Author Topic: The $800 CD (Read 2216 times)

mietla · « **Reply #30 on:** October 21, 2006, 08:59:11 PM »

never mind

ByeBye · « **Reply #31 on:** October 21, 2006, 10:34:08 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Rolex
Nope.
Nope.
Nope.
Nope.
Nope...

It's an audio cd, but the music isn't what's special. It's the quality of the sound. It's a quantum leap.

Without going into a deep explanation of how CDs and CD players work, suffice it to say that they really are a marvel of exacting manufacturing tolerances at the micron level, particularly error correction.

This CD is made from solid glass, will last for generations without dregradation and is not subject to surface material degradation and reading error problems that present imperfection of audio CD sound that come with multilayer, plastic CDs.

Standard CDs are made of different layers of material and are subject to warping and surface degradation from exposure to heat and UV. CDs don't last forever, contrary to popular belief. Data readability can start to degrade after 5 years, depending on the quality of the blank CD.

Is the CD's only merit that it is made of glass, or was it recorded at a different sampling rate other than 44.1?

Glass can be scratched very easily. A standard CD recording is only 44.1 kHz and only 16 bits. 16 bits is not good for dynamic range.

There is no way that CD is worth $800.00 and there is no way that it's sound is better than a high bit, high kHz recording on a hard drive or digital tape recording.

Rolex · « **Reply #32 on:** October 21, 2006, 11:24:25 PM »

Thank Nuke we all here have the "Word of Nuke" coming down from heaven to explain the physics of Nuke's World, i.e., glass can be scratched very easily...

Nuke, if you had any experience in, or understood the science of materials and the technology of CD manufacturing and particularly players, you would know that the semi-clear acrylic layer now used affects reflectivity of the laser, causing...

Never mind. A thimble can't hold a liter of knowledge.

You're right. Have a nice day.

ByeBye · « **Reply #33 on:** October 21, 2006, 11:37:08 PM »

If that CD were perfect physically, but was still "dumbed down" as it was mastered into a 44.1 kHz, 16 bit representation of the original recording, then I can't see how it would be worth $800.00. No way anyone that knows anything about digital recording would buy it.

It's still just a 16 bit digital recording that is lower quality than the master recording it was made from.

eagl · « **Reply #34 on:** October 21, 2006, 11:41:46 PM »

Rolex, I squelched byebye the first day he posted here... He hasn't ever contributed anything, and every time I get curious about his posts they turn out to be the same old derogatory nonsense he's spouting here.

He's one of a mere handful of people who post here that you can plonk and never worry about missing something insightful. It's a shade account used for nothing but fairly mean and nasty trolls. I thought skuzzy would have kicked him a month ago because pretty much his first 10 posts were 10 consecutive personal attacks, but I guess he hasn't crossed skuzzy's or any of the MPs line. I thought his first entire day's worth of posts would get scrubbed because he never posts anything but nasty comments. Even the one "positive" thread he started about photography was simply a follow-up of his nasty postings in two previous threads on photography.

Plonk him and don't worry about it. He's not worth a milisecond of your time.

Chairboy · « **Reply #35 on:** October 21, 2006, 11:45:12 PM »

Rolex: A super incredible glass master that costs $800 is kinda like a new type of horse saddle. It's neat, but I'll just use a car that's cheaper and faster.

Digital storage on HDs, Flash memory, etc can contain the exact same digital information without any risk of 'warpage' either that would affect playback. If you're talking about long term archival, meh... Once it's digital and part of a living storage (eg, not tapes), moving it from medium to medium is cake.

ByeBye · « **Reply #36 on:** October 21, 2006, 11:46:05 PM »

By the way, all CDs are mastered from glass masters. Even microscopic scratches can effect the sound quality.

Rolex · « **Reply #37 on:** October 22, 2006, 12:34:05 AM »

Yup, you're spot on, eagl.

Also agree with you, Chair. The concept was the designer wanted to keep things for his grandchildren to hear. He'll have to store a player to read it too, since CD players won't likely be around then

They still plan on commercializing it to reduce costs, but I think it's destined to be novelty forever.

Sony and Philips don't want CDs to go away for a long time. Sony makes over $300 million/year just on IPR for the CD. A five-person office counting and recording deposits. Any idea how much work it takes to make $300 million in traditional manufacturing? What a business.

ByeBye · « **Reply #38 on:** October 22, 2006, 01:00:44 AM »

Rolex, I was asking you legitimate questions. You didn't post anything about the CD other than it was made of glass and:

1. It's sound quality was a quantum leap
2. It would not be subject to surface degregation
3. It would last for generations
4. It contained music that sounded as close to live as possible and would last forever.

All I was pointing out was that unless the CD was not just a standard 44.1 kHz, 16 bit recording, then it's sound quality could never be a quantum leap.

And being made of glass, how could it not be subject to scratches?

If you take my post as an insult or as being mean, so be it.

Dinger · « **Reply #39 on:** October 22, 2006, 06:06:59 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by x0847Marine
I'll bet the government buys em for $130,000, plus tax.

You'd bet wrong xmarine.

MrRiplEy[H] · « **Reply #40 on:** October 22, 2006, 08:39:00 AM »

Just like any other CD it's priced that way because RIAA needs the profit.

Which is the only reason why we've been paying $20 for $5 net value product for the past 15 years.

And as much as I hate to say it, Byebye has a point - if it's 16-bit PCM it will sound exactly the same with a common cd.

Suave · « **Reply #41 on:** October 22, 2006, 09:53:49 AM »

Yep. Cassette tapes are actually more expensive to make, yet compact disks and dvds are more expensive.

The entertainment industry has reaped the benefits of recent technological progress, certainly not the consumer.

The music industry has gone downhill much since the advent of the CD. That's largely because the music industry is now owned not by people who like music. But by corporations who have a vested interest in media, like sony for example.

Remember rock bands?

I mean bands that weren't manufactured for radio or mtv ?

Heck it wasn't long after the CD came out, the early 90s, a lot of good, new and innovative electronic music could only be found on vinyl records at local private owned record stores (something that doesn't exist anymore).

The new music industry wasn't interested in improved music. Much like walmart now controlls the manufacturing sector. The new music industry thought it more profitable to decide what the consumer wants.

Neubob · « **Reply #42 on:** October 22, 2006, 11:06:21 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Rolex

This CD is made from solid glass, will last for generations

Even if I throw it against the wall like I do my el-cheapo cds?

ByeBye · « **Reply #43 on:** October 22, 2006, 10:13:21 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by eagl
Rolex, I squelched byebye the first day he posted here... He hasn't ever contributed anything, and every time I get curious about his posts they turn out to be the same old derogatory nonsense he's spouting here.

I'm not the one spouting nonsense. I actually know what Im talking about.

ByeBye · « **Reply #44 on:** October 22, 2006, 10:26:08 PM »

Rolex, I'm so sorry that I do not understand the manufacturing requirments needed to create that glass CD. I guess I am stupid or something.

Can you explain to a stupid guy like me how that glass CD is a quantum leap in sound quality? And, why is it more durable than a plastic CD?