You are still able to enjoy analog, and we are all free to choose what we listen to. So what is the problem exactly?
Is there a HiFi Mafia controlling what we discuss and talk about in HiFi?
- Thread starter Synaxis
- Start date
What do you mean by that? If you have read articles about the history of recording sound, engineers simply wanted a technically better method to record, with no tape noise and tape degradation. If you are inclined to you might say that in the early days of digital they were misguided regarding actual sound quality, but that's what they wanted, a better recording medium. I don't see how that has anything to do with "for the masses". Also remember that digital recording was first reproduced on the vinyl medium, so there was not even a change of format. Digital media like the CD came years later.
That claim runs counter the fact that record companies hated streaming. It took away all the profit from physical media which they made tons of money from. If it were up to the record companies we would still have mainly physical media (I would have no problem with that either, since I still buy CDs).
Also remember that they wanted to build copy protection mechanisms into their discs for sustaining profit, with which they succeeded (on SACD) until they didn't. Streaming of course runs counter any copy protection.
I don't see what "concerted effort" there was apart from Napster finding a loophole for distribution enabled by the internet. Things went on from there.
Never said there is a problem. I simple answered Wil’s question.
If record companies could go back to the drawing board they probably would choose going back to analog, for the simple reason that they could make much more money again from physical media. I bet musicians would love to go back to analog media for making money again as well; they hardly make any from streaming.
So I have a hard time envisioning any "conspiracy" by anyone to do away with analog.
label owners wanted lower costs to produce music, the engineers had no say in that part, but did like the digital tools.....which were an outgrowth of multi-track. it costs a lot more to always record a group together. so not one thing but many different things. Sony and Philips were large content rights holders. and they saw a money grab opportunity to get a cut of every song anyone sold with the CD. and offer the labels higher retail margins with lower media production costs. but this also made the process of music making cheaper and more accessible.
basically greed, greed, greed. forget the idea of a higher good to change formats. follow the money. but then it got away from them....
the ripple effect of the Apple i-pod and i-Tunes in 2000 flipped the whole revenue stream of the music industry, and led eventually to streaming killing most physical media....and most music rights holders. with a few exceptions.
now it's more live performance revenue where the big money is.
music access is now cheap, universal and unlimited. except for a few of us who care about the finer details.
are we better off? i donno. depends. a case can be made. i know i'm happy.....but would i be happier without digital music? probably not. it is 'easy' and it's up to me how i listen, i'm in control, not the media.
Last edited:
I finally stopped watching at the 14 minute mark. My suggestion is to be succinct, organized and leave out the video interludes. Your content covered a few apparently unconnected incidents that seem to fall under the rubric of speech suppression or speech intimidation wrapped up under a tabloid-like title, which admittedly has given you 1K views. Forums and review publications -- both of whom share advertisers as their customers -- will control comments from readers they find contrary to their interests. I was not convinced there is an organized crime family operating in the background of the audiophile world. I'm vaguely aware we see similar behavior over things like restaurant reviews.
I'm thinking one factor controlling the world of audio reviews and forum speech is the limited language of audiophile sonic characteristics.
I'm thinking one factor controlling the world of audio reviews and forum speech is the limited language of audiophile sonic characteristics.
Don't forget the dark ages between the late 70's and late 80's where prerecorded compact cassettes were the mass market delivery medium of choice. To me that was the sonic low point in medium as well as equipment. No wonder almost every pre or integrated needed volume controls and rack systems routinely came with *gasp* cheapo graphic equalizers.
Those cassettes actually sound good compared to most digital releases which is why they are also making a comeback...
Luckily most people know good sound when they hear it, which is why streaming services are destined to fail.
I mean such large scale change does not just happen. It took a plan, lots of money, research and development and then a nice pithy slogan. The way music is made, recorded and replayed is now different. There were many players involved and a lot of effort to change over. Now music is cheap and portable and enjoyed by the masses. And there is an endless stream of revenue through the ubiquitous subscription model. I do not think such a massive change in how music is consumed would have happened without a concerted effort.
Rexp, you keep flogging the same horse over and over. Maybe consider your experience, with your particular system is not the be-all/end-all truth?
Of course you’re entitled to your opinion/experience but I can tell you the quality from streaming I get on my system is astonishingly good! It’s not something that just happens by accident— it takes some OCD audiophile dedication to get there. I guess you’d have to hear it in person to understand.
Of course you’re entitled to your opinion/experience but I can tell you the quality from streaming I get on my system is astonishingly good! It’s not something that just happens by accident— it takes some OCD audiophile dedication to get there. I guess you’d have to hear it in person to understand.
Last edited:
Cassettes were cheap in the Walkman era too, music was portable and enjoyed by the masses. In fact you can argue that back then more people were just listening to music than now where lots of them play computer games.
The stream of revenue from subscriptions is a pittance compared to physical media. As I tried to explain earlier the record companies hated downloading and streaming because it killed their generous revenue from physical media. Thus on the side of record companies there was no concerted effort to make current digital distribution happen. It was an organic outgrowth from the possibilities presented by the internet.
Trying to extol the virtues of analog over digital via a digital medium, as is YouTube.
The "logic" is just delicious.
So, you need to resort to childish insults like "you can't hear the difference between good and bad sound."??
I can hear the difference very clearly. The LP version sounds bloated, soft, distorted and full of extraneous reverb. Given the choice, the YouTube version sounds much better. But I don't know what your in-room sound is really like. Phone vids, like this one, are often plagued by bad sonics.
I specifically said pre-recorded cassettes . These used the most affordable tape stock and mechanisms. They were also made on mass recorders that dubbed 30,40 50 tapes at a time. I wasn't talking about the potential of premium tape stock like TDK's MA and MR when recorded from a decent turntable or reel deck. There is absolutely no comparing the two.
The dubbing was also done at speeds multiple those of playback, if I'm not mistaken.
the big thing commercially about cassettes, and 8 tracks before it, was that it made music portable, so created another money stream for rights holders, until CD overwhelmed it with much lower costs.
reproduction quality was beside the point. people wanted 'their' music to be with them once given that choice. and that has been a driving force since. creating $$$ opportunities. but agree there were efforts at higher performance. lots of flash, and some substance too.
