"Arny Krueger" <arnyk@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:TfGdncvodPLqPb3VnZ2dnUVZ_vadnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> "Soundhaspriority" <nowhere@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:UomdnRvCc-0G7L3VnZ2dnUVZ_t6onZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> "Arny Krueger" <arnyk@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> news:o96dnVBO1fjOor3VnZ2dnUVZ_rOqnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> "Romeo Rondeau" <eveyone@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>> news:KkPTj.2370$3O7.1254@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>
>>>> You don't buy an iPod for quality, you buy it for
>>>> convenience.
>>>
>>> What you get with at least the larger iPods is an audio
>>> playback device whose electrical output is about as
>>> clean as a CD player, but that has a low source
>>> impedance designed for driving headphones. If you load
>>> it with uncompressed audio files, it is the functional
>>> equivalent of a high quality ****table CD player.
>>>> If you want quality buy something that was designed for
>>>> it.
>>>
>>> IOW, an iPod or high quality competitive product.
>>>
>>> Several of us enjoyed the use of the Nomad Jukebox 3,
>>> which was a logical predecessor of either the iPod or
>>> the Microtrack. At this point I don't think that the professional
>>> utility and perhaps even the professional stature of the
>>> Microtrack and competitive products are in doubt by many.
>>>
>>> Technically, the larger iPods are just Microtracks
>>> without the extensive facilities for location recording,
>>> but with a more user-friendly file system.
>
>> The zeitgeist manifests not in the hardware platform,
>> which is decent, but in the mastering and the
>> compression.
>
> So then this isn't about iPods or storage media, its about mastering.
>
>> The hardware is equivalent or better than a
>> typical CD Walkman of the 90's, but the sound is not.
>
> Given that the hardware can be loaded with what have you, then your
> statement makes no sense.
>
> Are you decrying customer preferences or hardware?
>
>> But the zeitgeist also manifests in the market share of flash
>> player music, which occured with the changing role of
>> music in our society.
>
> Do tell, what is "flash player music", and how does it differ from the
> finest digital recordings ever made?
>
>> In the past, music was marketed as a performance.
>
> Silly me, I thought it was marketed as something that you wanted to
listen
> to.
>
Silly me, I thought it was marketed as something that you wanted to listen
to.
>> High fidelity was a privilege equivalent
>> to a good seat in the hall.
>
> Silly me, I always preferred the good seat in the good hall.
Silly me, I always preferred the good seat in the good hall.
>
>> That is now quite secondary.
>
> Speak for yourself!
Speak for yourself!
>
>> Music is now principally a pacifier, an auxilary
>> brainwave.
>
> For some people, probably.
For the majority.
>
>> I would guess that most audio professionals
>> hear music fewer hours of the day than the typical flash
>> player addict, but we listen more intently.
>
> Your point?
>
Your point?
Bob Morein
(310) 237-6511
|
