![]() ![]() |
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
69.200.91.16
In Reply to: Re: agreed, but.... posted by John Kotches on July 2, 2005 at 07:33:12:
Here's your first quote again: "It is still predominately reissues of catalog titles instead of newly recorded material which can show the new formats in their best light."Here's one from your last post: "Newly recorded material can better show what DVD-Audio and SA-CD are capable of."
These two statements are opposites. I'm going to believe that the first wass an acciddent, and the second what you mean. I agree who;eheartedly, particularly after listening to Ray Kimber's DSD Iso-mike recordings at last year's HE show...
I've been meaning to pick up some Dire Straights. Thanks to your recommendation, I'm off to see if there are any DVD-A's or SACD's left at Tower Records here in NYC...;)
![]()
Follow Ups:
They aren't.What we're getting is predominately a rehash of old material, marketed to an aging audiophile base. It'll sell a few thousand copies, maybe as many as 10,000 copies but that isn't nearly enough to take it beyond niche status.
A 40 year old master tape isn't going to show what DVD-A or SA-CD is capable of and that point was consistent in both quotes you highlighted.
John,You should re-read your first quote: "It is still predominately reissues of catalog titles instead of newly recorded material which can show the new formats in their best light." Maybe I'm being a bit of a semantic freak, but the unequivocal meaning of the your statement is that reissues of catalogue titles can best demonstrate of "what DVD-A or SA-CD is capable." (Whether or not you meant it - I don't think you did - the base sentence is "It is still predominantly reissues of catalogue titles which can show the new formats in their best light." What the sentence needs to change the meaning is another qualifier and a comma: "It is still predominantly reissues of catalogue titles that are currently available, rather than newly recorded material which can show the new formats in their best light.")
This isn't what any of your follow-up e-mails state, with which I agree wholeheartedly.
![]()
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: