From: curt@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Curt Welch)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: DCC, MD Limitations
Date: 11 Nov 92 06:27:43 GMT
Reply-To: curt@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Curt Welch)
Organization: Carderock Division, NSWC, Bethesda, MD

In rec.audio, bc2y+@andrew.cmu.edu (Brian T Cheek) writes:
>What would happen if you recorded a whisper + loud electric guitar sound
>on either MD or DCC.  The whisper would be dropped, correct?
>
>So what happens if you phase out that loud electric guitar, and record
>it to another recording?
>
>You'd get blank space.

Phase out the guitar?  Who on earth would want to do that?  You talk
like this is some type of standard practice.  Wrong-O.

If you want a recording of a wisper, you don't store it under a
recording of an electric guitar - with any format.

>I hear the flames coming, but listen:  If musicians use either of these
>formats for source sampling, when you later go in to edit or
>effect-process those sounds, some of the original sound components would
>have been dropped, and not be acted on.

Why would musicians use these formats for "source sampling" if they
had side effects that the musicians didn't like?  This is not a
typical use of these formats or for any format for that mater.

Besides, in my opinion, the "dropped" sounds are just as likely
to improve the recording for this type of use.

>Believe me,

Why?  You don't seem to have a clue.  Did you ever notice that
people that say this are the ones that can't get people to believe
them?

>sometimes it's
>those frequencies that give body to the sound.  Nobody actually
>pinpoints them, but it sounds different if it's not there.

Yeah, right.  You imply that MD and DCC will throw out
these sounds.  Why do you think they will do this? (other than
your obvious dislike for the concept of compression.)

Hey, I haven't heard MD or DCC.  I don't know if it's going to work and
I don't know if I'm going to like it.  But I don't start making up
stupid reasons why it "can't" work before I've even heard them.

>Why do classical listeners prefer CD's over analog cassettes?
>Because they like the dynamic range of the highs and lows.

Hey bud.  MD and DCC have the same dynamic range as CD.

>How can people tell the difference between real pianos and sampled ones?
>Real piano strings resonate the other ones.  (Hard to hear, but you
>don't want to throw them away, now.

Once again, how can you imply that MD or DCC will throw away these
sounds?

>Why will MD and DCC take a LONG time to mature?
>1. Record stores can't afford to keep them with the small demand

I don't think this will have anything to do with how long it
will take to mature.  If the demand is there, the record stores
will carry them.

>2. People can't even program their VCR's yet.

True, but what does this have to do with MD and DCC?  These units won't
be much harder to use than cassette recorders.

>3. Smart people will wait for true CD quality, (like DAT now, which
>blows the doors off DCC in all areas but analog cassette compatibility
>and text information)

People don't have to wait.  They can buy DAT now if they want it.  Ever
notice how well DAT sales are going?  Did you every stop to think that
people might want more than sound quality?

And you missed one of the bigest points that will effect how long it
takes for MD and DCC to mature.  There are two formats to pick from!
No one want's to be stuck with the format that died, so many people
will wait to see which format "wins".

>All it would take is a smart marketeer to kill both these formats!

Go for it if you think you're so smart.

Curt Welch