Open discussion on a thought. Could mutli channel be hi rez savior?
1st, no bashing or anything of the sort, this is just an open discussion on an idea, we already know all the +&- of it all.
Hope this hasn't been discussed before but was thinking, why is it that the majors don't use mc as a new marketing tool. Making the younger generation care for AQ seems to be an unwinnable battle, but what if they introduced a "New way of hearing your favorite artists, the same quality as if you were in the studio with them" type thing.
You are now marketing a new experience that is more than just AQ. Add the odd doc, some video of the studio time, etc. Not very expensive, so make it affordable. Anyone with a BD player and at least an entry HTiB could "live the experience". heck, they might even start to enjoy the possible great AQ also
I'm sure many would buy if you get the Bieb... Oh Chr*st, that guy lol
Multichannel high resolution audio is a smaller subset of high resolution audio users, who are already a smaller subset of music listeners. While multichannel music is an advantage of the high resolution platform, it would be risky to base you the success of that platform on small subset of audio listeners.
I won't go into why I don't prefer surround audio, but just to say that personal preferences do come into equation. If the studios say its "better quality", that is something that the majority of people will go for - studies have already shown that people will buy high resolution audio if it is available and easy to use. But multichannel isn't better than stereo the same way stereo isn't better than multichannel - its personal preference. Alienating a group of people who have a preference is bad business.
I do think multi channel is easier to market than high res stereo, as everyone with 5.1 can hear it.. but then it should also be sold digitally, which for high res is still the domain of stereo. This could lower the entry point for trying MC out, as right now you have to buy the physical versions (which, if you are unlucky, are SACD's/DVD-A's that are OOP and expensive).
Still, a packaged edition with everything (high res stereo and MC, bonus tracks/alternate mixes, some music videos and possibly a documentary) for a reasonable premium option over the standard cd could be an interesting option. Preferably with Digipak packaging as it is recognisable as CD sized packaging but is also recognisable as a collector's edition/premium packaging option over jewel cases.
It should add value beyond just offering higher res, as not everyone is interested in that/can hear it/wants to hear it. Also combining it one disc should aid in that all important convenience factor..
I'm not really sure if advertising multichannel audio will really attract the younger generation, as most of them seem to be content with mp3 files on their iphones, but for me personally, it's a major selling point. I used to have no desire to hear albums remixed into multichannel, since most all of them were originally mixed for two channel stereo. I just didn't see the point in it, until I heard Steely Dan - Gaucho in 5.1, and then I was hooked.
If done properly, a multichannel remix can be a revelation, like hearing an album I've heard countless times for the first time. I have heard some multichannel mixes that add reverb in the surrounds and such, and I really can't stand that, but as long as they stick to the original tracks from the original recordings without adding any weird processing, I think it can be a very enjoyable immersive experience.
I totally understand why some people are purists and only want the highest quality stereo recordings of classic albums, as that's the way they were originally intended to be heard, and I may lose some audiophile credibility by saying this, but if a blu-ray of an album that I really like is available only in stereo, then I won't be purchasing it. I probably have close to 1,000 CDs in my collection, and without a high quality multichannel mix available, I will just stick with my CDs for those albums.
I will say that I've just recently gotten into multichannel remixes in the last few months, so a big part of my love for it could just be the fact that it's an all new way for me to reconnect with the albums that I love, and that may wear off a bit once I've become more used to it, but it really gives me that feeling I used to get when I was a kid picking up a new album at the record store, and I was just so excited to get it home and immerse myself in it.
On a side note, I do find it kind of odd that we now live in a technological age where we can have music and movies, audio and video, in a much higher quality resolution than I ever thought possible, especially for home usage, but at the same time, they have figured out how to use that technology to reduce the quality in order to save space, and so many people are more attracted to lower quality/less space than having the absolute best quality available. I just don't understand that mindset, and why we all seem to be in the minority. Oh well, at least we do live in an age where we at least have the option to enjoy all of this stuff in such high quality.
Personally, I love MC music. The more I get into it the more I realize it's a niche market. There have been some great releases since I started getting more into it (Pink Floyd's Wish You Were Here, Rush's 2112, Moving Pictures and the holy grail for myself, Farewell to Kings). With the number of systems out there now, even just HTIB systems, I think there is a possibility MC music could gather some steam. IMO the future is Blu-ray audio but I'll admit I'm not interested in most of the recent releases because of the lack of multi-channel audio. I'm willing to pay $30 to $45 for a decent MC mix. I'm not willing to pay that for a stereo BD-A.
The real advantage of BD-A becoming mainstream is the fact that no special player is required. If you are capable of enjoying a 5.1 movie on Blu-ray you have what you need to enjoy BD-A as well if you are so inclined.
I'll continue to buy what interests me (mainly classic rock) as it trickles out on whatever format it's released on but unfortunately with a couple of rare exceptions (like Dream Theater, thanks to pentatonic's suggestion) I'm just really not that much into truly new releases.
I'd love to see some of the OOP DVD-A and SACD titles rereleased on BD-A as long as they are MC.
1st, no bashing or anything of the sort, this is just an open discussion on an idea, we already know all the +&- of it all.
Hope this hasn't been discussed before but was thinking, why is it that the majors don't use mc as a new marketing tool. Making the younger generation care for AQ seems to be an unwinnable battle, but what if they introduced a "New way of hearing your favorite artists, the same quality as if you were in the studio with them" type thing.
You are now marketing a new experience that is more than just AQ. Add the odd doc, some video of the studio time, etc. Not very expensive, so make it affordable. Anyone with a BD player and at least an entry HTiB could "live the experience". heck, they might even start to enjoy the possible great AQ also
I'm sure many would buy if you get the Bieb... Oh Chr*st, that guy lol
The labels did make a relatively big push for surround music at the dawn of DVD-Audio and SACD, bolstered by the lossy surround found on normal DVDs. You have to realize back then it was a very small market, few had the necessary equipment to play surround and it was a mess of cables (no HDMI in those days).
The cost of production goes up for a surround mix over an existing stereo mix and can only be heard in a few venues. The market is just too small for a big promotional push at this point.
[Show spoiler]The labels did make a relatively big push for surround music at the dawn of DVD-Audio and SACD, bolstered by the lossy surround found on normal DVDs. You have to realize back then it was a very small market, few had the necessary equipment to play surround and it was a mess of cables (no HDMI in those days).
The cost of production goes up for a surround mix over an existing stereo mix and can only be heard in a few venues.
[Show spoiler]The market is just too small for a big promotional push at this point.
I'm not entirely sure what you mean when you say that a surround mix can only be heard in a few venues. I have a 7.1 setup with two 12" subs. My dad is 76 years old and has a 5.1 sound system. I know some dirt poor rednecks that live in a trailer park that have a 5.1 HTiB.
I'd love for m.c. Blu ray to catch on, but I doubt there'd be a whole lot of music out there for me.
A decade ago I bought a Toshiba player for $500 that played SACD and DVD-A, yet there was a very limited amount of music that suited my taste. I still have the only discs I bought in those two formats and they total five.
If it is offered and there's something for me to buy, I'll be all over it. But at the moment, I have a huge desire to get back into Vinyl and there is some music that I will actually but.
Multichannel high resolution audio is a smaller subset of high resolution audio users, who are already a smaller subset of music listeners. While multichannel music is an advantage of the high resolution platform, it would be risky to base you the success of that platform on small subset of audio listeners.
I won't go into why I don't prefer surround audio, but just to say that personal preferences do come into equation. If the studios say its "better quality", that is something that the majority of people will go for - studies have already shown that people will buy high resolution audio if it is available and easy to use. But multichannel isn't better than stereo the same way stereo isn't better than multichannel - its personal preference. Alienating a group of people who have a preference is bad business.
Hey Josh, I wasn't thinking of forgoing 2ch or anything of the sort, but chances are the parties already involved in HRA know about BD audio. And since more and more new albums with HRA also have mc, I just figured it could be a way of getting others to join in
Many people listen to MP3s on their portable devices and PCs via headphones and it's harder for many to hear what they are missing. I've been reasonably impressed with some MP3s on headphones too but as soon as I play them on my main system (5.2 B&W 802, Arcam etc) especially at higher sound levels they immediately show their inferior audio quality.
I can't 'stretch' low MP3 low sample/bit rates to fill high volumes in my large room. It all seems to fall apart. Many current geners will probably never experience that and will be happy to stay with stereo, MP3, compressed (and it's easy to download, and often 'free').
There will be a huge percentage of this generation that will stay with 'personal hi-Fi/portable hi-Fi' and probably never experience surround except in a movie theatre and that tends to be more effects than music of course.
As others have said, Blu-ray Audio will make 5.1 much more accessible to those with 5.1 systems, but I've not seen any stores demoing this format. It's always a big TV with some action movie or sometimes a live concert (not always a discrete surround mix. Most people are not aware of surround music and what a great experience it is).
It's a shame there is such a tiny number of BD-A discs out there, even less in surround (What are they doing with 'Pure Audio' discs anyway? Only about 1 in 10 discs released so far is surround, a lost opportunity?) and are there any surround albums of recent artists being released? They aren't going to sell too many 70s albums to Twenty Something's are they?
So I think its a great idea to launch 'MC Surround' on BD but it's probably a lost opportunity unless the studios and hardware vendors make a real push soon.
Personally, I think it's too late. And I also think that the market doesn't care because when it comes down to it, the market has rarely gone for quality. The market goes for convenience. If quality comes along for the ride, they'll buy it, but it's not the dominant reason.
The reason it's too late is because there isn't enough physical retail left where the multi-channel can be demonstrated and it won't sell unless it's demonstrated.
I thought that back at the very beginning of downloading (especially illegal downloads), the record industry could have done more to save itself by pushing the hi-res and multichannel formats that were available back then, especially multichannel, since at least back then, hi-res and multichannel file sizes would have been too large to download efficiently. But the industry failed to successfully market DVD-Audio and SACD. When I've written this before, some people have disagreed with me, but if they're right and I'm wrong, then it means that there was no market interest (which is certainly possible).
I felt that back then, if properly demonstrated in both record stores and electronics retail, it would have helped both the "hi-fi" industry and the music industry. They could have pushed the fact that only in hi-res and (in some cases) multi-channel were you hearing the record the way the artists/producers intended.
But instead, the record industry twiddled its thumbs, not believing that downloads were going to take over and until they started making deals with the iTunes store (and eventually others), sat around and watched the industry die. In spite of the success of paid downloads, because the market has returned to primarily a singles market, the size of the U.S. music market is less than half of what it was in its peak year of 1999. If you include inflation, it's only about a third the size of the 1999 market in the U.S.
But now there's a whole generation of people who have been raised on MP3 portable audio. Singles once again dominate, not albums. Although there's a wealth of information available about artists online, no one really cares whereas back in the day, we wanted to know who all the session players were, what the matrix numbers were, what studios the record was recorded, mixed and mastered in, etc. No one cares about that stuff anymore. Records are over-compressed (I'm talking about level compression, not file compression) and are filled with auto-tuning and other "out of the box" Pro-Tools effects that makes so much music sound the same.
And now that the industry is desperate for any fees it can raise no matter how paltry, they're making deals with the streaming services like Pandora and Spotify, which will further serve to kill the music business. If you can hear everything you want, whenever you want to via a player, why would anyone ever buy anything today, especially when the music is so disposable? People listen to music today, but they don't collect it.
Music listening has become a much more passive experience and I don't see very much desire by very many younger people to have big sound systems. Probably because they don't have much desire to stay home. And with a continued poor economy and the middle-class not gaining in real income terms in years, people are going to be living in smaller homes and they're not going to have room for large sound systems.
Most of the younger people in my office don't even know what "stereo" means. I made a joke about the dumb kids I see on the subway sharing earbuds (one person listening to the left channel and one person listening to the right) and no one understood why I found that funny. When I explained, one woman (who is highly intelligent and manages software development, so it's not like she's not technical) said, "what does stereo mean?"
There's no point listening to garbage music (or even good music that sounds like garbage) in hi-res. Until the culture returns to producing quality music (and maybe it never will), it's a non-starter. I think even old collectors, like myself, are tired of multiple dipping. And sometimes (perhaps due to our poor hearing after decades of rock concerts), it doesn't even sound all that much better. I just shelled out big bucks for the Blu-ray version of Van Morrison's "Moondance" and was not all that impressed.
What's really unfortunate is that there are many 5.1 channel re-mixes that have never been released and are just sitting in the vaults because the labels don't see much of a market for them. (Two examples: the "Supersession" album with Al Kooper, Mike Bloomfield and Steven Stills and the first Blood, Sweat & Tears album, "Child Is Father To The Man".)
Even in the case of vinyl, the labels don't put out catalog material themselves (for the most part) - they license it to labels like Sundazed, because even with all the recent vinyl hype, they don't see the ROI. Multichannel/Hi-res music is a very small niche market and I don't see anything changing that in the short term.
In the esoteric market, there's plenty of action in the A to D and D to A field and Sony is trying to push hi-res with some new boxes, but if it's not successful in the short term, they'll probably abandon it within a few years.
If I were running a label, I'd put out 10 great albums in hi-res/multichannel as a test, priced under $20, to see if it got any action. I'd do a campaign that said something like, "Now your music can sound just as good as your movies" or something of the sort. But even that's not really enough because there has to be a place to demonstrate it.
Personally, I'm actually more interested in multichannel than i am in hi-res, since my bet is that in a blind A-B test, the vast majority of people (and maybe everybody) would not be able to tell the difference between 44.1/16 and hi-res (and I'm an ex-recording engineer). But they will immediately hear the difference in a 5.1 remix (but one in which instruments, and not just echo or ambience, are sent to the rear channels).
The music industry has always been very shortsighted, only concerning themselves with the latest fads and whims. They started getting a grip on the shift to the iTunes model and now streaming has pulled the rug out from under that model.
I thought the general public were dumb when 3D became successful. Its one of the worst designs for what it does and its successful.
On the other hand, MC surround sound music and FX already has already won me over with SACD/BDA and DVDA and quite a few of the releases I have bought have floored me.
You need the right type of company to promote this stuff. It can't be Sony or Universal. It has to be Apple or Google. They are the only companies that the new generation listen to anymore.
MC music is the only way for me! I no longer listen to stereo; boring.
When I do play my stereo only music (great discs never released in multichannel ) I always use one of my receivers surround modes to create a pseudo 5.1 sound field. I just like to fill my room with sound.
Also, on my most favourite stereo only discs I've experimented with using a Foobar plugin to create a permanent 5.1 or 4.0 up mix to FLAC. These can sound quite good, sometimes even a little discrete. Lou Reed Transformer, Supertramp Crime of the Century, Pink Floyd Meddle etc all sound great but these are typically high DR discs that sound very good in stereo too!
When I do play my stereo only music (great discs never released in multichannel ) I always use one of my receivers surround modes to create a pseudo 5.1 sound field. I just like to fill my room with sound.
Also, on my most favourite stereo only discs I've experimented with using a Foobar plugin to create a permanent 5.1 or 4.0 up mix to FLAC. These can sound quite good, sometimes even a little discrete. Lou Reed Transformer, Supertramp Crime of the Century, Pink Floyd Meddle etc all sound great but these are typically high DR discs that sound very good in stereo too!
Me too. Though it's not so much about filling my room w/ sound as it is giving depth to the music. Instruments just sound so much fuller in surround.
While on MC. I'm telling you guys, he has influence in the biz, I have my nephew asking me about the bands he's remixed caused they like what he did with bands like Anathema and Opeth particularly. In case you don't know Opeth, they are one of the best Progressive Death Metal bands, quite the opposite of his Porcupine Tree work. They like him, so they buy what he works on, how can you get better marketing, and I believe he doesn't sell less than flac format on his site.
I'm feeling good about this and quality digital music was big at CES.
While on MC. I'm telling you guys, he has influence in the biz, I have my nephew asking me about the bands he's remixed caused they like what he did with bands like Anathema and Opeth particularly. In case you don't know Opeth, they are one of the best Progressive Death Metal bands, quite the opposite of his Porcupine Tree work. They like him, so they buy what he works on, how can you get better marketing, and I believe he doesn't sell less than flac format on his site.
I'm feeling good about this and quality digital music was big at CES.
I had been kind of on the fence about this one but after reading the interview I was excited enough about it to order it. Look forward to see what is next.
Thanks pent!
All countries
Argentina
Austria
Belgium
Brazil
Bulgaria
Chile
China
Colombia
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Estonia
Denmark
Finland
Greece
Hong Kong
Hungary
Iceland
Indonesia
Ireland
Israel
India
Latvia
Lithuania
Malaysia
New Zealand
Norway
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Singapore
South Africa
South Korea
Sweden
Switzerland
Taiwan
Thailand
Turkey
Ukraine
United Arab Emirates
Open discussion on a thought. Could mutli channel be hi rez savior?
Linear Mode
