Re: Sound Quality _ this is what has gone wrong with CDs and music today...
Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2008 6:06 am
not that I would take the wackypedia entry as gospel but:
"the term was applied more loosely to any mid-level stereo system. In the 2000s, hi-fi for expensive high-quality home-audio electronics was largely replaced with high-end audio".
So my take is not far from the truth - mid-level is hi-fi - well then I have two completely different sounding amps that are hi-fi. Don't I. They bot were classified as such at the time they were manufactured and sold!
thanks for the clarification! (???)
Standards do not necessarily result in something good.
CDs were meant to be 48k but compromised upon by corp.s to be 44.1k so they could cash in more.
16rpm vinyl died a death because it sounded crap presumably.
The 8 track cassette lost out to the compact cassette - longer tape less width - less 'fidelity' - music listeners have been screwed since day one of audio reproduction.
Always a compromise - more minutes - more money for the company. You can look at it thinking that there was benign intent - I suspect not, but that is just me.
Same thing with internet bandwidth. Everything is in place to give a decent wide band width to most of the planet but it is being throttled.
iTunes made a big deal of their 256kbps aac iTunes plus. Not impressive. If they wanted to do something good they would make wav/aiff at full resolution available. But they and other music distribution services are hampered by the big 5. (not Prince Buster!)
I would be delighted to have my stuff on iTunes downloadable at full audio resolution - such as my likka studio is capable of. But no...
A big part of what music listeners - serious ones such as the ones commenting here - have to deal with is making the music they like sound good regardless of the source - vinyl, CD, mp3, aac, wav, aiff, etc.
So what is hi-fi these days?
"the term was applied more loosely to any mid-level stereo system. In the 2000s, hi-fi for expensive high-quality home-audio electronics was largely replaced with high-end audio".
So my take is not far from the truth - mid-level is hi-fi - well then I have two completely different sounding amps that are hi-fi. Don't I. They bot were classified as such at the time they were manufactured and sold!
thanks for the clarification! (???)
Standards do not necessarily result in something good.
CDs were meant to be 48k but compromised upon by corp.s to be 44.1k so they could cash in more.
16rpm vinyl died a death because it sounded crap presumably.
The 8 track cassette lost out to the compact cassette - longer tape less width - less 'fidelity' - music listeners have been screwed since day one of audio reproduction.
Always a compromise - more minutes - more money for the company. You can look at it thinking that there was benign intent - I suspect not, but that is just me.
Same thing with internet bandwidth. Everything is in place to give a decent wide band width to most of the planet but it is being throttled.
iTunes made a big deal of their 256kbps aac iTunes plus. Not impressive. If they wanted to do something good they would make wav/aiff at full resolution available. But they and other music distribution services are hampered by the big 5. (not Prince Buster!)
I would be delighted to have my stuff on iTunes downloadable at full audio resolution - such as my likka studio is capable of. But no...
A big part of what music listeners - serious ones such as the ones commenting here - have to deal with is making the music they like sound good regardless of the source - vinyl, CD, mp3, aac, wav, aiff, etc.
So what is hi-fi these days?