![]() |
Quote:
|
commonly known betamax was better than vhs which backs what you said
|
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
|
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 |
Quote:
Quote:
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. |
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 |
did you purchase the surround or stero sacd??? 40 quid is cheaper than any i could find ;)
|
There was a clue in "5.1 SACD of BooH" :-)
Dave |
oops
(just testing) |
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.