We all know downloads are the future. Will it open up a new market and glorious era for hi-res/surround music?

It decreases the cost for the distributor, and they don't have all the challenges, problems, complications and delays associated with physical disc players and f'n disc standards. Look at how Tosh just lost 100s of $M due to a disc format. Downloads doesn't have all that risk, you only need to worry about software/codecs which are easy to standardise.

So I wonder if the freedom and risk-free-ness of downloads will give music studios more confidence to release 24-bit surround mixes to the world. You just slap the download on the website, it just sits on the server minding its own business and if it doesn't sell well you don't have much loss anyway, and there's certainly some people who would appreciate it enormously (read: us) and provide lucrative income. And anyway, CDs are pre-mastered/archived in 24-bit so I don't think there'd be much extra effort and therefore financial risk.

Here's hoping that the entire Beatles catalog, all those great movie soundtracks, and heck, EVERYTHING will one day be on online catalogs in 24-bit quality and whenever possible, surround sound.

I think this is a reasonable likelihood. Without the overhead of physical distribution, I think hi-rez downloads can be profitable for the music owners even with a relatively small number of consumers.

Other than concerts, I think downloads are a far more likely avenue for hi-rez than bluray.

Here's hoping!

It's one reason why I think the DVDA format could actually have a comeback of sorts.

With DVDA, as shown by itrax, one can download a hi-resolution track and burn it to DVDA for play someplace other than the computer it was downloaded onto. If the track could be down-converted and burned to CD (or better yet, some type of solid-state media) it could be played everywhere (cars, non-dvda stereos, etc). The format could possible be revived and live on past SACD and the SACD super copy protection.

I'm hopeful, but not optimistic. The same smattering of people interested in hirez / surround will be the ones downloading. there's not much interest otherwise in hirez, and even less in surround music

mr doom n gloom


(I just noticed the latest article re DVD-Audio from highfidelityreview.com was written in 2006 :eek:)

I was looking into getting some 5.1 Hi Rez but tehn to get it burnt to disk Unless I am Wrong looks to be very expensive ?? here is too Hoping I am Wrong ;)

Well if that is the Case I say just sell me the Disk!! To Bad DVD-A is on life support :(

Its not expensive - blank DVD media is around $1 (4.7GB) and falling

I am Not talking about the Blank media the Tool required to burn MLP to DVD-A ..

I think the answer is NO. Although hi-res and multi-channel are not the same thing, from a practical perspective they are. Hi-res music needs multi-channel to be viable. Further, history has shown that multi-channel music is a niche market and of little interest to the masses. There is no reason to think that downloadable, hi-res, multi-channel music will be any different. It will be nice to have yet another vehicle to help keep it alive, but I do not expect it to "reinvigorate" a market that has never really developed despite the various attempts.

I think the answer is NO. Although hi-res and multi-channel are not the same thing, from a practical perspective they are. Hi-res music needs multi-channel to be viable. Further, history has shown that multi-channel music is a niche market and of little interest to the masses. There is no reason to think that downloadable, hi-res, multi-channel music will be any different. It will be nice to have yet another vehicle to help keep it alive, but I do not expect it to "reinvigorate" a market that has never really developed despite the various attempts.
The industry wrecked it though, largely due to the lack of cooperation. They did the worst thing possible, and thought it would sort itself out in the end. Problem is, no one saw the iPod coming and the MP3 revolution (a regressive revolution might I add).

I do believe both formats have distinctive advantages to each other (although I prefer the more standard PCM to DSD, because well it's the industry standard for recording and listening to music and is able to be downloaded on PCs, so is future proof and yada yada yada).

I suppose what I'm saying, is that downloads might encourage the INDUSTRY, the record companies to release more material, not necessarily the consumers to buy more. They might not care so much this time that it sells so well because such is the relatively-risk-free nature of the downloads business model. they LOVE downloads, and there is always SOME money to be made, even if a niche market. It's not like they would be depending on it or see it as the "replacement model to CD", it would just be an extra option for audiophiles and home theater fans.

iTrax, Linnrecords, etc. are great, they will certainly be there to stay, but hey I want my (insert embarrassing secret favourite techno/electronic rock artist with Mute records through EMI whose name starts with M and ends with Y and has O and B in between here) in hi-res, and surround if possible.

Well, if I was to choose between hi-res and lossy multichannel, I'd have a hard-time deciding, but would probably go with the hi-res (depending on how good the surround mix was of course). I do love hi-res stereo, that's quite viable for me. I always say, "gee I wish X album was in hi-res, and surround if possible". Hi-res really does come first for me.