In Reply to: Audible watermarking will only become 'normal' if consumers tolerate this practice. I personally... posted by Methos on August 01, 2002 at 14:02:56:
despite the AW on DVD-A, we can look forward to more of the same as pirates WILL break the watermark and Warner's et al WILL respond with allegedly more robust (?) (aka stronger/more "acoustically objectionable") watermark schemes in attempts to fight a losing battle.
Mobile Fidelity LPs. I was scarred to try a Warner's DVD-A, but I now feel that these are actually some of the best master tapes from a Major label, and you all know I don't trust major labels.
What concerns me more is HOW a recording is made and how the finished product sounds and if I LIKE THE MUSIC, Watermarking is not important to me unless it degrades the sound quaility. In Warner's case I don't believe it does, as these Warner recordings never sounded so good.
I am guessing they do not.
And so how can you know whether the watermark degrades the sound or not? You have never heard them without the watermark. They may sound even better without it. Unless you think they could not possibly sound better. Which would be hard to believe.
may sound better without the watermark, we may never know? I will deprive myself waiting for something that may never come!
and I speak as one who still listens to and enjoys many many CDs which contain music that will never come out in any other format. So I am not criticizing anyone for listening to anything. All I am saying is that when you say the watermark does not degrade the sound, you do not have enough information to make this statement.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: