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
PettyOfficer, there is no such thing as format competition, nor is there any such thing as a format monopoly. The "CD monopoly" didn't edge out 8 track tapes, nor did the "DVD monopoly" edge out Laserdisc. 8 track and Laserdisc were simply inferior formats that fewer and fewer people bought. The smaller the market, the more companies would need to charge to continue printing media in these formats. Eventually, bicycles with two equal-sized wheels edged out bicycles with huge rear wheels -- this was not a equal-sized-wheel bicycle monopoly, just a market shift.

Here's another analogy. In the robber baron age, Carnegie steel and a number of other competing companies merged to form U.S. Steel -- a true monopoly. They were a monopoly because, if you wanted steel, you had to buy from them. They were basically no other companies selling steel, and new companies could not start because the competition from U.S. steel was overwhelming. The steel itself was the commodity, however, and that's what was monopolized. Today, music is the commodity, not CDs (or SACDs, or DVD-Audio, or HDCD). Hundreds of companies sell you music, and they compete against each other. They sell through different websites, different services, etc.

I see that you want other options, but those options will, some day, disappear. This is not due to some conspiracy, or some conscious marketing ploy to replace CD with downloads, but because companies make less and less money on sales of physical media, and so they stop printing them. In the end, the competition is not over formats, but over music. These companies' competition comes from other companies' music, not other companies' formats.

Do you disagree?
Wow! Thread resurrected? Tbeebout of course everything you say makes perfect sense - but this thread died because we got tired of trying to reason with pettyofficer - he has his agenda and cannot be reasoned with.

However, he has bravely chosen to fight the corruption of the computer audio industry and save music from certain death so we need not fear!
"Just when I am almost out, they drag me back in"!
I was done with this Thread, now I feel that I am in
an Episode of the "Walking Dead"! Of course the marketing
idea is to put Computer Audio (especially Downloads) in
direct competition with other Audio Formats. The competition is deadly with Computer Audio Proponents going
for the throats of other Formats. How many more "Ultimatums" have to be stated by these Proponents?
If the decision was based on strictly sound quality alone,
that would be one thing. Instead I hear convenience, MP3
lower than CD resolution, and Downloads of equal resolution
as CD- High Resolution being a small minority of these. With Hard Drive Errors, Hard Drive Crash, Back-up Hard Drive Crash, Fragmentation, Viruses, Malware- where is the
quality? You have more software between you, and your Music
than you ever had with a CD. User friendly goes right out the window with the loss of plug-n-play CD. Computer Audio makes as much sense as a nuclear powered Can Opener. There
are easier ways, with alot less tasking, to listen to your
Music. More complicated, more moving parts, less user
friendly, Chaos Theory inviting- and still I use Computer Audio only during those instances when the Sound Quality presents itself! I have done the homework, and there are other Formats that have instances of sounding better. I am greedy! I am a Consumer. I look for many avenues of
quality. A Format has to "E-A-R-N" my business. Pulling
strings, pushing buttons, eliminating alternatives,
issuing Ultimatums- THIS only earns my consternation.
I still hold out hope that someday low Res. MP3, CD Res.
Downloads, will blossom into High Res. of real higher
quality. So long as High Res. remains in a strict minority
Computer Audio hasn't earned the right to replace anything.
Five year olds Downloading Music, isn't going to change that. You can put them in charge of running your Family, if
that is the case. If Computer Audio sounds slightly better
than CD, so did SACD without all of the user unfriendly
software hassle/ tasking- what is the point? Spend time
playing with Software, or spend it playing Music- your
choice. I demand that choice! Of course they call me
"Certifiable" for that! So what- commit me!
"Computer Audio makes as much sense as a nuclear powered Can Opener. "

Great line PO!

Thank God PEtty is back among us. PO, please, save us!!