True. The standard was finalized in '95, drives too a couple of years to turn up in the stores. The technology for it pretty much existed by '92 or so, though. It was squabbling over standards between Philips, Sony and a few of the others delayed the introduction of any digital successor to the Laserdisc for years. Eventually IBM got wind of competing standards for next-gen computer optical drives, rounded up a coalition of computer manufacturers - Apple, Dell, HP, Compaq, and Microsoft - which in turn ganged up on the consumer electronics idiots. Their threat was great: the computer makers vowed they wouldn't sell any of their damn drives until Sony and the rest all agreed upon a single standard. Voila! DVD! So you can thank the computer industry for saving consumers from the rank stupidity of the consumer electronics boobs, and the resulting massive success of DVD. Left to their own devices, those idiots could eff up a wet dream (and in fact they did, which is why Apple is now arguably the thousand pound gorilla of the consumer electronics space, with the rest of the market left to low-margin crap).
If you enjoy reading about technology and such, this is one of the better sites around on the evolution of the CD by Philips, with a little Sony history. My theory is the best sounding DAC chips were made years ago, but as a business model you need to feed the beast, so all the players keep doing so. I already own a Philips CDM-2 (Magnavox CDB 471--badged) that I purchased for $5 at Goodwill. It is by far and away the best sounding CD player I have ever owned, including SACD players. Then I went to an estate sale in Elko, NV that some mining executive had going on and purchased a lightly used Marantz CD95 for $15. Had I been more prepared financially I would of purchased much more, but it was a drive by. Anyway...as for why 16/44? Lots of great answers in this thread. I always felt they move to 24 bits was to allow more head room for studio work, but I can't confirm the truth. If real interested in the beginning of it all, Dutch Audio Classics has an incredibly well laid out website along with some insightful history. I can't recommend it enough to anyone interested in the evolution of the CD. DutchAudioClassics.nl - Information, specifications, photos and service manuals of Philips & Marantz TDA1541 cd players I highly recommend this read, it's a page within site that discusses the infamous TDA1541 chip that is increasingly becoming a serious supply/demand issue for originals. You have to hear the players to understand how digital can sound as well as it does. Progress is sometimes a cruel necessity in audio. Philips TDA1541 - DutchAudioClassics.nl
Not so.There has recently been a big revival in people collecting and using older CD players.A lot more second hand CD's are still sold on sites such as ebay than Vinyl..A lot of people also buy CD's simply in order to rip them to uncompressed FLAC or WAV as they prefer that to downloading.The physical CD also provides a more secure storage of the music than a hard drive.
And then when everybody had replaced their LPs and the industry started losing money they didn't think about ways to innovate and keep with the times they blamed downloaders just like they blamed home tapers in the 80s. Chad
CD technology originated from the prototype media format for carrying VIDEO signals, not audio signals. It was subsequently adapted for audio only but as with most things it was an accidental compromise that gave birth to what we now have today.
That's what I had thought. Because we had Laser Disc 5-8 years before CD's came along. I think even thought of releasing albums like Laser Discs at one point in 79?
Why not? You record and mix at higher resolutions for completely different reasons then the end playback format. I absolutely say 16/44.1 is good enough for the end master, but higher resolutions should be used in the recording studio. And yes, I do have some experience in studios. Correct, and professional mastering software such as the type our distinguished host uses render this a non-issue. Another great point! The record companies tried to make people re-buy catalog by touting "remasters" with bonus tracks, but that only brought in the hardcore fans (for the most part). CDs last forever if you take reasonable care of them, and you can rip them to your computers for free.
From what I understand, a Laserdisc-sized audio-only format was considered and rejected because it would have allowed 12 hours of music on one disc that no one would be able to afford.
Often, all you need to do with CDs to maintain them is to handle them only by the edge/center hold when you return them to their jewel case. I've never had to clean a CD and even my oldest ones still play as well as they day I purchased them (back in 1985). When I was buying LPs, 45s, and cassette tapes, I often purchased an extra copy of my favorite albums in case my in-use copy wore out. Since moving to CD, I've never had to rebuy an album and rarely consider buying an upgraded version of an album I already own. Although I have purchased compilations that contain songs I already own, it is usually due to the compilation containing songs unique to it (such as ABBA's Thank You For The Music which contained a number of tracks that hadn't been released on CD and a fourth disc that contained songs that had never before been released in any form).
This may be an urban legend, but when CDs first started coming out, I was told the size of the disc was chosen because it was the biggest they could use that could also fit into a player installed in the dash of a car. And the technology at the time could only fit so much information on to a disc that size. Any merit to this?
Metal fatigue? Fiction. Stylus jumping? No. Sound continually hitting the stylus? No. A stylus tracks excursions in the groove walls; it isn't hit by sound. If the sound was just sitting in the grooves it would just leak out and spill onto the floor. Or something. Where's my mop? I think I just saw my missing Ben Webster trio recording puddled in the corner. Sorry. You really need to listen to the latest well mastered LP pressings created from digital recordings, e.g.., the Sound & Color LP by Alabama Shakes. There are many other superb examples of new LPs (and the matching CD and digital downloads) from electronic artists (Yelo and many others), jazz artists (a long list), rock (a long list), indie (a long list) and many more. Some of the CDs are actually mastered with less dynamic range than the LPs, although that's not typical. Given all the complaints about overcompression of so many contemporary pop and rock recordings over the past ten years or so in particular, your comments about what vinyl is (and isn't) technically capable of are accurate but don't actually reflect what's going on in the marketplace (and the studios). Frankly, there have been so many spectacularly good LP pressings in recent years that clearly prove that LP mastering can accommodate so truly amazing dynamic range in the hands of the right producers and mastering engineers. Give your head a shake.
Holy cripes you must have had HORRIBLE systems or abused the HECK out of your records. I still have (lots and lots of ) records I purchased in the 80s and even a few from the 70s that sound as good today as they did day 1.
None at all. As I recall, the debate about the size of the discs was partially driven by what Philips was tooled up to produce vs. what Sony was tooled up to produce. One of them - I think Philips - was all set to produce a smaller disc (I don't recall how big - say 5"), and Sony wanted the bigger one (5 1/2"), which they were set to produce. If you Google it you can probably get the story.
Wiser words have never be spoken here. Can't stand the "If you can't hear it, go get your ears checked !" BS
I had standard P-Mount turntables (first a Technics, then a Sony fully automatic linear tracking), not top of the line but also not extremely cheap. I had the backup copies of some LPs just in case. Usually, I avoided wear and tear on my vinyl by making a high-quality cassette copies. If I played my actual LPs/45s as much as I played the tape copies I likely would have worn out several copies just from normal playing (played the tape until the sound significantly degraded from playing, then made another copy, repeat). Still, some of my older LPs (purchased from garage sales in the 1970s) did have significant wear (scratches, surface noise) so I made personal copies on cassette to avoid further wear.
While not exactly supporting the car-dash story, the article does note that they did not want the CD to be much larger than a cassettte. So they were trying to keep the disc size down. It is conceivable that some were also thinking about what would work in a car dash. On the other hand, it does look like the the technology of the time pretty much limited it to 16/44.1. So a bigger disc would not have had more musical info per track (contrary to what I was told way back when by the same person who told me the car-dash schtick).
Cool I just rescued a Sony PS-LX520 from a thrift - refurbished it and it's currently in service in my living room. Bet you had a very similar model back in the day!
Related Comment: I'd heard that you can tell the difference between an MP3 file and a FLAC of the same song, so I did a personal test using my own digital audio player. I compared the highest level VBR and 320 kbps CBR LAME-encoded MP3s against FLAC files of the same songs. My experience was that I usually could not tell the difference between the MP3 version (either type) and Red Book FLAC on my audio player. In a few cases, I could hear a very slight difference that I would not have noticed had I not been listening for it. That convinced me that Red Book FLAC is good enough, and Hi-Res wouldn't offer advantage for my listening (this may not be the case for others).
I had a PS-LX510. It was a decent consumer turntable, and pretty gentle on your records. A little sensitive to noise and vibration though, and whenever the linear tracking tonearm advanced, the motor created a brief pulse of low-frequency noise (you could see the woofer pulse in and out). I'd engage the subsonic filter on my receiver whenever I was playing vinyl.
Agitater wrote the following as part of a post: I was trying to make a joke based on the how CDs tend to be mastered (such as The Loudness War), but based on the comments I guess it didn't come off that way. Of course, jokes about audio overload of equipment goes back quite a bit. See this song by Stan Freberg:
