Goodsounds wrote: > The record industry squashed the DAT format for consumers sometime ago, > maybe it was 15 years or so, out of fear that that would put "master" > quality sound out on the street. But the recording industry was just > fine with CDs, because it is far from master quality.
This is rubbish. DATs were 48khz x 16, RedBook is 44.1kHz x 16. There is nothing more than theoretical differences. DAT was killed because it was recordable. The idiot labels thought that recording/sharing was going to kill their industry. CDs are very early 1980 technology, they were designed to replace the hated cassette tape, which was crap audio quality, but recordable. The CD was better audio quality, as convenient, and not recordable. At least not until 1995/96 On the olden days, CDs had DRM, you had to own a mega dollar pressing plant to make them. RedBook recordings can sound very good. But only if the artists, producter, label, etc want it that way. Most folks don't care, and so we have loudness wars. SACD and DVD-A were pushed by the labels as "better" but mostly because consumers could not make copies. In pratice, lots of SACD and DVD-A were the same signal as on the RedBook. I expect that one could technically make their own SACD in theory, but there was never a demand for it. DVD-A died before DVD burners became mass market. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
