jfo wrote: > It seems that the industry still hasn't come with a meaningful standard > definition of Hi Res, so we will continue to see marketing hype for so > called Hi Res material. Dr Mark Waldrep sums up the industry approach > nicely in an excerpt from his post CES blog.... > > "There seems to be a collective effort to market hi-res music without > any regard to whether it makes any difference. Theyre all chasing the > wrong end of the music fidelity beast. Instead of putting on slick > presentations in expensive booths, or assembling a panel of so-called > industry experts, they should start by creating recordings that actually > possess better fidelity than were currently getting. Theyve defined > all music ever created as hi-res if its delivered to you in a > high-resolution digital container. I was unimpressed."
Yup. All of this is pretty well nonsense (as 'discussed recently in a blog post' (http://archimago.blogspot.com/2017/01/musings-on-ongoing-push-for-hi-res-and.html)). The industry needs to be seen as doing something different and new to sell yet another "version" of the same thing. Most of these 24/44 releases are totally ridiculous dynamic range compressed <DR10 albums that I have seen recently. Stuff like Carly Rae Jepsen, Justin Timberlake, Lady Gaga, etc. Obviously stuff that could have been 12/44 and sounded just fine :-). Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective' audiophile blog. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Archimago's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2207 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=106935
_______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
