mlukfc.com Forums

mlukfc.com Forums (https://www.mlukfc.com/forums/index.php)
-   Tyre Tracks & Broken Hearts (https://www.mlukfc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16)
-   -   BooH SACD (https://www.mlukfc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=14899)

wolfy35 23 May 2010 01:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monstro (Post 498125)
unfortunately not always the best one wins

Unfortunately very true. More often than not its down to whatever manufacturer can gain the most support rather than what is the better product

Monstro 23 May 2010 01:12

commonly known betamax was better than vhs which backs what you said

wolfy35 23 May 2010 01:16

What about Videodisc? My dad made the big mistake of buying one and staying loyal right up to the day I played him my first ever DVD

duke knooby 23 May 2010 02:15

until this thread i had never heard of mp6, but i agree, in the technology battle the lesser quality product usually wins... hence we got as mentioned vhs, mp3 and sky + to name a few

videodisc im not familiar with either... google suggests it was read with a needle like a vinyl record...

but laserdisc rocked...im the home of old technology lol

evil nickname 23 May 2010 10:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by wolfy35 (Post 498126)
Try a google search for Phillips Research Division and searching for a joint press release between them and the Fraunhofer Society (Software and Systems Technology Centre ) where they describe mp6, its applications and development.

I see how you're not responding to any other point, but I'll play along ;) Guess what I found. Nothing. Surprisingly, a search of Fraunhofer's site has exactly the same result.

Quote:

Originally Posted by wolfy35 (Post 498126)
Just because something is at the moment is a little obscure and hard to find on a popularist search engine does not mean it does not exist.

Just because you keep claiming some magical, 'newer and far superior than CD format / SACD mp3 etc.' audio encoding standard exists doesn't mean that it does exist. Unless you show me a credible source (you know, post a link to it, not 'search this and that site for such and so') I'll keep assuming it does not.

Especially when the technology sounds perfectly impossible. Lossless audio and video that is far superior to SACD that fits a digital file the same size of a run of the mill mp3? Forget it. Can't be done.

daveake 23 May 2010 11:18

Indeed. "Decent" quality mp3 compresses a CD by a factor of about 10, and SACD has 10 times the information of a CD, so that's a 100:1 lossless compression needed to achieve SACD quality with mp3 file sizes. Can't happen.

I can believe it's possible to have a lossless system that produces file sizes near those of a high quality mp3, but only with similar sampling rates and dynamic range.

Dave

duke knooby 23 May 2010 13:04

did you purchase the surround or stero sacd??? 40 quid is cheaper than any i could find ;)

daveake 23 May 2010 13:18

There was a clue in "5.1 SACD of BooH" :-)

Dave

duke knooby 23 May 2010 13:53

oops


(just testing)

Kai-H. 25 May 2010 13:54

I transfered the SACD of BOOH to DTS, so I'm able to listen with DVD-player on 5.1-System. IMO its a nice gimmick, but not more ... ;-) .

BTW: As we discussed last year, the vocals of ELLEN FOLEY on Paradise did not survive complete, so in the surround-production parts of it sang new by PATTI.

Bye from Kai


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 02:16.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright ©1999 - mlukfc.com
Made by R.


Page generated in 0.02369 seconds with 11 queries.