I was thinking about what constitutes a successful technology. My feeling is
that any thing that has had at least a popular 20 year run would quality.
The VHS tape would certainly qualify. While DVDs are starting to take over the
prerecorded movie market, the VHS tape still remains popular because of the
lack of realistic recording capabilities at the present.
But it must not be the picture quality, but the convenience, added features
etc. that have made DVDs so popular since nobody really seemed interested in
Super VHS. Now sound was evidently important, Hi Fi VHS became very popular.
The CD, of course qualifies (along with the CD ROM, which is actually as strong
as ever do to the dropping prices of CDRW drives and blanks).
People are still buying compact cassettes (although I have a feeling their days
may be numbered). But there really hasn't been anything widely accepted to
replace the cassette when it comes to recording.
So that leaves with the lonely Mini Disc. It has never really caught on in the
US. But by the same token, it refuses to die. I used to think that the
problem with it not taking off was due to compression.
But I now realize that the market the MD should be selling to really are not
critical enough to care about that. The ridiculously high prices that are
still being asked for players along with the lack of prerecorded MDs has to be
a major problem.
I hate to admit it, but I'll bet that they have sold almost as many of the
Diamond Rio type MP3 players as they have portable MD players (I'm saying
strictly players, NOT recorders).
Regarding the statement by Christopher Hicks that, "This "familiarity" effect
is well-known in the audio research community", this is the first time that I
am hearing about it. If it were that common among "the audio research
community", I would think that it would have come up on this list.
If it is so common, I would think that after about 6 versions of ATRAC, Sony
would have taken every measure they could to resolve that problem. We all know
that the best ATRAC will never be lossless. But when you are talking about
artifacts, you are referring to something that is added, rather then lost.
I quite familiar with the artifact phenomena from you study of dental
radiographs. There are several causes, but the artifacts only confuse things,
they do not adversely affect the resolution, sharpness, grain, etc. of the x
ray itself.
I'm not sure if it is the compression, so much as the use of digital itself
that is causing the artifacts. Try listening to an early CD on an early CD
player. I think in many cases you will not be satisfied.
Must my 2 cents.
LAS
-----------------------------------------------------------------
To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word
"unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
