No, because the average person is completely unable to tell the difference between 192kbps mp3 and raw uncompressed audio.
The only thing would be have 7.1 channel master audio, and even then at the inevitable $50+ price tag such a product would have, it still would only be a niche.
If midrange BD-2.0 players were to hit the $300 price point and the BD-Audio discs were the same price (or cheaper) than their CD counterparts, then yes it may take off. Maybe even have the BD-Live disc include .mp3 & .m4a versions for use on an iPod. As long as it requires a significant monetary commitment to own and use, It won't take off. Plain and Simple.
seriously? If you can't tell the difference between 192kbps compressed mp3 and totally uncompressed audio, you need to get your ears checked/learn how to hear. That's ridiculous.
Have you ever listened to uncompressed audio? Do you even know what you're talking about?
I agree completely with NoAndThen. Provided you have a semi-decent sound system/headphones, anyone should be able to tell difference between itunes quality and studio master quality.
To give my answer to the question - I honestly don't know. If the whole music industry DOESN'T get behind it and promote it, it won't happen. Last time Sony et al. were behind SACD, and Warner et al. were behind DVD-Audio and it didn't work. So many other things went wrong at the same time too though, including the rise of portable mp3 audio, and so it was a disaster.
I reckon they will see if blu-ray succeeds first - but if it doesn't succeed "as much" as DVD did - which I fear is likely (although I hope not) - they may not go ahead with it and HD music downloads will take over instead. They already exist with linn records, itrax and music giants. And frankly I don't care, I'm getting a HTPC as soon as Asus HDAV1.3 comes out.
As a side note, it's a shame that it almost seems it must be a Sony format in order to have any chance of success - DVD-Audio was my choice last time. But blu-ray is the most superior disc format I've ever seen. (Yep, i think I'll always have a love/hate relationship with Sony. :| )
I said "The Average Person" not myself. I can most certainly tell the difference. However the average Tom, Dick an Harry with the $250 HTIB won't.
And yes, I do know what I am talking about. It may not be audiophile quality but a Denon 4308, 6 nht classic 3's, nht center 3 and Definitive Supercube I is nothing to laugh at.
Blu-Ray audio will be a niche product only for the "ZOMG, I can hear the difference between Monster audio cables and non-monster audio cables!^!&!^!" Or at least, you think you can.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
MadMike @ Jul 8th 2008 8:39AM
No, because the average person is completely unable to tell the difference between 192kbps mp3 and raw uncompressed audio.
The only thing would be have 7.1 channel master audio, and even then at the inevitable $50+ price tag such a product would have, it still would only be a niche.
If midrange BD-2.0 players were to hit the $300 price point and the BD-Audio discs were the same price (or cheaper) than their CD counterparts, then yes it may take off. Maybe even have the BD-Live disc include .mp3 & .m4a versions for use on an iPod. As long as it requires a significant monetary commitment to own and use, It won't take off. Plain and Simple.
NoAndThen @ Jul 17th 2008 11:57PM
seriously? If you can't tell the difference between 192kbps compressed mp3 and totally uncompressed audio, you need to get your ears checked/learn how to hear. That's ridiculous.
Have you ever listened to uncompressed audio? Do you even know what you're talking about?
dj496 @ Jul 18th 2008 9:50AM
I agree completely with NoAndThen. Provided you have a semi-decent sound system/headphones, anyone should be able to tell difference between itunes quality and studio master quality.
To give my answer to the question - I honestly don't know. If the whole music industry DOESN'T get behind it and promote it, it won't happen. Last time Sony et al. were behind SACD, and Warner et al. were behind DVD-Audio and it didn't work. So many other things went wrong at the same time too though, including the rise of portable mp3 audio, and so it was a disaster.
I reckon they will see if blu-ray succeeds first - but if it doesn't succeed "as much" as DVD did - which I fear is likely (although I hope not) - they may not go ahead with it and HD music downloads will take over instead. They already exist with linn records, itrax and music giants. And frankly I don't care, I'm getting a HTPC as soon as Asus HDAV1.3 comes out.
As a side note, it's a shame that it almost seems it must be a Sony format in order to have any chance of success - DVD-Audio was my choice last time. But blu-ray is the most superior disc format I've ever seen. (Yep, i think I'll always have a love/hate relationship with Sony. :| )
MadMike @ Jul 18th 2008 10:22AM
NoAndThen:
I said "The Average Person" not myself. I can most certainly tell the difference. However the average Tom, Dick an Harry with the $250 HTIB won't.
And yes, I do know what I am talking about. It may not be audiophile quality but a Denon 4308, 6 nht classic 3's, nht center 3 and Definitive Supercube I is nothing to laugh at.
Blu-Ray audio will be a niche product only for the "ZOMG, I can hear the difference between Monster audio cables and non-monster audio cables!^!&!^!" Or at least, you think you can.