We want HD tracks, studios listen!

[syganymede]

Is it time to demand HD from the studios?

 

We all know that we want at least 24bit/96kHz tracks.

 

We all know that the studios record in even higher resolutions than that.

 

But we can't get the tracks to buy anywhere.

 

The few HD tracks available are Jazz or Classical. No pop. No number one's. Nothing on iTunes other than AAC.

 

And the studios are using DRM on DVD-Audio, Bluray and SACD to prevent us from copying the digital HD files to our music servers, and forcing us to purchase expensive new players.

 

So is it time to revolt, and let them know how we feel?

 

[watchnerd]

I find the enormous amount of extra space taken by 24/192khz 'super hi rez' files to not be worth it when compared to the good quality of more 'normal hi rez' rates of 24/88 and 24/96.

 

And before someone argues that more (as in higher sample rates) is somehow automatically better, ask yourself: how much more? 1 Mhz sample rates, with single albums then consuming around 10 GB of space each?

 

Or did I completely misunderstand and you're just asking to get the latest Lady Gaga album in hi-rez?

 

 

 

 

 

[sandyk]

To better put this into some kind of context, the .wav files of the Stereo ONLY tracks from the 24/192 DVD-A of "Carly Simon-No Secrets" is 2.35GB, which is well within the capabilities of a normal DVD-R. I wonder what percentage of people wanting high resolution formats would actually want multi channel surround, which is often very artificial sounding ?

 

SandyK

 

[kamil]

It seems Sony has also opened up the DSD spec to allow computer playback!

 

http://www.ps3sacd.com/dsddiscguide.html

 

[Wavelength]

Gang,

 

Look I have talked about this at the last two RMAF conferences for Computer Audio.

 

First we are less than 0.001% of all sales to any record company. They won't listen if we don't have a plan to make them money. Because they are not going to make it from us.

 

The best avenue to get this accomplished is to develop a platform for which a consumer can pay for performance. Yes actually allow the customer to download at any rate and quality they want. The higher the rate and quality the more costly it is. This way the record company can make a ton of money off the MP3/AAC and still consider selling higher resolution material as it all has to be there in the first place.

 

In this scheme the server would have all the master tapes in some fixed format. The server would have the capability to downsample and format the file into any popular format (i.e. WAV, AIFF, FLAC, ALAC, AAC, MP3... etc).

 

Any programmers with some free time might want to come up with this solution and sell it to the record companies as they are scared right now and need direction.

 

Thanks

Gordon

 

[PeterSt]

Hehe You may have gotten enthusiast about this because "DSD disc" looks as if it is equal to SACD. But it is not ...

Sorry

 

[PeterSt]

Any programmers with some free time might want to come up with this solution and sell it to the record companies

 

That already exists. Tell them to go to the former MP34ALL or something similar. Homeground is Russia, you know, where all free music comes from.

 

But it really worked perfectly, and you even had to pay for it.

 

I live in a country where 100Mbit down+up is common within a year against 30 euro or so per month;

The government is talking about adding a "copy right" fee to the internet subscription "for download and share with your friends". Now let's see ... let them add a crazy amount of 100 euro per month for that. We can download a 1000 albums overnight at this speed, and all bring 500 million per month to the auhors/production companies. It may be sufficient, but it is the only solution which may work. I don't know of any other.

 

Peter

 

PS: Gordon, don't forget your < / c i t e > at quoting (if you do) hehe