|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
152.163.100.16
In Reply to: Re: The very very Best designers may indeed give a rats ass about audio... posted by Steve O on March 14, 2007 at 16:51:01:
would be that artists are going to be interested in it.Doesn't matter what sort of Artist, look at the day-jobs of the owners of hot-rods. For most part the good engineers are going to work where the future is percieved to be. Like when the Aero guys went for fixed wing airplanes in the early 20's instead of the Zepplins. That didn't stop a few brilliant folks like Eckner from staying with LTA. But the best were going to be doing work on things like the ME-109, P-38, and the Mosquito.
As for audio, change the specs the industry is working to, and you'll see product delivered to meet it. Want to make a fortune, figure out how to define and measure what makes an amp sound good, and patent the process, then sell it.
Follow Ups:
Hi.Isn't every designer in the audio industries trying to "define & measure what makes an amp sound good, patent the process & sell it" since day one?
Has many made a fortune this way yet? I can quote someone in this audio industry for decades & patented hundreds of his designs in the US patents office alone. I guess he got to make tones of fortunes.
The problem is sonics is so subjective. You like it doesn't mean they also like it.
I don't think that MPG technology has actually advanced the audio art.It has made it more portable and ubiquitous though.
Questionable goals at best, unquestionably compromised quality throughout.
Assuming you meant MP3 vs MPG: MP3 may not have advanced the audio art WRT to sonic quality at this point in time. Have to admit though, at high bit rates it can be pretty darn good.As you observe, MP3 has indeed made music more portable and "ubiquitous". Much greater variety is easily available too! IMO, these are not questionable goals at all. They are different than those of a sonic purist but are certainly valid and definitely more viable than pure sonics in a fiercely competitive capitalist environment. I view MP3 and the like as a stepping stone to high quality and maybe lossless compression schemes of the near future where all your music needs (and other stuff too) will be supplied digitally via some cheap and fast broadband connection at a quality level YOU select.
These days it seems that some purists have to limit their musical horizons because their reproduction equipment reveals unacceptable flaws in the source material and they can't listen thru it. Too bad for them. I may be dreaming but I believe those days will be behind us soon. Will highest quality audio be mainstream? Probably not but it never was mainstream in the past. Will high quality audio cost more than lower quality? Probably, both in terms of transmission and storage media and of the cost of the material itself. When/if things settle down, everybody will get just what they want.
as you observed, I actually meant MP3.....I was watching 'Debby Does Detroit pt45'.mpg while typing, that's all.As you pointed out, vurtually all audio developments have been driven by market forces in the last 70 years.
By questionable, I would suggest that we don't actually function better in an environment where while shopping for lumber and tools, we have to hear some schlock hit music on the overhead....or in the elevator.
What about all the restaurants that have TVs playing everywhere and a sound system that plays Musak?
I find it interesting that in all the marketing date for the newest best audio development is framed like 'sounds as good as.....vinyl or tubes.'
I don't mean to disregard all technological developments, but simply point out that they DON'T actually constitute a real improvement in actual audio quality....just delivery and marketing. This fact seems to be progressively lost as we readjust our standards and expectations around these developing technologies...and the assumption that newest is implies improvement.
Later
D
You further observed: "I find it interesting that in all the marketing date for the newest best audio development is framed like 'sounds as good as.....vinyl or tubes.'"In my exposure to audio mass marketing the catch phrase is "...sounds as good as CD" This applies to HD (ha!) AM & FM radio, computer sound equipment and portable MP3 players. About my parts, tubes and vinyl are mentioned in nostalgic lapses but almost never in terms of a reference point for audio quality. The phrase "Digitally Remastered" you do hear as well as an occasional reference to the "master tape". Tape? Must be referring to a time before the hard drive became the preferred digital storage medium.
most good recording are still recorded with analogue tape...if not tube equipment. Those recorded directly to digital are not the same quality...yet at least.If you ever get the chance, listen to some master tapes. Sometimes Paul Stubblebine brings some to shows like CES.
I have compared vinyl to digital on an ultra high resolution tube/horn system. The difference was staggering. It's funny how much we 'forget' in audio....assuming we ever knew it in the first place.
I like your comments though, it reminds me of the 'genuine margarine' that I see in the store these days. We used to joke about the term 'genuine plywood' back in the 70s.....:)
With the WEB, we will soon forget that film photographs look different than JPGs too.
Later
D
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: