Tony Antoniou wrote:
>
> Sound quality has EVERYTHING to do with it. It's not just about convenience,
> it's also about appreciating what you listen to, after all, that's what
> audio is about, isn't it? Why else would we spend our hard earned cash on
> that great sounding speaker, for example?
Sure, maybe to YOU and select audiophiles that really care about sound
quality.
But mass acceptance and becoming mainstream have very little to do with
sound quality. MP3 would not be nearly as popular as it is now if sound
quality was a significant factor. All my MP3 loving friends KNOW MP3's
sound quality isn't as good as MD or CD. They don't care. Not a single
one of them. "It's good enough for me", or "I can't tell the
difference" is the usual answer. Cheap boomboxes and those little
minisystems would not be so popular if sound quality were that
important. LaserDisc may have been more popular if video quality had
been very important, as it was around LONG before DVD showed up.
If the average consumer asks an electronics store employee about a
product's sound quality, "Yes, it's pretty good" is usually an
acceptable answer.
I can't say that I'm that much different. I record my MP3's to MD all
the time. I'd RATHER record CD's to MD, but like my friends would
agree, the sound quality of MP3 is good enough for me.
--
Shawn Lin
http://www2.cybercities.com/g/gmwbodycars/
__________________________________________
NetZero - Defenders of the Free World
Get your FREE Internet Access and Email at
http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------
To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word
"unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
