Aaron Zinck Wrote: > >People value quality, and the technology > to provide consumers with higher and higher sound-quality only > continues to > improve. There is still plenty of economic incentive to provide high > sound-quality.
Unfortunately, my experience causes me to disagree with this. I have a number of friends that are really into music, but somehow are unable to hear anything wrong with 64kbps WMA. Yes, 64. They burn me CDs of stuff to listen to that has been ripped and burned with WMP, and I have to just throw them away. I cringe when I go to their houses or ride in their cars and listen to music, because at this point they've ripped everything in that format. It sounds awful to me and I imagine most people here, but somehow it's OK to them, even on music that they have known and loved for years. They don't have a chance at hearing the difference for new music with which they are not already familiar. I do intend to set up some listening tests for them, but they're just a few people. I strongly suspect that the vast majority of music listeners out there are more like my friends than they are like the people on these forums. The industry has tricked the great masses into accepting marginal quality rips as "CD quality", and we're all worse off for it. I do believe that eventually these "celestial jukebox" services (which I also look forward to) will eventually move to better quality (hopefully lossless) encodings, but I think it will be later rather than sooner, because of this chicanery that has gone on in the last eight years. -- eq72521 _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
