[Table of Contents]


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [ARSCLIST] The "dumbing down" of Downloaded Recordings



Jim Lindner wrote:
Is it just me who wonders about this? With the hundreds of articles I have been reading on the changes in media distribution (literally hundreds and is this a REALLY big surprise??) I have not read one - not one - that makes any mention of the fact that the quality of the recordings being distributed by download are significantly compressed and poorer then those distributed on media. Of course it does not have to be this way - there is no reason why .wav files could not be being downloaded instead of AAC or MP3 - but no one seems to care - at all.

It is not you - and it is a phenomenon of interest. The market for video and for audio *appears* to be bifurcating. Part finds cost no object and clamors for SACD, Blu-Ray, architecturally designed media rooms and the like. The other appealing part is ear buds, iPhone, highly compressed downloads. Whether either division is substantial financially has not been addressed; for example, the high-end video-disc offerings are subsidized by the format competitors, yet even so do not have credible published statistics.


It may be worth noting that the audio degradation for download is likely to be minor relative to that used by the producers. It is, indeed, of different form. Published recordings use dynamic compression, clipping and other distortions to achieve target sound quality, where compression for sharing is of a different sort. Still, whatever audio qualities were in the track originally have been largely lost in the commercial preparation and their preservation for sharing is of little interest to the bulk of the audience.

It has long been my own contention - not based on law and not voted on by the industry - that low-fidelity sharing should be encouraged. It provides evidence of everything but the audio quality of a recording; for that, one should turn to the published form. The low-rate files would be analogous with a review of a book or a catalogue of an art exhibit (say, of photographs) and would be a spur to the purchase of the volume or original prints.

Mike
--
mrichter@xxxxxxx
http://www.mrichter.com/


[Subject index] [Index for current month] [Table of Contents]