what is good quality depends on its intended uses. The popularity of mp3 suggests that the market, not you or me, have accepted its quality for its intended uses. And also there is a substantial market for low-quality goods, aka Wal-Mart, or Ford/GM, etc.
most people are still challenged by your average PC. What they need is a digital "gateway" that can store and stream digital content, data, voice, audio, video and anything else. This allows other digital devices on the home network to work and to be commanded by the gateway, aka. the firewire-connected speakers. we are moving towards that, slowly.
iTunes is a very interesting business model as it, if designed and marketed properly, has the potential to completely destroy the existing content distribution model. the foundamental bottleneck in iTunes is that the supply of the digital content is centralized, aka the 1-to-N model.
One project I am working on is an authenticated N-to-N model (essentially a P2P with centralized authentication). This will allow fast distribution of digital content, and with the built-in ability to make it a marketplace where users can publish and market their work over the network (aka eBay).
most people are still challenged by your average PC. What they need is a digital "gateway" that can store and stream digital content, data, voice, audio, video and anything else. This allows other digital devices on the home network to work and to be commanded by the gateway, aka. the firewire-connected speakers. we are moving towards that, slowly.
iTunes is a very interesting business model as it, if designed and marketed properly, has the potential to completely destroy the existing content distribution model. the foundamental bottleneck in iTunes is that the supply of the digital content is centralized, aka the 1-to-N model.
One project I am working on is an authenticated N-to-N model (essentially a P2P with centralized authentication). This will allow fast distribution of digital content, and with the built-in ability to make it a marketplace where users can publish and market their work over the network (aka eBay).
At the same time I know alot of people who do use a home PC that would never bother with the likes of an Ipod.
I think the popularity of it is due to the portability of it, over anything else. All it has replaced is the typical "walkman", for which it is in competition with any mp3 player.
No, people do enjoy some measure of quality, especially for home theatre, the ipod and its' "dock" will not make a big dent in that market, where a typical home PC + powered speaker set is probably already far superior.
" authenticated N-to-N model (essentially a P2P with centralized authentication)."
Maybe you can sell that to music/video companies as they're starting to look at this sort of thing more seriously, but I personally feel, P2P is already here to stay, we don't want to pay low quality versions with limited user rights either, which is something they don't seem willing to do away with.
Already better options are available to us, no authentication required, no cost, no limited rights. They'd have to offer a better deal to get looked at seriously.
Anyway, is Napster not already an example of this?
I think the popularity of it is due to the portability of it, over anything else. All it has replaced is the typical "walkman", for which it is in competition with any mp3 player.
No, people do enjoy some measure of quality, especially for home theatre, the ipod and its' "dock" will not make a big dent in that market, where a typical home PC + powered speaker set is probably already far superior.
" authenticated N-to-N model (essentially a P2P with centralized authentication)."
Maybe you can sell that to music/video companies as they're starting to look at this sort of thing more seriously, but I personally feel, P2P is already here to stay, we don't want to pay low quality versions with limited user rights either, which is something they don't seem willing to do away with.
Already better options are available to us, no authentication required, no cost, no limited rights. They'd have to offer a better deal to get looked at seriously.
Anyway, is Napster not already an example of this?
classd4sure said:
To project one's inclination into the mass consumer behavior is chancey. Typically there're all kinds of tastes and pocketbooks. Business people usually bet that one of them is more profitable. Today technologies allow any implementation. The risk is on guessing the market.
"Today technologies allow any implementation"
That's kind of where I'm going with this. There's one thing you don't have to guess as far as the market goes. We want high quality content, reasonably cheap, preferably free, and we want the ability to do with it as we please.
Ipod, others, all want to standardize the industry to their proprietary formats with limited user rights and expect us to pay dearly for it. The problem with that is exactly what you said, and why they're doomed to fail.
As I've found yesterday, even purchased DVD movies have commercials on them now! Bet the ones I grab for free don't. They're far too behind in the game, too little, too late.
That's kind of where I'm going with this. There's one thing you don't have to guess as far as the market goes. We want high quality content, reasonably cheap, preferably free, and we want the ability to do with it as we please.
Ipod, others, all want to standardize the industry to their proprietary formats with limited user rights and expect us to pay dearly for it. The problem with that is exactly what you said, and why they're doomed to fail.
As I've found yesterday, even purchased DVD movies have commercials on them now! Bet the ones I grab for free don't. They're far too behind in the game, too little, too late.
Well, we hope to provide a product that offers high quality audio playback from a PC.
Our product is a combination of a custom soundcard with FireWire interface and class D amp modules. Our prototype is currently using the Hypex UcD400s and UcD180s in a multichannel design. We are working on the next phase, which is the development of the working prototype with a more advanced soundcard/analog signal section and will also probably swap out the linear supplies for SMPS, in addition to any appropriate enhancements or alternatives to the amp modules.
Anyhow, we hope to provide a higher quality option as an alternative to the type of product that someone like Apple might offer. We feel there is a market for high quality PC based audio. Not as large as the market for Apple's iPod, etc., but maybe a nice niche. Currently there are a few outlets for high quality audio tracks. Check out MusicGiants and Magnatune for starters.
For more information feel free to check out our blog. Any feedback is appreciated.
Our product is a combination of a custom soundcard with FireWire interface and class D amp modules. Our prototype is currently using the Hypex UcD400s and UcD180s in a multichannel design. We are working on the next phase, which is the development of the working prototype with a more advanced soundcard/analog signal section and will also probably swap out the linear supplies for SMPS, in addition to any appropriate enhancements or alternatives to the amp modules.
Anyhow, we hope to provide a higher quality option as an alternative to the type of product that someone like Apple might offer. We feel there is a market for high quality PC based audio. Not as large as the market for Apple's iPod, etc., but maybe a nice niche. Currently there are a few outlets for high quality audio tracks. Check out MusicGiants and Magnatune for starters.
For more information feel free to check out our blog. Any feedback is appreciated.
Nice shameless plug that. Total posts 10, shameless plug 1. Poor ratio.
By "we" you mean "you" and by "our" you mean "my", right? Or, this not a one man op.?
Anyway, there is obviously a market for high quality pc based audio, but throwing modules into the computer is not it IMO.
Cheers,
Chris
By "we" you mean "you" and by "our" you mean "my", right? Or, this not a one man op.?
Anyway, there is obviously a market for high quality pc based audio, but throwing modules into the computer is not it IMO.
Cheers,
Chris
Yeah, sorry for the shameless plug... and I agree the ratio is not good.
But it seemed like an appropriate place to mention that there are other companies developing products for higher-end PC based audio.
BTW, we are not planning to throw amp modules into a PC. The amp modules, combined with the soundcard will be housed in a separate enclosure with a FireWire (and possibly USB) connection to the PC.
And.. it's not just me, but I'm the most public/vocal of the group. No, we are actually a huge multinational corporation with thousands of employees hell bent on world domination.
But it seemed like an appropriate place to mention that there are other companies developing products for higher-end PC based audio.
BTW, we are not planning to throw amp modules into a PC. The amp modules, combined with the soundcard will be housed in a separate enclosure with a FireWire (and possibly USB) connection to the PC.
And.. it's not just me, but I'm the most public/vocal of the group. No, we are actually a huge multinational corporation with thousands of employees hell bent on world domination.
Freescale Semiconductor
FastEddy said that Freescale Semiconductor is a fabless design house. This isn't true. Freescale is the "high-tech" part of Motorola's semiconductor line that was spun-out. (On Semiconductor was the "low-tech" part of Motorola's semiconductors). Freescale still has a lot of fab capacity. From their web site:
"Freescale has design, research and development (R&D), manufacturing or sales operations in more than 30 countries. We have seven wholly-owned wafer fabs, two assembly and test sites and a 300-millimeter pilot line and R&D center in Crolles, France, jointly owned with STMicroelectronics and Philips. Freescale invests $1 billion annually in R&D and has 5,500 patent families."
Interestingly, ON Semiconductor also has some class-D products - but positioned more in a way to sell their power MOSFETs.
Now TriPath - that's a fabless design house!
- John
FastEddy said that Freescale Semiconductor is a fabless design house. This isn't true. Freescale is the "high-tech" part of Motorola's semiconductor line that was spun-out. (On Semiconductor was the "low-tech" part of Motorola's semiconductors). Freescale still has a lot of fab capacity. From their web site:
"Freescale has design, research and development (R&D), manufacturing or sales operations in more than 30 countries. We have seven wholly-owned wafer fabs, two assembly and test sites and a 300-millimeter pilot line and R&D center in Crolles, France, jointly owned with STMicroelectronics and Philips. Freescale invests $1 billion annually in R&D and has 5,500 patent families."
Interestingly, ON Semiconductor also has some class-D products - but positioned more in a way to sell their power MOSFETs.
Now TriPath - that's a fabless design house!
- John
koolkid731 said:
A truly sage comment. Obviously spoken by someone who has been there, done that..... and hopefully gotten out with their pockets full of cash. The NuForce amps are a perfect example, truly mediocre (thats not of criticism of your work Tranh, you didn't control the implementation), but obviously are what the market demands.
classd4sure said:
and there will always be a market for people like that, just like there will always be a market for Ferraris and Maseratis and the like.
However, the market has spoken loud and clear that the "low-quality" formats like mp3 are quality-enough for the mass. And that is the market a lot of people are chasing after. Just as the meat of the automotive markets are in the Fords, GMs and Toyotas.
classd4sure said:
the interesting thing is that it is exactly the studios, not the distribution companies, are very afraid of this, from a rights management point of view. They are extremely concerned about having their properties out there in a digital format that sooner or later will be cracked, not matter how "secured" the encryption is. No one has been able to solve that problem so far.
Ironically, the studios are the biggest beneficiary of such a new business model.
classd4sure said:
It is very difficult to have a business model where the content can be distributed without some sort of rights management or meaningful marginal costs. no one has been able to figure out a way so far. And I think it is in the collective good of the consumers and content owners to have rights management and to respect the IP rights.
MP3 can be fairly decent at high bitrate.
Here's an interesting discussion on the topic that about sums it all up:
http://www.tweakhound.com/itunes/fandq.htm
Max bitrate available at Itunes however seems to be 128kbs. Would you be willing to pay a dollar a song (inevitably more... just a matter of time!) which is far more than you'd pay for it on CD considering the reduced overhead and lesser content with limited options.
Personally I listen to alot of MP3's on my high end system, with a decent bitrate, such that is unavailable at Itunes, which I consider to be a total rip off business model.
All the same, I wouldnt' make the mistake of equating Itunes with what's acceptable by the masses in terms of quality enough. I'd hypothesize it's perhaps more the illusion of greater choice (just picking what you want), ease of purchase (online shopping), melded with the existent and already huge portable market. By using their proprietary format on itunes they've created a monopoly, for the time being at least.
So why doesn't everyone run around with much cheaper portable mp3 players.... well, the majority aren't geek enough to know what bitrate is, where to get them readily at a high bitrate, don't grasp the concept of the client software needed to get it, and it's the same most likely less than resourceful people who are more readily programmed into wanting the next supposed best gimmick by mass marketing campaigns like the ipod has obviously enjoyed. Having it cost them 300 or 600 only makes them want it more. It's the typical snakebit unto the uneducated, ever so popular in audio.
Most often high bitrate MP3 is OK enough also, only when you consider that the original mastering quality is pure junk.... who needs that on DVD?
I think it would be completely stupid to model a distribution system on Itunes success based on the supposed acceptance of low quality audio. If and when better quality material comes along with the same sort of benefits people enjoy, they'll want it instead, once it becomes obvious to them at least.
Still, there exists one website for a long time now where you can select format/bitrate and pay a very reasonable price. The distribution companies don't like that one, I read of them attempting to sue them /shut em down just last week.
I don't recall seeing any studios suing p2p users either, btw, it is wholly the distribution companies who stand to lose everything as a direct result of their consistant greed, and is that not who owns the studios to begin with?
BTW, when it comes to quality, obviously that ipod/dock thing is a huge flop, so it's the content distribution at reasonable cost people are after, and I do think they would prefer higher quality all around.
