|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
99.57.82.28
In Reply to: RE: Pricing and Costs of SACD and DSD / High Res downloads posted by Sordidman on May 12, 2015 at 10:48:08
I don't worry about the price of downloads per se, as much as what it is I am buying. When music was and is cheap you can buy something on a whim, enjoy it and put it away. I look at my CD collection and look at all the discs that don't get played very often any more. THAT does bother me.
Now my download choices are BlueCoast, Linn, eclassical, and my buys from SoundKeeper Recordings. I now preview more and consider is the music good enough and performed well enough for me to want to listen to it repeatedly? It is not any more about is the recording good enough to make me really enjoy my time listening? From these folks the recording quality is the highest there is, period. I don't worry that something was copied up to 2496 or more for marketing purposes. That boxed was checked long ago.
Some recordings do not tax my systems as my gear is often better than the the recording and/or the material, but with the companies mentioned above, I know my gear is the weakest link, but still makes those performances as live and real as they can be within my gear budget. I am amazed on a daily basis at what I hear from these recordings through my lowly Steinberg $150 UR-22 24/192 usb interface and my AKG 701's. I just consider all that music I have bought to be an incredible value and look to buy more as my budget permits. And today with this Steinberg unit one does not have to spend crazy money to enjoy it...it is not just a rich man's game anymore. You could be sitting on a park bench with a laptop and this UR-22 and have the best there is. Who could not want that?
I still buy some vinyl from time to time, but from now on downloads will get more of my music money. Seems like a better value to me. And if they are 2496 I can burn them to DVD-Rs myself and enjoy them on all my DVD players, and not just my computer.
Jim Tavegia
Follow Ups:
Now my download choices are BlueCoast, Linn, eclassical, and my buys from SoundKeeper Recordings. I now preview more and consider is the music good enough and performed well enough for me to want to listen to it repeatedly? It is not any more about is the recording good enough to make me really enjoy my time listening? From these folks the recording quality is the highest there is, period. I don't worry that something was copied up to 2496 or more for marketing purposes. That boxed was checked long ago.
How do you make a decision when to spend the extra money for a higher resolution format?
Blue Coast typically charges $15-20 for a 44.1k download. I assume it's 16-bit, but they don't say. Whereas they charge $30-40 for 96k PCM, and $40 for 192k PCM. I assume these are 24-bit, but again they don't say. And they want $40-50 for DSD64 and $50 for DSD128.
I read the arguments from Jared and Cookie explaining why most recordings lose money and why they need to charge more to survive because of their comparably smaller sales volume. I get that. And I think Channel Classics' prices have always been pretty fair. What I don't get and can't get on board with is the big disparity in Blue Coast pricing based solely on download format. If you have to resort to introductory pricing and BOGOF and similar sales tactics to move that hi-res product, it could be an indication that the prices are out of line with what the market will bear.
Much of their PCM 2496 material is $20 which I think is very fair. The fact that their music can be previewed is a big plus as is eclassical. I think $20 is more than fair considering much of their material is starts as DSD. The eclassical pricing is less than that for most of my buys there.
I am not much into re-buying material I already own even if it is remastered, especially when those prices are usually $30 to $40 a pop. My last buy that way was a MFSL SACD of Billy Joel that did not really sound much better than my original lp. Different and with black backgrounds, yes, but not worth the $30 to me. Live and learn.
Reviews can help, but my systems are not up to the same standards of the reviewers so we will not hear the same thing. Someone with a $1k cart, a $2K phono stage and speakers over $10k will hear more than I do.
Now that I am older I am finding more interest in classical music, smaller acoustic ensemble work with vocalists, and more jazz titles. And as I work to created more complete boxed sets of the great composers, many of those can be had on CD for nearly a $1 a disc, a great buy and still very enjoyable. That is what I use Amazon for mostly. I am also not adverse to buying used CDs on occasion.
With a little work one can find affordable high rez files that are the music you really like, and often I am finding there are many artists who are new to me that I can really enjoy, and many of those are on the BlueCoast Records roster of artists. Quiles and Cloud will be my next buy as they are and excellent duo.
Jim Tavegia
There is no music being sold that cannot be previewed....
Given the current state of this dying economy, - I would hazard that very people are buying anything unheard...
With the horrible new Apple paradigm, - it is set up for the consumer to buy, (and playback) from a small database of individual (favorite) songs: 1 or two songs per artist. It is centered around low quality, so that the consumer can play back that song anywhere, on 1 of 5 to 10 devices.
""With a little work one can find affordable high rez files that are the music you really like""
That is simply not true... As a matter of fact, I think that there are so few hi-rez files to download, that even classical fans would have a hard time finding music with good to great performances available. I think that you need to research further. Even huge, huge, stars like GoldFrapp, Groove Armada, Peter Gabriel, Sting, REM, Rolling Stones, who've already had hi-rez discs made, don't have the Hi-rez download files available...
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
I suppose you are right in that you might find it hard to find highrez hip-hop, but the rest is out there if you look. I have no problem finding great highrez material that I LIKE that is affordable for me. And I don't do HD tracks.
And if not downloads, there are still many affordable SACDs off of Amazon if that floats your boat. I have 4 SACD players. I am still filling out my RCA RedSeal SACD collection on occasion. I buy them when the mood hits me, but now with my 24192 usb interface, downloads will rule for me.
Jim Tavegia
of anything....
With that few recordings, - the likelihood of missing someone's favorite, or even likeable stuff is pretty darn high.
From Ornette Coleman to Faudel to the Beatles, - there is no hi-rez.
If your music is represented, that's awesome, I'm happy for you, but that doesn't mean that there is lot of hi-rez out there, and it doesn't mean that there's any kind of variety.
By saying that there's "music for everyone" you're necessarily comparing hi-rez to other formats that actually DO have a wide representation.
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
If someone's music is not represented, whose fault is that in 2015? The Artist? The Label? Someone doesn't feel it is worth being reissued, which today is kind of sad as I would bet there are more reissues than new releases. Look how long it took Sony to do Kind Of Blue in SACD, the number one selling jazz album of all time. Those who have a cool thousand or more a month to spend on music may run of stuff to buy. Most of us don't have that luxury.
Jim Tavegia
exactly as you are stating. Ultimately,- it is likely the economy & the massive loss of wealth that is being taken from everyone by the 1%The lack of leisure time, plus the ubiquity of portable players/phones, means that lower quality music goes everywhere. Less and less people can listen for its own sake, in a static home environment. If people don't have the time, or can't experience the superior quality of hi-rez files/discs, - and most of the files that other consumers are buying are .mp3, - then they are not going to pay more for better: especially if they can't make direct comparisons.
It is what it is: and what hi-rez is is not worth it to most everyone. So the big labels who are already suffering from lack of physical discs, can't/don't/won't invest in a higher resolution files that very few will buy.
The big "disc-selling" artists are all making .mp3s at lower quality than redbook. Streaming services are streaming in .mp3 or worse.
Cookie is absolutely right: when she says that people who don't buy their files don't like the the music of their artists. I would rather buy redbook files/discs of the music that I like, than buy hi-quality recordings. I've been down that road before with Chesky, wasting money on expensive discs made by artists who are 3rd rate IMO.
With hi-rez downloads and discs under 10,000 albums: there's a whole world of people who are not going to get music that they like. Classical, Jazz, and a few prog-rock discs from the 60s-70s + some current unoriginal bands who copy 70s bands: (yes there are a few original new artists, Goldfrapp, Groove Armada, PG, etc, [just a smattering]), will not make hi-rez downloads "popular," successful. (The kind of jazz & classical offered by Chesky, Blue Coast), are not popular compared to "the Voice" style pop crooners, Arabic Dance, pop-rock, roots rock, etc.
Cheers,
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
Edits: 05/19/15 05/19/15 05/19/15
Everything you say is correct, but you left out one important fact. Hi-rez and DSD in particular are the closest thing to the master tape you are ever going to get. "Master tape quality" is a much overused term, but it applies to DSD, and that changes everything. I just got The Stones, Let it Bleed. It sounds amazingly good.
You know, there are people on this forum who spend big money on RTR tape machines, and if they have a collection of thirty tapes they think they are doing very well. I would much rather pay $30 for a DSD file as opposed to $350 for a 15 ips tape.
I think the numbers are even worse than you suggest. On Acoustic Sounds I count 500 DSD files, and 1800 PCM 96/24 files. I think there are 30 DSD files I want, and I'm sure I could find 70 pcm files. The record collector in me says that 100 albums is a legitimate collection.
Hopefully the selection of downloads will continue to grow. PONO music just came online. I think it's just the beginning of this format. It will have to build up more momentum to become relevant, but it may.
---------------------------------------------------------
Big speakers and little amps blew my mind!
I really enjoy about 30 of my 50 SACDs, and I always play them when I want to hear those artists: as opposed to listening to them on the computer or the redbook discs: where I also have them. I only have one or two SACDs where the SACD version is muddier, & sounds worse than the redbook.
I really don't like the way the term "master" and "mastering" is used. Traditionally, the term "mastering" comes from taking the "final mix" or "master" tapes to the production facility, and applying EQ (and sadly compression) during the process of cutting a lacquer for vinyl duplication. From there, a few metal discs are used as masters base duplication points, depending on the run of pressings.
