I heard again last week from a technician of a reputed high end audio
supplier that sony would discontinue sacd; this was rumor coming from
Japan inside Sony. Any other feedback from the group, except that it
is the 1000th rumour on this ?

On 9/19/04 10:19 AM, in article , "Cervin"
wrote:

I heard again last week from a technician of a reputed high end audio
supplier that sony would discontinue sacd; this was rumor coming from
Japan inside Sony. Any other feedback from the group, except that it
is the 1000th rumour on this ?

This would not surprise me as Sony is going to be promoting their Blu-ray
HD-DVD technology, as well as some hi-rez + DVD formating (that new flip
disc and so on).

Though death of new formats tends to be overstated especially with Sony -
and DSD *is* a studio format, who knows!

I can bet that the "marketing push" that Sony did over the last couple of
years will be toned down as they try to promote the high Rez video formats -
and perhaps it will allow the SACD to survive as a couple of tracks there?

B&D wrote:



On 9/19/04 10:19 AM, in article , "Cervin"
wrote:

I heard again last week from a technician of a reputed high end audio
supplier that sony would discontinue sacd; this was rumor coming from
Japan inside Sony. Any other feedback from the group, except that it
is the 1000th rumour on this ?

This would not surprise me as Sony is going to be promoting their Blu-ray
HD-DVD technology, as well as some hi-rez + DVD formating (that new flip
disc and so on).

Though death of new formats tends to be overstated especially with Sony -
and DSD *is* a studio format, who knows!

I can bet that the "marketing push" that Sony did over the last couple of
years will be toned down as they try to promote the high Rez video formats -
and perhaps it will allow the SACD to survive as a couple of tracks there?

I have no insider information on this topic but I will say that if there's
anything that Sony has done right is to continue to support the customers who
use their proprietary formats. Look at how long they supported Beta when it had
clearly lost in the marketplace. Same with MiniDisc; it's still being used
while its competitor DCC has been long discarded both having been blasted out
of the water by cd-r.

On 9/19/04 6:37 PM, in article , "Nousaine"
wrote:

B&D wrote:



On 9/19/04 10:19 AM, in article , "Cervin"
wrote:

I heard again last week from a technician of a reputed high end audio
supplier that sony would discontinue sacd; this was rumor coming from
Japan inside Sony. Any other feedback from the group, except that it
is the 1000th rumour on this ?

This would not surprise me as Sony is going to be promoting their Blu-ray
HD-DVD technology, as well as some hi-rez + DVD formating (that new flip
disc and so on).

Though death of new formats tends to be overstated especially with Sony -
and DSD *is* a studio format, who knows!

I can bet that the "marketing push" that Sony did over the last couple of
years will be toned down as they try to promote the high Rez video formats -
and perhaps it will allow the SACD to survive as a couple of tracks there?

I have no insider information on this topic but I will say that if there's
anything that Sony has done right is to continue to support the customers who
use their proprietary formats. Look at how long they supported Beta when it
had
clearly lost in the marketplace. Same with MiniDisc; it's still being used
while its competitor DCC has been long discarded both having been blasted out
of the water by cd-r.

True - we agree. Actually, minidisc has been revived in the late 1990's -
and now offers a new formet "Hi-MD" which will reocrd up to 45 hours on a
disc - mostly due to the new lasers on offer.

I suppose this is why Sony will support a medium as long as they do!

Also - the Beta format is still used for analog studio recording by most
stations that still use analog!

B&D wrote in message ...
On 9/19/04 6:37 PM, in article , "Nousaine"
snip..snip
I suppose this is why Sony will support a medium as long as they do!



I really do not know what they are thinking. I am generally cautious
about spending money on SACD haardware and software but at the same
time Hong Kong and Chinese Albums seem to be leaning towards SACD.

And in this article the so called blu-ray man says SACD is here to
stay for at least for another 20 years. Just nice, in another twenty
years I think I will be probably gone..

http://www.sa-cd.net/shownews.php?news=23

cheers

B&D wrote in message ...


Also - the Beta format is still used for analog studio recording by most
stations that still use analog!

Actually, the beta format used by TV stations is called BetaCam SP,
and it's only relation to the home beta format, betamax, is that it
uses the same sized cassettes, although the tape inside them is
radically different, as is the tape speed etc. There is also a digital
format, Digital betacam, or DigiBeta as it gets called, which uses the
same sized cassette shells, but is a very high quality studio digital
format. Both betacam SP and digibeta also have larger sized cassettes
to allow for longer recording times. There are even decks that will
play back HDCAM, DigiBeta, BetaSX (yet another beta format cassette
with a different type of digital encoding using MPEG2), IMX (yet
another....) and analogue BetaCam SP.

I'd also say that Betacam SP is still used for analogue studio
recording by most stations that can't afford anything better, as
compared to any modern digital format, it looks a bit low rez, soft
and fuzzy. How the times change....

Graeme

TChelvam wrote:

I really do not know what they are thinking. I am generally cautious
about spending money on SACD haardware and software but at the same
time Hong Kong and Chinese Albums seem to be leaning towards SACD.


oh great ... now we get crappy Canto pop in hi-rez surround sound ...

My only clue that proved to me that Sony was pulling the plug on SACD
was with Thomas Schippers' recording of Alexander Nevsky by Prokofiev.
For ages it was not available on CD. About a year ago it came out on a
single layer SACD. Fast forward to a few weeks ago. I wander into
Tower, and see that Sony has released onto CD a series of "Great
Performances" ....and there it was.....all remastered in great sound,
and at a amazing low price of $7.99!!!! For me, that was the sign that
resisting had paid off. Thank you Sony, for saving me money on
equipment. So long SACD (and DVD-A for that matter), it's been great
not knowing you.

Oh, by the way.....I'm not just a stubborn pessimist. I do have HDCD in
my system. I know that when that little blue HDCD indicator light goes
on...........I know that my player's face is much prettier.

B Smith

"B. Smith" wrote in message
...
My only clue that proved to me that Sony was pulling the plug on SACD
was with Thomas Schippers' recording of Alexander Nevsky by Prokofiev.
For ages it was not available on CD. About a year ago it came out on a
single layer SACD. Fast forward to a few weeks ago. I wander into
Tower, and see that Sony has released onto CD a series of "Great
Performances" ....and there it was.....all remastered in great sound,
and at a amazing low price of $7.99!!!! For me, that was the sign that
resisting had paid off. Thank you Sony, for saving me money on
equipment. So long SACD (and DVD-A for that matter), it's been great
not knowing you.

Oh, by the way.....I'm not just a stubborn pessimist. I do have HDCD in
my system. I know that when that little blue HDCD indicator light goes
on...........I know that my player's face is much prettier.


What you don't seem to acknowledge is that with or without Sony, SACD seems
to be taking off at least as a niche audiophile product...disk releases now
top 2500 and there are more being released each month this year than
last...even with Sony contributing NADA. Moreover, the market is now being
flooded with pretty decent low cost universals and Sony players, and DVD-A
recording software is now available for cheap for the small independent
labels, so DVD-A is also likely to be around in one form or another for some
time to come...perhaps as the home-brewed favorite. And both sound better
than CD.

So if you like your little blue HDCD lights, fine. You should like
additional lights for SACD, DVD-A, and Multichannel even more....they'll be
on your *next* player.

A significant point, though, is that the SACD release was not a hybrid
and could not be played on regular CD players. Hence, the need for a
CD release.

Kal

On 23 Sep 2004 23:59:36 GMT, (B. Smith) wrote:

My only clue that proved to me that Sony was pulling the plug on SACD
was with Thomas Schippers' recording of Alexander Nevsky by Prokofiev.
For ages it was not available on CD. About a year ago it came out on a
single layer SACD. Fast forward to a few weeks ago. I wander into
Tower, and see that Sony has released onto CD a series of "Great
Performances" ....and there it was.....all remastered in great sound,
and at a amazing low price of $7.99!!!! For me, that was the sign that
resisting had paid off. Thank you Sony, for saving me money on
equipment. So long SACD (and DVD-A for that matter), it's been great
not knowing you.

Oh, by the way.....I'm not just a stubborn pessimist. I do have HDCD in
my system. I know that when that little blue HDCD indicator light goes
on...........I know that my player's face is much prettier.

B Smith

Or simply put, DSD made it possible to capture all of what's in the fragile
original master tape. Thereafter, you make CD , mp3, DVD-A or even LP...it
means nothing. The re-emergence of rolling Stones in SACD and thereafter in
CD or both simultaneously was pastrly DSD or SACD made it possible to save
what could be lost forever. Or atleast this the story that was told by SACD
white paper.


"B. Smith" wrote in message
...
My only clue that proved to me that Sony was pulling the plug on SACD
was with Thomas Schippers' recording of Alexander Nevsky by Prokofiev.
For ages it was not available on CD. About a year ago it came out on a
single layer SACD. Fast forward to a few weeks ago. I wander into
Tower, and see that Sony has released onto CD a series of "Great
Performances" ....and there it was.....all remastered in great sound,
and at a amazing low price of $7.99!!!! For me, that was the sign that
resisting had paid off. Thank you Sony, for saving me money on
equipment. So long SACD (and DVD-A for that matter), it's been great
not knowing you.

Oh, by the way.....I'm not just a stubborn pessimist. I do have HDCD in
my system. I know that when that little blue HDCD indicator light goes
on...........I know that my player's face is much prettier.

B Smith

B. Smith wrote:
My only clue that proved to me that Sony was pulling the plug on SACD
was with Thomas Schippers' recording of Alexander Nevsky by Prokofiev.
For ages it was not available on CD. About a year ago it came out on a
single layer SACD. Fast forward to a few weeks ago. I wander into
Tower, and see that Sony has released onto CD a series of "Great
Performances" ....and there it was.....all remastered in great sound,
and at a amazing low price of $7.99!!!! For me, that was the sign that
resisting had paid off. Thank you Sony, for saving me money on
equipment. So long SACD (and DVD-A for that matter), it's been great
not knowing you.


Well, in a similar vein, all of the recent Bob Dylan SACDs (which were Sony
hybrids) have now been rereleased in CD-only format.

One might ask: why?



--
-S
Your a boring little troll. How does it feel? Go blow your bad breath elsewhere.

Chelvam wrote:
Or simply put, DSD made it possible to capture all of what's in the fragile
original master tape.

But PCM can do that too.

Thereafter, you make CD , mp3, DVD-A or even LP...it
means nothing. The re-emergence of rolling Stones in SACD and thereafter in
CD or both simultaneously was pastrly DSD or SACD made it possible to save
what could be lost forever. Or atleast this the story that was told by SACD
white paper.

If you mean, DSD was originally developed as an archiving medium, that's so.


--
-S
Your a boring little troll. How does it feel? Go blow your bad breath elsewhere.

On 24 Sep 2004 15:50:54 GMT, Steven Sullivan wrote:

Chelvam wrote:
Or simply put, DSD made it possible to capture all of what's in the fragile
original master tape.

But PCM can do that too.

Thereafter, you make CD , mp3, DVD-A or even LP...it
means nothing. The re-emergence of rolling Stones in SACD and thereafter in
CD or both simultaneously was pastrly DSD or SACD made it possible to save
what could be lost forever. Or atleast this the story that was told by SACD
white paper.

If you mean, DSD was originally developed as an archiving medium, that's so.

Yet interestingly, DSD was exposed as having a fatal and fundamental
flaw, so totally failed as an archival medium, and the hybrid DSD-Wide
is now the Sony studio standard.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
On 24 Sep 2004 15:50:54 GMT, Steven Sullivan wrote:

Chelvam wrote:
Or simply put, DSD made it possible to capture all of what's in the fragile
original master tape.

But PCM can do that too.

Thereafter, you make CD , mp3, DVD-A or even LP...it
means nothing. The re-emergence of rolling Stones in SACD and thereafter in
CD or both simultaneously was pastrly DSD or SACD made it possible to save
what could be lost forever. Or atleast this the story that was told by SACD
white paper.

If you mean, DSD was originally developed as an archiving medium, that's so.

Yet interestingly, DSD was exposed as having a fatal and fundamental
flaw, so totally failed as an archival medium,

Deutsche Grammaphon, for one, agrees. They archive in PCM.

and the hybrid DSD-Wide
is now the Sony studio standard.


I've left out, too, the whole aspect involving expiration of
CD-related patents as an impetus towards developing a new format....


--
-S
Your a boring little troll. How does it feel? Go blow your bad breath elsewhere.

Steven Sullivan wrote:

B. Smith wrote:
My only clue that proved to me that Sony was pulling the plug on SACD
was with Thomas Schippers' recording of Alexander Nevsky by Prokofiev.
For ages it was not available on CD. About a year ago it came out on a
single layer SACD. Fast forward to a few weeks ago. I wander into
Tower, and see that Sony has released onto CD a series of "Great
Performances" ....and there it was.....all remastered in great sound,
and at a amazing low price of $7.99!!!! For me, that was the sign that
resisting had paid off. Thank you Sony, for saving me money on
equipment. So long SACD (and DVD-A for that matter), it's been great
not knowing you.


Well, in a similar vein, all of the recent Bob Dylan SACDs (which were Sony
hybrids) have now been rereleased in CD-only format.

One might ask: why?

For the same reason book publishers put out hardcover editions before they
put out paperbacks--market segmentation. You sell a high-priced (and
high-margin) version to as many people as are willing to pay a premium for a
better quality product (real or perceived). Then you put out a cheaper
version to appeal to everybody else. This maximizes revenue for each
remastering.

You can't put them out at the same time, for a couple of reasons. First,
many consumers (i.e., those who don't know what an SACD is) will be confused
if they see the same recording at two different prices in the bin--plus you
won't get the higher price from the consumers who don't care about the SACD
layer but are willing to pay full price for the CD. Second, if the exact
same remaster is available on CD for less, it tends to make the SACD look a
little less special, which is not the image Sony wants to convey.

Of course, there seems to be some evidence that Sony has now decided the
market for SACDs is so pitifully small that it isn't worth feeding it at
all. That will probably mean fewer remastering projects in the future, since
SACD was certainly part of the reason Sony has been remastering parts of its
back catalogue of late.

bob

__________________________________________________ _______________
Get ready for school! Find articles, homework help and more in the Back to
School Guide! http://special.msn.com/network/04backtoschool.armx

Steven Sullivan wrote:
B. Smith wrote:

My only clue that proved to me that Sony was pulling the plug on SACD
was with Thomas Schippers' recording of Alexander Nevsky by Prokofiev.
For ages it was not available on CD. About a year ago it came out on a
single layer SACD. Fast forward to a few weeks ago. I wander into
Tower, and see that Sony has released onto CD a series of "Great
Performances" ....and there it was.....all remastered in great sound,
and at a amazing low price of $7.99!!!! For me, that was the sign that
resisting had paid off. Thank you Sony, for saving me money on
equipment. So long SACD (and DVD-A for that matter), it's been great
not knowing you.



Well, in a similar vein, all of the recent Bob Dylan SACDs (which were Sony
hybrids) have now been rereleased in CD-only format.

One might ask: why?



In one word i-tunes/pod....SACD is expensive and not flexible...Anthem
has just come out with a new surround digital processor that will
supposedly upconvert most digital signals to high res...just a thought...;)

Bob Marcus wrote:
Steven Sullivan wrote:

B. Smith wrote:
My only clue that proved to me that Sony was pulling the plug on SACD
was with Thomas Schippers' recording of Alexander Nevsky by Prokofiev.
For ages it was not available on CD. About a year ago it came out on a
single layer SACD. Fast forward to a few weeks ago. I wander into
Tower, and see that Sony has released onto CD a series of "Great
Performances" ....and there it was.....all remastered in great sound,
and at a amazing low price of $7.99!!!! For me, that was the sign that
resisting had paid off. Thank you Sony, for saving me money on
equipment. So long SACD (and DVD-A for that matter), it's been great
not knowing you.


Well, in a similar vein, all of the recent Bob Dylan SACDs (which were Sony
hybrids) have now been rereleased in CD-only format.

One might ask: why?

For the same reason book publishers put out hardcover editions before they
put out paperbacks--market segmentation. You sell a high-priced (and
high-margin) version to as many people as are willing to pay a premium for a
better quality product (real or perceived). Then you put out a cheaper
version to appeal to everybody else. This maximizes revenue for each
remastering.

But the Dylan SACD/CD hybrids wreren't particularly high-priced...
in fact, at Circuit City, they were priced the same as CDs.
(And were filed along with them).


--
-S
Your a boring little troll. How does it feel? Go blow your bad breath elsewhere.

gzubeck wrote:
Steven Sullivan wrote:
B. Smith wrote:

My only clue that proved to me that Sony was pulling the plug on SACD
was with Thomas Schippers' recording of Alexander Nevsky by Prokofiev.
For ages it was not available on CD. About a year ago it came out on a
single layer SACD. Fast forward to a few weeks ago. I wander into
Tower, and see that Sony has released onto CD a series of "Great
Performances" ....and there it was.....all remastered in great sound,
and at a amazing low price of $7.99!!!! For me, that was the sign that
resisting had paid off. Thank you Sony, for saving me money on
equipment. So long SACD (and DVD-A for that matter), it's been great
not knowing you.



Well, in a similar vein, all of the recent Bob Dylan SACDs (which were Sony
hybrids) have now been rereleased in CD-only format.

One might ask: why?



In one word i-tunes/pod....SACD is expensive and not flexible...


Again,this makes no sense. I can rip the CD tracks from a hybrid SACD and convert
them to mp3/AAC as easily
as I can from a regular CD...and have done, for my personal archive.

The Dylan SACDs were hybrids. (Although 'Blood on the Tracks' also appeared
as a stereo SACD, in the format's earlier days).





--
-S
Your a boring little troll. How does it feel? Go blow your bad breath elsewhere.

On 25 Sep 2004 00:09:18 GMT, gzubeck wrote:

Anthem
has just come out with a new surround digital processor that will
supposedly upconvert most digital signals to high res...just a thought...;)

Once and for all, can we lay this ghost to rest? You can *NOT*
upconvert *anything* to a higher resolution..................
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

"Harry Lavo" wrote in message

snip...snip...


What you don't seem to acknowledge is that with or without Sony, SACD
seems
to be taking off at least as a niche audiophile product...disk releases
now
top 2500 and there are more being released each month this year than
last...even with Sony contributing NADA. Moreover, the market is now
being
flooded with pretty decent low cost universals and Sony players,
snip.....


And one $11,000 SACD player
...http://www.gizmodo.com/archives/sony...layer-019551.p
hp

I was trying to buy the DVP 999 the other day - it is not listed on their
website - us or canadian - anymore. My cousin works for Sony - he couldn't
find it internally either. After several days, he discovered it is still
available to employees, but still is not listed on site. I'm getting it
(friends and family discount is great), but I wonder what they are doing
too.

"B. Smith" wrote in message
...
My only clue that proved to me that Sony was pulling the plug on SACD
was with Thomas Schippers' recording of Alexander Nevsky by Prokofiev.
For ages it was not available on CD. About a year ago it came out on a
single layer SACD. Fast forward to a few weeks ago. I wander into
Tower, and see that Sony has released onto CD a series of "Great
Performances" ....and there it was.....all remastered in great sound,
and at a amazing low price of $7.99!!!! For me, that was the sign that
resisting had paid off. Thank you Sony, for saving me money on
equipment. So long SACD (and DVD-A for that matter), it's been great
not knowing you.

Oh, by the way.....I'm not just a stubborn pessimist. I do have HDCD in
my system. I know that when that little blue HDCD indicator light goes
on...........I know that my player's face is much prettier.

B Smith

"Steven Sullivan" wrote in message
...
gzubeck wrote:
Steven Sullivan wrote:
B. Smith wrote:

My only clue that proved to me that Sony was pulling the plug on SACD
was with Thomas Schippers' recording of Alexander Nevsky by Prokofiev.
For ages it was not available on CD. About a year ago it came out on
a
single layer SACD. Fast forward to a few weeks ago. I wander into
Tower, and see that Sony has released onto CD a series of "Great
Performances" ....and there it was.....all remastered in great sound,
and at a amazing low price of $7.99!!!! For me, that was the sign
that
resisting had paid off. Thank you Sony, for saving me money on
equipment. So long SACD (and DVD-A for that matter), it's been great
not knowing you.



Well, in a similar vein, all of the recent Bob Dylan SACDs (which were
Sony
hybrids) have now been rereleased in CD-only format.

One might ask: why?



In one word i-tunes/pod....SACD is expensive and not flexible...


Again,this makes no sense. I can rip the CD tracks from a hybrid SACD and
convert
them to mp3/AAC as easily
as I can from a regular CD...and have done, for my personal archive.

The Dylan SACDs were hybrids. (Although 'Blood on the Tracks' also
appeared
as a stereo SACD, in the format's earlier days).



I think you are thinking of "Blonde on Blonde". As far as I know, this was
the only Dylan released on SACD before the big remastering. Have sold mine
in favor of the multichannel...still have the original CD.

"jw" wrote in message
...
I was trying to buy the DVP 999 the other day - it is not listed on their
website - us or canadian - anymore. My cousin works for Sony - he
couldn't
find it internally either. After several days, he discovered it is still
available to employees, but still is not listed on site. I'm getting it
(friends and family discount is great), but I wonder what they are doing
too.


They have a whole new lineup of models and are slowly phasing out the old
ones. That's probably what you have run into.

On 9/25/04 11:06 AM, in article , "Stewart
Pinkerton" wrote:

On 25 Sep 2004 00:09:18 GMT, gzubeck wrote:

Anthem
has just come out with a new surround digital processor that will
supposedly upconvert most digital signals to high res...just a thought...;)

Once and for all, can we lay this ghost to rest? You can *NOT*
upconvert *anything* to a higher resolution..................

But you can certainly convert it into a different format without losing
resolution - yes?

Steven Sullivan wrote in message ...
Bob Marcus wrote:
Steven Sullivan wrote:

Well, in a similar vein, all of the recent Bob Dylan SACDs (which were Sony
hybrids) have now been rereleased in CD-only format.

One might ask: why?

For the same reason book publishers put out hardcover editions before they
put out paperbacks--market segmentation. You sell a high-priced (and
high-margin) version to as many people as are willing to pay a premium for a
better quality product (real or perceived). Then you put out a cheaper
version to appeal to everybody else. This maximizes revenue for each
remastering.

But the Dylan SACD/CD hybrids wreren't particularly high-priced...
in fact, at Circuit City, they were priced the same as CDs.
(And were filed along with them).

"High-priced" is a relative term. The SACD hybrids were/are more
expensive than the CD-only versions of the same masters. That's the
market segmentation--first catch the people willing to pay "full"
price for a CD (plus those few who really want the SACD), then go
after the rest of the market.

bob

On 26 Sep 2004 14:50:10 GMT, B&D wrote:

On 9/25/04 11:06 AM, in article , "Stewart
Pinkerton" wrote:

On 25 Sep 2004 00:09:18 GMT, gzubeck wrote:

Anthem
has just come out with a new surround digital processor that will
supposedly upconvert most digital signals to high res...just a thought...;)

Once and for all, can we lay this ghost to rest? You can *NOT*
upconvert *anything* to a higher resolution..................

But you can certainly convert it into a different format without losing
resolution - yes?

If you really know what you're doing, yes. It is however quite tricky
to do this without causing *some* degradation, especially once you
move away from simple translations like 16/44.1 to 24/88.2.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Hi,

In message , B&D
writes
On 9/25/04 11:06 AM, in article , "Stewart
Pinkerton" wrote:

On 25 Sep 2004 00:09:18 GMT, gzubeck wrote:

Anthem
has just come out with a new surround digital processor that will
supposedly upconvert most digital signals to high res...just a thought...;)

Once and for all, can we lay this ghost to rest? You can *NOT*
upconvert *anything* to a higher resolution..................

But you can certainly convert it into a different format without losing
resolution - yes?

Yes, there are a number of 'mathematically lossless' compression schemes
for audio, so for example, you can convert a wave file digitally
extracted from CD to an APE (Monkey's audio) file with no information
loss, and hence no resolution loss. MLP (Meridian Lossless packing), as
used in DVD-Audio, does this.

However, the point is that you cannot add any extra information to that
in the original data stream by upsampling - you can certainly make it
'bigger', but from an information theory point of view, there will be
nothing in the larger (upsampled) stream that constitutes 'new
information'.

--
Regards,
Glenn Booth

"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...

Yet interestingly, DSD was exposed as having a fatal and fundamental
flaw, so totally failed as an archival medium, and the hybrid DSD-Wide
is now the Sony studio standard.

The "fatal and fundamental flaw" had to do with digital signal processing
which is utterly irrelevant to archiving!

It's also debatable that there is any practical problem at all since all
analog recordings have this very same "fatal and fundamental flaw," namely
that both are not "perfectible" in the future.

When PCM recording finally gets perfected, maybe we should look at this
issue again. Meanwhile, I'm not holding my breath just because a bunch of
folks who hold patents in PCM technology want to take cheap shots at a
technology that recently became part of the public domain.

--
Bob Olhsson Audio Mastery, Nashville TN
Mastering, Audio for Picture, Mix Evaluation and Quality Control
Over 40 years making people sound better than they ever imagined!
615.385.8051 http://www.hyperback.com

On 26 Sep 2004 22:19:42 GMT, "Bob Olhsson" wrote:

"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...

Yet interestingly, DSD was exposed as having a fatal and fundamental
flaw, so totally failed as an archival medium, and the hybrid DSD-Wide
is now the Sony studio standard.

The "fatal and fundamental flaw" had to do with digital signal processing
which is utterly irrelevant to archiving!

No, it had to do with overload of the ADC, which is pretty darned
relevant!

It's also debatable that there is any practical problem at all since all
analog recordings have this very same "fatal and fundamental flaw," namely
that both are not "perfectible" in the future.

However, 24/96 PCM vastly outstrips the capability of *any* analogue
recording medium, so may reasonably be considered 'adequate' for
archiving masters in a way which will allow infinite humbers of
submasters with zero degradation.

When PCM recording finally gets perfected, maybe we should look at this
issue again.

It was always perfect in theory, all we lack are perfect ADCs.

Meanwhile, I'm not holding my breath just because a bunch of
folks who hold patents in PCM technology want to take cheap shots at a
technology that recently became part of the public domain.

There *are* no patents in the basics of PCM, since it's been in the
public domain for *decades*.

--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering