LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST Archives

ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST  November 2012

ARSCLIST November 2012

Subject:

Re: Early digital recording history -- a couple of followups

From:

Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Wed, 7 Nov 2012 12:43:05 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (143 lines)

Hi Rod:

I think that _all_ plastic discs are dying media. SACD is niche media, with few of those titles 
selling more than a couple thousand copies. You can play in the niche if your margin is enough to 
justify marketing and selling small quantities. LPs go for about $25 nowadays, and the niche is 
healthy. Will enough people pay $25 for SACDs? The net uptake for more than 2 speakers is tiny, most 
people simply won't do it (and many spouses won't allow it). You get a little bit built-in market 
with the home-theater crowd, but that too is a niche market. The question is, do enough customers 
find anything about a plastic disc of any sort appealing enough to pay the kind of prices required 
to profit in small quantities? Time will tell.

-- Tom Fine

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Roderic G Stephens" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2012 12:28 PM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Early digital recording history -- a couple of followups


Tom, you seem to be writing off the SACD as a dying animal. From what we've been seeing on 
http://www.sa-cd.net/ new releases keep coming, so does that mean that they (the record companies) 
are getting the message?

--- On Tue, 11/6/12, Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

From: Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Early digital recording history -- a couple of followups
To: [log in to unmask]
Date: Tuesday, November 6, 2012, 3:29 PM

Hi Goran:

Yes, the Soundstream editing system was massive (it was a DEC computer), and it was slow to transfer 
tapes back and forth with the computer, but let's not forget that everything else (including Decca, 
Denon and EMI in-house VTR-based systems) didn't have DSP, waveform editing or anything beyond 
video-style insert-editing. Same with the Sony 1600/1630 system. I think the Sonic Solutions was 
first pro-grade waveform editor/mastering system after Soundstream, but there may have been 
something that was short-lived before that. I know you could do homebrew editing on Commodore 64's 
and Radio Shack TRS-80 computers, but that was not pro-grade.

CD mastering was still mostly VTR-centric until the late 90's, although Sonic and then ProTools 
started making headway in the mid-90's. I think they typical MO was to dump your DAW final onto a 
1630 tape or, later DAT and Exabyte started being accepted at the CD plants. At least that was the 
situation in the US, in the Polygram system.

Your perspective about too little CD manufacturing capacity in the early days reminds me of tales 
I've heard about what killed SACD (aside from the fact that it started off as a superior 2-channel 
system and was then quickly re-launched as many-speaker gadgetry, which had little uptake with real 
consumers living in real homes with real wives). One tale oft repeated (but I've never tracked down 
the facts on it, so I can't say it's true) is that between Sony reissuing the Bob Dylan catalog on 
SACD hybrid and Abkco putting out the early Rolling Stones catalog on hybrid, all of the hybrid 
manufacturing capacity (which was too little) was booked for months, while market buzz on SACD 
fizzled since you couldn't play the first generation of discs on anything except pricey 
first-generation SACD-only players. Also, they launched SACD without hybrid discs, and with a very 
limited selection of titles. And of course the first generation hardware was super-costly.
 This was all the same series of mistakes made with the CD, but at the dawn of the CD era, there was 
a healthy cassette market and LPs were still a force. Some argue that SACD's failure sped up the 
rush to pirate downloads, which began the downfall of the record business. I'm not sure I give the 
"SACD moment" that much importance. I would argue the single event most contributing to the downfall 
was the price-fixing in the US market throughout the 90's. Consumers read all the news reports that 
came out when the record companies had to pay fines and settle antitrust enforcements and other 
lawsuits. There was then a widespread attitude during the Napster days of, "the ripped me off for 
years, screw 'em." The industry reaction of suing its customers didn't help!

-- Tom Fine

----- Original Message ----- From: "Goran Finnberg" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2012 5:11 PM
Subject: [ARSCLIST] Early digital recording history -- a couple of followups


> Tom Fine:
>
>> Sony was 4th (and it was the
>> pro-sumer PCM F-1 system at
>> first, followed quickly by the 1600 system).
>
> http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/CorporateInfo/History/SonyHistory/2-10.html
>
> "Following the development of the home-use PCM-1 digital audio processor in
> 1977, the professional-use PCM-1600, which used the U-Matic machine, was
> launched in March 1978."
>
> May I point out that despite having the ability to record digitally what use
> is that if you cannot edit?
>
> Fact is that Sony was still telling me at the London AES in 1980 that they
> had no digital editor but soooooon it should be available. ;-)
>
> Bis, Robert von Bahr, was the first in Sweden if not in Europe? to buy the
> Sony PCM-1, 78/79?, and used it to record in parallel with his ReVox A-77
> from then on but he could not edit the digital tapes nor was there any
> medium to release any digital recording in their native form.
>
> When CD arrived, 82/83, the pressing capacity was so low that even if you
> did have something ready to be sent to the replicator you could be set on
> the waiting list for a year or so.
>
> At the 1980 AES meeting in London I got bored and walked over to Kingsway
> Hall to find DECCA/London producer Jimmy Walker and DECCA senior recording
> engineer John Dunkerley recording solo piano works with Vladimir Ashkenazy
> at the Steinway.
>
> Despite having a fully operational digital recorder and editing system home
> built they were still recording on two DECCA modified Studer A80 running in
> parallel using Dolby A because they did not have more than a few digital
> recorders and having many recording teams out recording scheduled works
> meant that still some of the recordings had to be made in analogue because
> of the shortage of digital recording equipment.
>
>> no one was making commercial digital recordings
>
> So to be able to make commercial recordings you must have editing equipment
> too and having the ability to record digitally but NO editing facility and
> you are still dead in the water with no ability to make a ready edited
> product for sale.
>
> This was the biggest reason for DECCA to make everything in house since the
> thought of having to go to the USA, Soundstream, for editing was completely
> out as far as DECCA was concerned. And the Soundstream editor was big and
> clunky and VERY slow........
>
>
>
> -- Best regards,
>
> Goran Finnberg
> The Mastering Room AB
> Goteborg
> Sweden
>
> E-mail: [log in to unmask]
>
> Learn from the mistakes of others, you can never live long enough to
> make them all yourself. - John Luther
>
> (\__/)
> (='.'=)
> (")_(") Smurfen:RIP
>

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager