HDtracks....... not for me.

[mzpro5]

CDs are limited to 16/44.1, period.

What this entire conversation is missing is the fact that for a VERY large percentage of home users, CD players are a thing of the past, as are all disc players. I have very technical friends who at this point no longer own a stand alone disc player of any kind. They get their video entertainment from Cable/Satellite, Amazon, Netflix and iTunes. They get their music entertainment from Amazon or iTunes. They don't bother with hard media anymore.

Just recently a friend of mine, a Q/A lab tech for my employer (a technical junky and genius) said his son got an Audio CD of his favorite band for Christmas and didn't know what to do with it. My friend had to really think about it before he remembered his Xbox could play audio CDs.

While I have no doubt that your sophisticated techie friends are in that category that demographic does not make up "a VERY large number of home users". When I see my friends and family members' home there is always at least one type of disc player there, some don't even realize they can play a CD on their DVD player and have both. Heck even though BD has grown leaps and bounds any of my good friends that have BD players were introduced to the format by me and I believe they still would be using DVD had I not been around. When I asked the local video rental guy why they didn't carry more BD copies of movies he said he wasn't getting the demand to justify more copies, that being in a situation where he claims that after the NF debacle he has seen a 15-20% increase in business. The same thing with streaming media with NF and Amazon. The only place I really see discs declining is in music with iTunes and Amazon offerings.

I'm not trying to revive the BD growth issue - the format has grown leaps and bounds and growing every year but DVD still has a strong portion of the market..

As has been pointed out by others I don't think you always have a hold on what is going on with true average Americans. If you use the people you work with as a barometer you are setting the bar way too high. Most average Americans are not "very technical" or pursue the HT/AV hobby the way we do. And besides being unfamiliar with the technology they can't afford the cost of all the newest thing.

The younger upcoming generations will/have embraced the new technology but there are millions of "older" folks that do not have a clue.

I believe we will eventually get to a mainly "discless" society but we have quite a distance to go before we get to "a VERY large number of households" at that point.

 

[Flint]

I merely used my goof friend as an example because that happened this week. While visiting in-laws in OK, they too were without CD players, choosing to use their TVs, iPods and phones for all their music playback needs. My mom uses the Radio or Time Warners music channels for music. My neices and nephews use their phones and computers. My wide uses her phone. Basically, I believe the disc player is slowly dying out, so assuming HD tracks and other high res formats need to play nice with disc players is unrealistic in the current market. That was my point.

But I am talking purely about music playback and the trends in the market. I have reports I am not allowed to divulge here about the number of stand alone disc players in American homes --- let's just say the number of players per household is dwindling significantly.

 

[mzpro5]

I merely used my goof friend as an example because that happened this week. While visiting in-laws in OK, they too were without CD players, choosing to use their TVs, iPods and phones for all their music playback needs. My mom uses the Radio or Time Warners music channels for music. My neices and nephews use their phones and computers. My wide uses her phone. Basically, I believe the disc player is slowly dying out, so assuming HD tracks and other high res formats need to play nice with disc players is unrealistic in the current market. That was my point.

But I am talking purely about music playback and the trends in the market. I have reports I am not allowed to divulge here about the number of stand alone disc players in American homes --- let's just say the number of players per household is dwindling significantly.

We live in two very different worlds and our personal experiences are much different, I feel my world is closer to mainstream America. And alluding to "secret information" is meaningless without the real numbers.

As often we will have to agree to disagree about the timing of the evolution.

 

[Flint]

Fair enough... I didn't want to bring up the market research, but it is the primary source for my knowledge and is fact based. I don't own it, so I am not at liberty to share the specifics or who created it. That's the problem with public forums and having hard, fact-based information which cannot be made public (or else face lawsuits and firings).

 

[koufax65]

I would have to disagree with Flint on the "large percentage" of home users that don't have a disk player to play music. I would say it is less then 10%. It may well be the wave of the future but it is not anywhere near here at this point. A blu-ray player or DVD player plays CD's or Ripped music very well for most people. In a car or truck CD players are standard. I am in agreement with Jeff that this rush to dumb down music quality for the sake of "convenience" is a sorry thing. I do think that one day you will be able to stream high quality music and video in an easy and convenient way. I just hope these Ipod carrying, head phone wearing teen agers don't ruin it for the rest of us.

