Courtney Love does the math

[Bucky_Katt]

DVD-Audio is an outstanding format, and considering that the DVD player is the most popular consumer electronics product. Why doesn't the recording industry what to market something that's in almost everyones home just waiting for some content? They're still living in the eighties!

[BJ_M]

they do want to market it -- very few buy them though

[Jester700]

DVD-Audio is an outstanding format, and considering that the DVD player is the most popular consumer electronics product. Why doesn't the recording industry what to market something that's in almost everyones home just waiting for some content? They're still living in the eighties!

Because CDs play ANYWHERE. Car, home, boombox, discman, you name it. AND, the increase in quality means zero to 99% of the buying public - those people who are more interested in convenience than sound - and have proven it through sales of MP3 players and media that don't even match the sound quality of CDs.

And I can't disagree with them too much. My little MP3 player is awesome to jog with. Of course, I use $130 earphones and 192k MP3 files, but still...

Also, DVD Audio's benefits are lost on modern music that has less than 10dB of dynamic range. People generally aren't listening to 24/96 recordings of Berlioz these days...

[Nilfennasion]

Actually, if you had a listen to some of the music I have mentioned (not the abrasive stuff like DarkThrone, but more harmonious stuff like Orphanage), you'd find that it is ideally suited to DVD-Audio. With a soprano, tenor, and bass vocalist, along with two guitars and a keyboard lead, the channel separation and extra resolution is sorely needed.

The problem is that these bands are not what the RIAA considers "marketable", and what is worse, they manage to make enough at their craft through the independent labels that they could not care less what the RIAA has to offer. Especially in light of the fact that 99% of RIAA-quoted sales figures are literally made up on the spot. Indeed, DVD-A is one of those formats that rewards creativity.

It is also foolish to claim that people don't notice the higher sound quality. I have an inability to perceive certain frequencies when they occur on my left side, but I can look you in the eye and tell you that on the DVD-A version of Bohemian Rhapsody, I heard *vocals* that I didn't hear before. That kind of difference is not so easily dismissed.

Jester hits the nail on the head, though. You can play a CD anywhere, while the DVD consortium seems to think that they can get away with a home stereo-only format. They don't seem to have learned from the example Sony set with the cassette and CD, where giving the end user more control over what they do with the recordings was rewarded with more purchase. Another reason why I was less than excited by the DVD-A format is the spectre of Region Coding. Sure, they claimed that they would never Region Code a DVD-A, but if they learned they could shut out real artists such as Opera IX from the Australian market simply because they're Italian, how long do you think the RIAA would keep that promise?

[JohnnyCNote]

I can definitely hear the difference between poorly encoded MP3's and good ones when in my car. The industry excels in underestimating the public, which is why we have to deal with the crap they've been selling for nearly 30 years...

[Bucky_Katt]

Because CDs play ANYWHERE. Car, home, boombox, discman, you name it. AND, the increase in quality means zero to 99% of the buying public - those people who are more interested in convenience than sound - and have proven it through sales of MP3 players and media that don't even match the sound quality of CDs.

That makes sense, just like most people chose VHS over Beta because they could record six hours on one tape in LP mode, never mind the quality.

[Jester700]

Actually, if you had a listen to some of the music I have mentioned (not the abrasive stuff like DarkThrone, but more harmonious stuff like Orphanage), you'd find that it is ideally suited to DVD-Audio. With a soprano, tenor, and bass vocalist, along with two guitars and a keyboard lead, the channel separation and extra resolution is sorely needed.

I'm unfamiliar with the group, but your description doesn't help - the only abnormal item is the bass vocalist, and none can hit notes a normal bass guitar can.

Channel separation of CD is over 90dB - you never need more than that. But if you're referring to having >2 channels, I heartily agree. In a home environment, this is probably the biggest opportunity for improvement. Still, outside the home, nobody cares.

As for resolution, no double blind test I've seen has shown that >44.1k sampling frequency in the playback medium has any audible benefit with music programs. Bit depth is something else, but it takes a very good listening environment, playback gear, and source material to hear it - and having all 3 of those is very rare in the mainstream. What's the typical dynamic range of Orphanage's music?

It is also foolish to claim that people don't notice the higher sound quality. I have an inability to perceive certain frequencies when they occur on my left side, but I can look you in the eye and tell you that on the DVD-A version of Bohemian Rhapsody, I heard *vocals* that I didn't hear before. That kind of difference is not so easily dismissed.

And I can look you right back and ask you to show me that it's the increased resolution making the difference. It's much more likely the efforts in remastering, because any resoultion increase *on a 20 year old heavily overdubbed analog master* between 44/16 and 96/24 is going to be subtle at best, and more than likely inaudible (and maybe even unmeasurable). Now again, if we're talking about a new 5.1 channel remix/remaster, that's another thing entirely; I agree that this is cool technology. But it's also a niche market; those throngs of people with MP3 players & other portable gear only have 2 earphones...

Jester hits the nail on the head, though. You can play a CD anywhere, while the DVD consortium seems to think that they can get away with a home stereo-only format. They don't seem to have learned from the example Sony set with the cassette and CD, where giving the end user more control over what they do with the recordings was rewarded with more purchase. Another reason why I was less than excited by the DVD-A format is the spectre of Region Coding. Sure, they claimed that they would never Region Code a DVD-A, but if they learned they could shut out real artists such as Opera IX from the Australian market simply because they're Italian, how long do you think the RIAA would keep that promise?

Does DVD Decrypter or any other ripper allow processing of DVD-A?

[MOVIEGEEK]

"Does DVD Decrypter or any other ripper allow processing of DVD-A?"

CSS2 is a tough nut to crack,nobody has done it yet...that I'm aware of.
I agree,bit depth is more important than samplerate.

[Nilfennasion]

The issue with the music I mainly refer to is not so much resolution or even clarity, but simple clutter. A dynamic range of 90 db is not sufficient to completely seperate the entire band without some of the instruments blending together, usually in the middle range where the guitars reside. A dedicated channel for the bass instruments already does wonders for music, so being able to pipe keys around to the surrounds and giving those medium instruments space to breathe makes a difference that you can't just dismiss.

I have been told by many with more experience in audio that it is not the frequencies the user does hear that are so important, but those they don't. I've never understood that myself, but after listening to a mere five or six instruments fight to be heard on some of my favourite CDs, I know I'd be very curious to hear if a 96 kHz, 5.1 channel transfer can bring about any improvement.

I could not tell you off the top of my head what the typical dynamic range of an Orphange song is. You'd probably have an easier time working that out from one of the MP3s on their site, but with all the layers in the mix, the use of six channels will certainly make a massive difference. Another aspect of DVD-A is that unlike CD, where it's basically 2.0 channels, 16-bit, 44.1 kHz or nothing, multiple bitrates, compression formats, channel configurations, or even resolutions, are literally endemic to the format. The artist can decide how to present themselves, certain end-user limits notwithstanding.

[JohnnyCNote]

You may find this interesting: The Anstendig Institute. They've written a lot about dynamic range in music, and were early critics of the CD format because they felt it didn't afford the complete experience of the music. It's been a long time since I've read any of their papers, but they talked a lot about dynamic range, which is what I think you're referring to....

[Renegade6]

Johnny C Note. Translator, love that band. I saw them in Chicago once and it was a great show. 45,000 is not alot of money and I make more than that in a year without the overtime I get.

[kisrum]

http://www.stonecoyotes.com/

These people have probably found the best way to do it. Most sales over the web, no distribution deal with big company. But they started with quite a bit of money and years of experience.

[BJ_M]

http://www.stonecoyotes.com/

These people have probably found the best way to do it. Most sales over the web, no distribution deal with big company. But they started with quite a bit of money and years of experience.

there are several web based distro companies now - some have got great talent signed ... PLUS you can download all the songs legally as mp3 and if you like them - but on-line and get hi quality version

two of my fav's :

http://www.magnatune.com/ <-- awesome site , huge number of artists .


http://www.lobecandy.com/ <-- small but interisting

[Nilfennasion]

Perhaps rather than talking about the positive that I would like to have, just mentioning what I dislike about CD would work better. While I love CD to death because it has made life so easy for indie distributors (probably not what Sony had intended), many of my favourite albums sound congested on the format. That they are my favourites in spite of this should say a lot about the quality of the music. Just having the dedicated LFE channel would make a massive difference to some of these recordings.

[Jester700]

Perhaps rather than talking about the positive that I would like to have, just mentioning what I dislike about CD would work better. While I love CD to death because it has made life so easy for indie distributors (probably not what Sony had intended), many of my favourite albums sound congested on the format. That they are my favourites in spite of this should say a lot about the quality of the music. Just having the dedicated LFE channel would make a massive difference to some of these recordings.

Do you think that analog versions sounded less congested, or rather that a hypothetical DVD-A would be less so? Because if the former, you should understand that cassettes & LPs had an order of magnitude greater IM distortion than CDs - that will cause some congestion. As to your earlier post about the frequencies you DON'T hear being more important - that's true, but not necessarily about delivery format; it's a basic concept in mixing technique. That is, since vocals, guitar, keyboards, etc. all inhabit the same basic frequency range, it's important to "carve out" a place for each track you want to hear clearly. This can be done with panning (or surround positioning in a 5.1 system - another great argument for it), it can be done somewhat in "space" (reverb or lack thereof), and it can be done with frequency manipulation.

For example, many guitarists love the chest thumping sound they get from their Marshall stacks (and similar) when cranking up in their home. But if that isn't rolled off when mixed with the rest of the band, the guitar and bass "fight" each other for this 80-200Hz frequency space and it all ends up sounding like mud.

A separate sub often DOES help a bit with most speakers because the bass & low mids are where lots of this sonic "confusion" occurs.

[JohnnyCNote]

Johnny C Note. Translator, love that band. I saw them in Chicago once and it was a great show. 45,000 is not alot of money and I make more than that in a year without the overtime I get.

I'll confess that I wasn't really into their music, but they were all nice guys and I'd like to have seen them succeed. Unfortunately, it seems that the recording deal proved to be worst thing that happened to them rather than the best.....

[Nilfennasion]

I don't think analogue formats, especially not vinyl, sound any less congested. In fact, the high analogue noise floor on vinyl pretty much ensures that it will sound more congested. What makes DVD-A different, the possibility of 5.1-channel mixes aside, is the total absence of this noise floor.

I have heard some CDs where the bass and guitars are fighting one another for space. Sepultura's Arise album would be one of the muddiest CDs I have ever heard, mainly because the producer doubled the guitar tracks. There's basically four guitars all occupying the same space in the mix, making the bass virtually inaudible. The dedicated LFE channel would at least give the bass and drums another speaker to get one's attention with.

[Jester700]

I don't think analogue formats, especially not vinyl, sound any less congested. In fact, the high analogue noise floor on vinyl pretty much ensures that it will sound more congested. What makes DVD-A different, the possibility of 5.1-channel mixes aside, is the total absence of this noise floor.

Yes, but keep in mind that except for fairly new all digital recordings made at 24/96, ALL recordings have a noise floor that DVD-A won't erase. The Queen album you mentioned earlier has MUCH more noise from the master tape than any 16/44.1 digital recording. 16/44 really isn't bad at all if the engineer is careful. Of course, any extra resolution can't hurt.

I have heard some CDs where the bass and guitars are fighting one another for space. Sepultura's Arise album would be one of the muddiest CDs I have ever heard, mainly because the producer doubled the guitar tracks. There's basically four guitars all occupying the same space in the mix, making the bass virtually inaudible. The dedicated LFE channel would at least give the bass and drums another speaker to get one's attention with.

The producer/engineer must have given in to the guitarist(s). Maybe they WERE the guitarists! But yeah - happens all the time. Sometimes it works - I like Judas Priest's "defenders" album, and there are TONS of overdubbed guitars on there at times. But they're meant to be a thick "wash" of guitar at those points. On the parts you need to hear clearly, there are fewer tracks, and it works well, IMO.

[Nilfennasion]

The producer/engineer must have given in to the guitarist(s). Maybe they WERE the guitarists! But yeah - happens all the time. Sometimes it works - I like Judas Priest's "defenders" album, and there are TONS of overdubbed guitars on there at times. But they're meant to be a thick "wash" of guitar at those points. On the parts you need to hear clearly, there are fewer tracks, and it works well, IMO.

The guitarists were pretty adamant in one interview that the guitars and drums giving the bass no space to breathe was one of the reasons they went with someone else on their next album. In spite of the congestion, it really wasn't such a bad album, but they claim it was not very reflective of how they sound live. Either way, the sound on their next album was a lot cleaner and expansive, giving them more room to experiment.

Of course, any extra resolution can't hurt.

Exactly.

[Jester700]

The guitarists were pretty adamant in one interview that the guitars and drums giving the bass no space to breathe was one of the reasons they went with someone else on their next album. In spite of the congestion, it really wasn't such a bad album, but they claim it was not very reflective of how they sound live. Either way, the sound on their next album was a lot cleaner and expansive, giving them more room to experiment.

Excellent. Not your average "more me!" guitarists, then.

[Nilfennasion]

Well, in this particular case, I think they had come to realise that their rhythm section, especially the drummer, was more their strength, anyway. Not to mention the simple fact that congestion in the upper end of the sound spectrum is not good for any member of the band. Not when most of the RIAA's customer base fall into that category I like to call "[insert derogatory term here] who cannot listen past a voice". Which is another reason why DVD-A could have been a whole new beginning - the increased channel separation and frequency range makes it much easier to hear the proverbial guts of the music.

I honestly wonder what the 2020s answer to punk will be like. Parents who were young in the 2000s will be asking what sort of garbage this is, and with a few exceptions like myself, their children will be saying "at least it is music!".

[Jester700]

I honestly wonder what the 2020s answer to punk will be like. Parents who were young in the 2000s will be asking what sort of garbage this is, and with a few exceptions like myself, their children will be saying "at least it is music!".

Lawrence Welk & Liberace.

[Nilfennasion]

Well, I was thinking of something more along the lines of Martin Powell's violin solos for My DyING BRIDE, but still...

Were one of my nephews or nieces to have their mother asking "why are you listening to this crap?", I'd probably join in with them. Only I'd be more blunt. I'd be more likely to say "at least it isn't retard noise".

[NamPla]

Courtney Skank-Hole is just a Nancy Spungeon try-hard image glam yuppie poof.

And Nancy Sponge-Hole is just a jewish skank-ass junkie groupie idiot.

By the way, I think DARK THRONE are ******* awesome!

You are in breach of the forum rules and are being issued with a formal warning.
/ Moderator BJ_M >>> no religion etc .. including defamatory remarks like that

[NamPla]

But I'll still jerk off on her...

http://jenellerose.com/images/courtney.jpg

[ViRaL1]

But I'll still jerk off on her...

http://jenellerose.com/images/courtney.jpg

Uhhhhh.

[BetaMaster]

An excellent read, thanks.
But then how does Britney afford a $6 million house?

The same way most of us have $200,000 houses -
You put 5-20% down and take a mortgage for the rest. However, Britney pays the mortgage out of her advances, which are generally borrowed from her record company. As long as she has a "job", she has cash flow and can keep the house. However, like us, if her cash flow dries up, she's in deep deep trouble. It's not like she ever "had" $6 million to buy the house.

I thought the basic article was great too. It's not just musicians who put up with this - authors have similar arrangements. Unless you're Stephen King, you're constantly trying to pay back your last advance. Actors are lucky in a sense - as "working stiffs" they get paid up front in cash. However, the average mean salary for an actor is about $12K a year, and 90% make less than that - Tom, Rene and Jim bring up the average.

[BJ_M]

Britney is also in the rare .o1 % of musicians that make a lot of money at it -- plus a huge amount of merchandising ...

[DereX888]

how come there are so many idiots in there world?
<sigh>
incredible

[BJ_M]

how come there are so many idiots in there world?
<sigh>
incredible

who are you referring to ?