Should Sound Quality of Computer Audio be improved


Unable to respond to, "Mach2Music and Amarra: Huge Disappointment"- Thread. Other Members take free pop-shots!
Apparently some have more Freedom Of Speech than others! I
don't know how many times I have said it, I want Computer
Audio to succeed! It will only succeed if Computers are designed from the ground up to reproduce Music (Same minimum standard applied for Equipment of ALL Audio Formats)! This is common sense Audio Engineering Design. Bandaid Modifications cannot be substituted for absence in design to produce Music! Design it right to EARN the right to become a New Audio Format- same as all other Audio Formats! No Freebee's, No Cutting Corners! Lack of design is what's causing such varied results in S.Q. between
listeners of Computer Audio. I see about 50% negative
responses here on these Threads. It will continue to happen unless you fix it! Blaming me won't help! I am an
Engineer, and I can read results! 50/50 success/ failure
rate- you have an inherit Engineering Design Flaw for the
reproduction of Music via Computers! Shock! Suprise- since
they were never designed for Music! So when is someone finally going to properly design the Equipment/Computer
(From the ground up) for Computer Audio? Do we continue
to treat any real criticism as "HERESY" in the lack of
design in Computer Audio for Music? You tell me what I am
allowed to talk about, and we will both know!
pettyofficer
And yet, Chadeffect, I am looking at High Res. Optical
Disks on "Elusive Disks". They are claimed to have been
Remastered at 32 Bits, and are claimed to be playable in
all CD Players. New Releases in Vinyl on harder material
180 Gram Records are springing up all over. Now if the
Sound Quality of these is even better than 24/192 High
Res. Downloads (Big if-plus there is possibility of DXD),
someone is going to want to know how they can get
32 Bit/ DXD Downloads. The heat is on High Res. Computer
Audio Downloads to compete in sound quality. THIS is
EXACTLY what I am talking about! The exact opposite would
be true in a single Audio Format of exclusive Music Audio
Downloads. A tide raises all boats. With competition we
stand to get more "Bang for the Buck" in Sound Quality.
Without it Sound Quality gets stuck in the mud. This would really be a bad business decision for the Consumer to
eliminate all of his options (Formats) in this Market. Bad Call- Bad Timing!!! Of course embraising this competition
puts more heat on Computer Manufacturers to cut into their
Profits to boost sound quality. They will be forced to come
up with a way to Download 32 Bit Releases, if not DXD. That
is going to cost them a pretty penny. They are not blind to this, a single Format (Downloading) being way more
Profitable for them without any other competing Format. Is
it out of profitable convenience for them to convince as
much of the American Public as possible that "No one is really interested in Higher Sound Quality". Is it really true, or just a "Profitable" Myth being perpetuated? I still hear rumors of the Major Picture Industry concidering
using DXD in their Soundtracks for their Movies. Finally,
there might be some real competition to get the ball rolling on sound quality!
My point, Hfisher, is if someone were to come out with an
High Resolution Optical Disc Format (With Properly Remastered Release) that turned out to sound better than
High Res. Downloads- I would still want both options. I
keep on seeing 32 Bit Mastered Optical Disks being sold on
"Elusive Disks". They claim that these Disks can still be played on a regular CD Player. New Releases of Vinyl on
much harder material in "180 Gram" might be promising- same
source. What I want is the freedom to try these things,
and determine for myself weither the Sound Quality is worth it or not. Of course quality of original Recording
will determine Sound Quality, unless Remastering really helps. Experimenting still going on, and I want to have the
options of trying these things. Still think Meridian Lossless Packing was the best sounding Optical Disk Format that I ever heard. I am still smarting from THAT option being yanked from the Music Selection Department. This is
what I see with my light bulb on, a whole lotta damn good
sounding Music going to waste. It isn't pretty. Single
Format market of Downloading, no matter how inevitable it
might be or if anyone desires it, could cost us alot in
selection of High Sound Quality Audio Formats. No Audio Market likes uncertainty, I don't like it either. This is
the reason that I need something really substantial in
Music Selection for whatever High Resolution Audio Format
the Audio Market accepts. Careful with those light bulbs,
you might not like what you see. You will see the "The Good-The Bad- and the Ugly" in sharp relief of any Format.
One question: Can't find "Ladies' Jazz Vol.5" on optical
Disk. I have been streaming it, and it sounds really good-
especially Julie London with tons of depth soundstage. I am getting the feeling that it only exists as MP3 or as a
Download. Can't tie down the source other than Warner Music Poland. Don't want to use i-Tunes, don't like mixing
MAC Software with Windows 7 PC. I had a hell of a time getting rid of it- not again! This isn't the first time that I have come across Music only available as a
Download. It won't be the last (Yeah, Yeah...I know. Just
Download it, and Burn it!). Would like to know of the original source. Can't seem to find it with many Downloadable releases- Uncertainty??? It isn't available in HD Tracks. Other than i-Tunes, where is it at?
Even if a recording is mastered in 32 bit, once you hear it on a redbook CD player you are hearing it in 16/44. That's just the way it is, Petty - that's the technology.

On the other hand, it is possible to hear such a recording in its native resolution on a computer, of course, since the original file is on a computer.

I agree with you that competition is a good thing - but the market and consumers will ultimately decide which formats succeed and which fail.
I agree with you Petty. Some folks out there already know the very limitations you point out with computer audio and they are beginning to take matters into their own hands and move the ball forward, not waiting around for the industry to catch up. This is how I suspect the revolution will get started (whether it will be televised or not is another matter). For one example, you could go to the facebook site of Alan Maher Designs and take some time to sift through his ongoing posts (some recent, others past) about computer audio, exactly what kind of computer Alan envisions is required for music, his own attainable gains in sound quality that can be had with his method of ripping CD's compared to CD's by themselves, water cooling, superority of FLAC vs WAV, etc, etc - all rather advanced, I admit, but to me this sort of thing is what's needed - there needs ot be a full-blown example in the marketplace that people can point to and recognize that it works. Expensive?? Initial iterations usually are, but you can always streamline from there. First you just gotta show people that the concept works (and how Well that it works). I believe that day is coming, but I imagine that we can only depended on computer companies to wait around until someone else begins eating their lunch before they will begin to decide exactly what they want to do about it.
Ivan, "audio-only" computers already exist. See Linn Akurate and Bryston BDP-1, amongst others. However, it is not that difficult to gather info on the net about optimizing your own off-the-shelf computer system for server use. Most of us who frequent forums like this have done it. It's actually kind of hands-on and fun! The beauty of it is that for less than $1K you can get an optimized Mac Mini, for example. Then add a suitable DAC and you can have a state of the art digital front end for way less than a top-flight optical player.

Rare to be able to do something like that in the crazy world of high fidelity audio!