SteveFord 1,119 Posted January 17, 2012 Posted January 17, 2012 http://www.neilyoung.com/messagepage.html
RichP714 3,163 Posted January 17, 2012 Posted January 17, 2012 I don't think it's been formally announced yet: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13645_3-20062544-47/warner-gears-up-to-release-high-resolution-music/
kingman 662 Posted January 17, 2012 Posted January 17, 2012 Interesting...anyone have an opinion as to how this format will prove to be viable or.......
zumbini 6,147 Posted January 17, 2012 Posted January 17, 2012 If it's left up to the music industry to delevop it'll probably get mucked up.
martin1970 361 Posted January 17, 2012 Posted January 17, 2012 I thought we already had several high def formats. wave flac dsd dvdaudio I read it like he was just saying we'd start seeing the industry marketing it more.
RichP714 3,163 Posted January 18, 2012 Posted January 18, 2012 Does I gotsta buy ANOTHER playa? My guess us that he's talking about HD downloads
martin1970 361 Posted January 18, 2012 Posted January 18, 2012 Wait a minute, I forgot, we're talking about the RIAA here. Now that the last audio format has been cracked (SACD), they have to invent another one so that they can resurrect their glory days of raping artists and consumers alike. Maybe they've finally reached their goal of creating a format with 1000 bit encryption and a 3dB dynamic range!
mbskeam 1,975 Posted January 18, 2012 Posted January 18, 2012 Now that the last audio format has been cracked (SACD) since I am a cd and record guy, what does this statement mean??? cracked??? I'm kinda slow this way....
martin1970 361 Posted January 18, 2012 Posted January 18, 2012 Sorry if that wasn't clear. It is now possible for regular people to make exact digital copies of SACDs. As far as I know, it was the last significant digital audio format to be cracked, in other words, to have the copy-protection defeated.
Balok 1,667 Posted January 18, 2012 Posted January 18, 2012 I had a copy of Sound and Vision from about 2001 that had an interview with Neil. He was backing DVD-audio 100%.
RichP714 3,163 Posted January 18, 2012 Posted January 18, 2012 Sorry if that wasn't clear. It is now possible for regular people to make exact digital copies of SACDs. As far as I know, it was the last significant digital audio format to be cracked, in other words, to have the copy-protection defeated. DVD-A's CPPM encryption has been broken as well. I'm guessing that this new his res format will be a digital download (any new hardware encryption scheme has been shown to just annoy people, can be broken, and forces people to either buy a new device or opt out and let it fail)
weitrhino 1,443 Posted February 2, 2012 Posted February 2, 2012 http://www.audiostream.com/content/bose-and-beats-are-about-back-end-donkey-neil-young Nice video clip, I just wish it hadn't been edited. 1
zumbini 6,147 Posted February 2, 2012 Posted February 2, 2012 Would have been nice if anyone other than Fric and Frack had been the hosts. Neil might as well have been talking to the back end of the donkey.
RichP714 3,163 Posted February 2, 2012 Posted February 2, 2012 I liked his stance on MP3 piracy; not that it's bad or good, just that it IS
SteveFord 1,119 Posted February 10, 2012 Author Posted February 10, 2012 After 20 some years I finally found an illustration of why I've always thought digital sounded strange but I could never describe it correctly:
martin1970 361 Posted February 10, 2012 Posted February 10, 2012 That stepped-looking response is misleading. The magic that's actully happening is lots of fancy math is used and the sine wave is reconstructed using those data points. As it turns out, you only need two of those data points per cycle to have enough information to rebuild the waveform. That's called Nyquist theory or somesuch and is pretty well agreed upon. The upshot of is is that if you sample 44,100 times a second, you can accurately rebuild waveforms of frequencies up to 22,050 Hz on a CD and much much higher with DVD Audio. The part that's perhaps a bit less certain is whether or not reconstructing with resolution beyond 20 kHz can be perceived. I think it's an oversimplification to just dismiss doing this simply because we can't hear higher than 16kHz or so. Tiny delays in sound arrivals allow us to tell what direction a sound comes from. We can't say "Ooh, I sensed a 30 microsecond delay." But, we can point to where we think a sound came from based on the arrival time to our two ears.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now