My point is that we rarely know how the original, final mixes sound. Even the artists, and producers, forget. By the time that a recording got played on the radio, (in the past), it was likely the 4th or 5th generation of what happened on mix down day, and way over a year after that day. I remember getting a "test" cassette of the master of our recording as a "double check" from KDisk. It was so horrible, I started booking a plane ticket to NYC to come and oversee the process. Luckily, though, our producer/engineer called me from KDisk later that night, he took care of it.
Some lucky people do get to buy a safety copy of the final mixes; every now and then. Now, we have "clean-up" people, who are middle-men who sit at a computer, re-interpret the music, and build the digital file, either in hi-rez or not: and add their own "take" on the final mixes. IMO, these can vary widely from the original mix. The Rolling Stones ABKCO SACDs don't sound like the original vinyl, and they sound different again from the redbook CDs.
The SHM-SACD of Steely Dan Aja has a way different tonal character than the vinyl, and a way different tonal character to the Universal Gaucho SACD.
It was revelatory to me, whenever, my guitars sounded much different in the rough mixes than when I played them in the enclosed room, different again during the final mixes, different again on the CD, & different again on the AIFF files... (yet played back on the same playback system). Which one is right?
I sure hope that you're right, and I agree that the Pono thing is pretty cool. I am happy to make an investment in DSD/Hi-Rez file playback above what I have now, IF there will be NEW original material & a reasonable selection: instead of just doing another version of Steely Dan, Patricia Barber, etc, stuff that's already been released in other formats.
I guess that I shouldn't be arguing too vociferously as this spiraling cycle of lack of hi-rez feeds upon itself towards doom. As listening habits & wealth of people change/decline: the demand for hi-rez material goes down. People need their money for other stuff. This also hurts album sales for ALL discs and even .mp3 downloads. So people just want to spend &.99 on one song. So the "labels" don't take chances on original material, and promote artists who sound the same as everyone else, and don't cost them anything in expenses. This is all geared to hoping/investing for 1 hit, that comes from American Idol, or the Voice.
This kills SACDs even more, too much investment in art, packaging, discs, etc. and the hi-rez file needs to be created anyway. I do have a problem with companies who buy the rights to duplicate the already built hi-rez files that were used to manufacture SACDs, then jack up the price to purchase a copy of that same file, yet don't offer the other components of the SACD package. At what point will this "kill" the market. Right now, I am betting that few people interested in Hi-Rez file downloads also HAVE EXPERIENCE with SACDs. So, that file better sound as good as the SACD, and it better be cheaper...
The thing that might be a saviour to this death spiral, are things like the PS Audio Directstream DAC, and APL's DSD DAC. DACs that automagically jack up all material to DSD on the fly.
Cheers,
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
I wonder if there are more audiophiles now than in the '70s? Certainly you can't get around the baby-boom numbers, but there is a significant number these days. Going to shows and reading mags seems to indicate we support a rather diverse and expensive market.All this to say; what if DSD became what 7.5 ips tape was to the '70s audiophile? It wasn't that common to the general market, but it was well supported. Even Columbia House sold them mail order.
If converting RB to DSD does turn out to sound better, and the word gets out? Look out. In a relative way of course. :) It's amazing how many people don't even listen to CDs anymore. However, the download nature of hi-rez plays exactly into that.
As an artist I'm sure you have had a much better understanding of the recording process. For an end user like me, it better sound something like the record, unless the record really sucked. It gets weirder. Does Jimmy Page have the right at this point to do whatever he wants to Zeppelin III, and still call it Zeppelin III? Let it Bleed is so old it's almost a historical document. That must have been a well preserved tape they used for the hi-rez version.
There's a greedy record company for ya. If they sell the hi-rez remastered version of the Zep albums, then why not include a hi-rez flat-transfer from the safety copy? That's what makes me want to slap those bastards. BTW, safety copy is the best term. It's what I meant when I said master copy.
As for the rest, don't get me started on the sad state of the world.
The record companies have been on the lookout for the megahit since Frampton comes alive. Oh, the next jagged little pill. It's out there somewhere. It's interesting to me that small labels have made a come-back.
I so wanted to throw a bunch of crazy talk to Cookie Morenco. You know like how do indie labels get there CDs or music to market, and why doesn't she carry more of them. I suppose Subpop would be the biggest of these. If I was her I would also contact Sun Records. :)
Later,
------------------------------------------------------------
Big speakers and little amps blew my mind!
Edits: 05/22/15
Yes, there are tons of SACDs. However, I do wish I snagged more of the major label SACD and DVD-A releases when I could (e.g. Sony, Universal, Warner stuff), because many of them are long out of print and not available for download.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: