Re: HDCD revisited.

David Looser wrote:
> "Don Pearce" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:0sGdneqMvfX-0_PVnZ2dnUVZ8qjinZ2d@posted.plusnet...
>> Glenn Richards wrote:
>>> Don Pearce wrote:
>>>
>>>> That is a big difference, but why would they bother to do it that way?
>>>> Far easier just to master the whole thing 6dB lower - it certainly
won't
>>>> be running out of dynamic range at the bottom end. I speak as someone
>>>> who owns an Arcam Alpha 9, an HDCD player (very ashamed of myself for
>>>> falling for it).
>>> Two words. Loudness war.
>>>
>>> If you master it 6dB lower then it'll be 6dB quieter than everyone else's
>>> CD. And that would never do.
>>>
>> But an HDCD disc doesn't play back correctly on a conventional player - it
>> is actually distorted. When it is played back as intended it is identical
>> to mastering 6dB lower and allowing the high peaks. So loudness doesn't
>> come into it.
>>
>
> This thread really does show how much the lunatics have been allowed to take
> over the asylum. We have a perfectly good medium (the CD) with more than
> enough dynamic range for any normal music or speech listening requirement.
> Yet something called an "HDCD" that does no better a job on a special
player
> than ordinary CD does on an ordinary player, and a worse one on an ordinary
> player, is billed as "better". What is going on?
>
> David.
>
>

Your guess is as good as mine.

d
[ Auf dieses Posting antworten ]