 

[Flint]

I will say this... the encoders used to make AAC, WMA, and MP3 files have vastly improved over the past 10 years. Most of today's MP3 tracks encoded at 128kbps are signficantly superior to those offered 10 years, or even 5 years, ago. We dismiss lossy compression, but today's lossy compression is so much better than those from the past.

The problem is that unless we pay for a high end audio tool, we cannot get access to the amazing new encoders. They are licensed for pretty high dollars to the companies who encode audio for iTunes, Amazon, and so on.

Of course, I am still a zealot and prefer high-VBR or Lossless audio files.

 

[Botch]

In a car or truck CD players are standard.

A coworker just bought an SUV (I can't remember the brand) and it had both an iPod dock, and a Thumb Drive input, but no CD player. I have no idea if that's common or a new trend or what.
That's one trend I'd actually welcome; a vehicle environment is hard on any disk player with ejectable media (heat, dust, vibration).

 

[mzpro5]

In a car or truck CD players are standard.

A coworker just bought an SUV (I can't remember the brand) and it had both an iPod dock, and a Thumb Drive input, but no CD player. I have no idea if that's common or a new trend or what.
That's one trend I'd actually welcome; a vehicle environment is hard on any disk player with ejectable media (heat, dust, vibration).

I have all three on the Edge but only have used the CD player once just to test it out.

 

[heeman]

The professionals who created the 24/96 and 24/192 files used computers to create, edit, master and listen to the music. You can get a killer hi-rez semi-pro stereo sound card for any PC or Mac for less than $150 to listen to high resolution audio at home.

Flint, would the output of this sound card be digital or analog??

I think you know why I am asking.

 

[Flint]

Usually analog going straight to the powered monitor speakers.

 

[heeman]

Usually analog going straight to the powered monitor speakers.

So this could have been an options instead of the Fubar II USBDAC for my office use with the power amp and speakers?

Sorry for the thread Hi Jack!

:text-threadjacked:

 

[Towen7]

Didn't someone suggest an external sound card instead of a DAC?

 

[Kazaam]

HDtracks ain't for me, either. I hope it succeeds as it'd be "feel good" to have it as an option for getting so-called hi-rez music.

But I'd just be thrilled if albums, in general, would be recorded and mixed/mastered in such a way as to make them sound better on hi-fi systems, regardless of format or resolution. Heck, I'd probably rather listen to a decently mixed/mastered MP3 over a poorly mixed/mastered CD (or poorly done hi-rez download, for that matter).

 

[koufax65]

"Can you name an audio company other than Bose?
Steve Guttenberg
by Steve Guttenberg December 29, 2011 7:35 AM PST

Everyone knows Bose, in large part because it's the most heavily advertised audio brand in the world.

Then again, I can't think of any other audio brand that advertises on the radio, national magazines, or in newspapers. So unless you're an audiophile, or a regular reader of this blog, I doubt you could name another audio brand, if you're under 40."

Just an example of how the large majority of people think about audio in general. Sad but true. I work with people that think spending 500 dollars on a piece of equipment of any kind is "insane" People posting on this board are a small minority that love this sort of hobby. Me included.

 

[Botch]

"... I doubt you could name another audio brand, if you're under 40."

I think folks under 40 would name Apple before they'd name Bose. :ugeek:

 

[Flint]

Monster, specifically Monster Beats and Monster Turbo.

 

[Yesfan70]

Jeff,

I have to agree with some of the posts not putting the blame on HDTracks. I had a similar experience a few months ago.

I have been transferring some of my vinyl to my PC for playback on my Squeezebox. This involves using a USB interface that connects my turntable to my PC and Audacity to record the audio. One of my albums, Peter King - Miliki Sound, I decided to record at 24/96. I had the idea of burning those files to a DVD-R and making a '24/96 DAD' disc like the ones that came out at the dawn of the DVD format. I never could accomplish this and wound up down converting those files to 16/44.1 and burning to a CDR for conventional playback.

I was able to burn the 24/96 Flac files to a CDR for archiving, but imagine that disc will only be able to play on a PC using a program like Winamp (since WMP hates Flac files). I think it's just the luck of the draw for us. I do agree about the misinterpretation of HDTracks statement you quoted. It's not specific enough. There should be some sort of footnote saying, it would not be true 24 bit audio, but 16 bit. The good thing is, 16 bit is still "CD sound". The 16 bit CDR version of my Peter King album sounds amazing.

 

[Deleted member 133]

Jeff,

I have to agree with some of the posts not putting the blame on HDTracks. I had a similar experience a few months ago.

I have been transferring some of my vinyl to my PC for playback on my Squeezebox. This involves using a USB interface that connects my turntable to my PC and Audacity to record the audio. One of my albums, Peter King - Miliki Sound, I decided to record at 24/96. I had the idea of burning those files to a DVD-R and making a '24/96 DAD' disc like the ones that came out at the dawn of the DVD format. I never could accomplish this and wound up down converting those files to 16/44.1 and burning to a CDR for conventional playback.

I was able to burn the 24/96 Flac files to a CDR for archiving, but imagine that disc will only be able to play on a PC using a program like Winamp (since WMP hates Flac files). I think it's just the luck of the draw for us. I do agree about the misinterpretation of HDTracks statement you quoted. It's not specific enough. There should be some sort of footnote saying, it would not be true 24 bit audio, but 16 bit. The good thing is, 16 bit is still "CD sound". The 16 bit CDR version of my Peter King album sounds amazing.

The thing is, I too am quite happy with CD quality sound. I doubt very very much that I'd ever be able to hear a difference between 44.1/16 and 96/24 of the same recording. In fact, my "untrained" ears can't tell a difference between 192 mp3s and CD. But just in case I could, or ever learned how to, I still want to purchase music at CD-quality - or better.

And as I've said, with but few exceptions, I buy albums, not songs. (Another indication that I should be put out to pasture!) So if I could ever find a service that allowed me to download an actual CD, for a price less than what I would pay for a physical copy, such that I could create that physical copy myself, I'd buy into it.

As for hi-res versions... I own a lot of SACDs, some DVD-As, and a couple of music BDs. I intend to buy more. But those are almost exclusively for their multi-channel attributes (something that I don't think even HDtracks offers) and when I do listen to plain old stereo from such formats, I'm sure I notice a difference between it and the CD version, likely because those hi-res versions have been changed (re-mixed, re-mastered, re-whatevered) in some way, shape, or form.

I'm pretty sure that I'll have to "get with the program" if i) I live as long as I plan to and ii) I want (and can) continue listening to high quality recordings. But for now I'm happy to cling to the past and preserve my old ways as long as possible - like a lot of people out there I suspect. (Call us a future untapped market segment - with disposable income to boot!)

Jeff

 

[Yesfan70]

....The thing is, I too am quite happy with CD quality sound. I doubt very very much that I'd ever be able to hear a difference between 44.1/16 and 96/24 of the same recording. In fact, my "untrained" ears can't tell a difference between 192 mp3s and CD. But just in case I could, or ever learned how to, I still want to purchase music at CD-quality - or better......

Some claim to be the same as you, some can "clearly" hear the difference and some are somewhere in the middle. I can hear a difference, but I can't tell you what it is that I'm hearing (does that make sense?). To me, lossless seems to have a more 'fuller' sound to it. Now, in my Jeep, there is no difference but then again the Jeep's interior isn't the quietest either (the 32" mud terrains don't help).

As for 24 bit compared to 16 bit...I'm not even going to try. I really don't think I have the ears for it. I like the idea of HDtracks, but IMO, I think I would buy more from them if they offered 5.1 audio instead of 24 bit stereo tracks. They are tempting, but I don't mind "settling" for CD sound by going with the used CD for a few dollars less.

 

[Deleted member 133]

They are tempting, but I don't mind "settling" for CD sound by going with the used CD for a few dollars less.

Thing is that I've bought many used CDs from Amazon for $0.01 + $2.98 shipping, and tons of them in bricks and mortar stores for $2.99. I probably average something like $5 all in per CD. It's really hard to justify a downloaded "album" from HDtracks at $17.98 even if it is "hi-res."