money in them in the first place.

And, speaking from my experience in the industry, we are always looking for new and exciting ways that we can interact with consumers, as well as new and different products that we can offer that may appeal to these consumers.

quote:

One can get high qualit downloads from Linn, MusicGiants, B&W Music Club and other places. They doesn't seem to be that worried about piracy.

That's probably due the fact they are offering music that most people don't care for. While the Naim label and others may offer good sound quality the music isn't what I want to hear even at 96/24.