For you to equate a high quality format with that of a rather exclusive car, I can already tell I"ll never be authenticating on your very expensive p2p system. Also what I meant when I said they'd never bother with the likes of an Ipod, is because there's a good majority that aren't gadget inclined. My aunt for example has all her audio ripped to her hard drive, she won an Ipod at work over two years ago.... it's still in the box, unused to this day.
Cheers
Here, as coincedance would have it, I believe this backs alot of my views on the matter:
http://www.smarthouse.com.au/iPods_...ticle=/iPods And Devices/MP3 Players/P3J5D3K6
http://www.smarthouse.com.au/iPods_...ticle=/iPods And Devices/MP3 Players/P3J5D3K6
many music players failed before iPod and may more will continue to fail after iPod, because they focused on the wrong thing: technical performance.
What iPod/iTunes have done exceptional well is to find a compromise between performance ("low-quality" but good enough) and ease of use.
The significance of that business model isn't if the songs are encoded in XXXbps or YYYbps, it is that it is a distribution system of desirable content with a large user base.
to the system, it is just distributing bits and it is upto the system operators / content owners to decide what the bits are and how they are to be distributed to whom.
It is quite likely the whole iPod/iTunes will be far more valuable than the rest of Apple's business: recent transactions have placed the value of such distribution systems to about $10 per active user in low-income locales.
What iPod/iTunes have done exceptional well is to find a compromise between performance ("low-quality" but good enough) and ease of use.
The significance of that business model isn't if the songs are encoded in XXXbps or YYYbps, it is that it is a distribution system of desirable content with a large user base.
to the system, it is just distributing bits and it is upto the system operators / content owners to decide what the bits are and how they are to be distributed to whom.
It is quite likely the whole iPod/iTunes will be far more valuable than the rest of Apple's business: recent transactions have placed the value of such distribution systems to about $10 per active user in low-income locales.
fokker said:
I have posted this quote elsewhere. It's from the March 1999 issue of Networker Magazine. I withhold the author's name in order to not embarass him further.
"The question remains though, whether AOL can overcome the reputation as a consumer-oriented business. This will determine whether Case's hopes for penetrating the e-commerce market will succeed. The Sun phase of the deal may be enough to reassure the hardcore techies who worry about what a consumer outfit like AOL might do to the technically oriented Netscape operation."
How wrong can a man be!? This is the reason SUN, Netscape and Linux will never amount to anything to 95 pct of the world's population. Those clowns are still stuck in the 1970s when you needed to be an engineer in order to operate a computer.
Apple gives the users what they want. Usability.
Ask the kids what they want, a new cell phone, iPod or PC. The PC doesn't even rate. The PC's too 1990s for them to bother.
In 1997 (I believe) Bill Gates didn't think the Internet would ever amount to much. Well, it's 2006 and we now live in the post-PC age. 5 yrs from now the PC will only be used for specialized tasks, like running Spice or JBuilder. Which means most people will never use it. There won't even be a PC as we know it. Then computers will be for the engineers, like they should be. Everybody else will use gadgets with computers hidden or embedded--ubiquitous computing--that SUPPORT the user.
I think iTunes has problem with the EU. At least the French have blocked it (or try to), saying it prevents competition.
I'm not sticking by iTunes. Who's going to be the winner I don't know. In fact, I use "iPod" and "iTunes" like general terms. I don't know what's out there.
I'm with the old gard. They will have to pry my PC from my cold, dead hands. At least that's how I feel now.
I'm not sticking by iTunes. Who's going to be the winner I don't know. In fact, I use "iPod" and "iTunes" like general terms. I don't know what's out there.
I'm with the old gard. They will have to pry my PC from my cold, dead hands. At least that's how I feel now.
How successful is iTunes when compared to peer-to-peer filesharing; or, when compared to actual CD sales? Isn't it still a small percentage? The big debates over the past few years have been trying to determine if filesharing has had a negative impact on CD sales. CD sales have gone down and the record companies blame illegal file sharing, but some studies have shown that it could also be due to other factors. Have the sales generated through iTunes helped offset the losses...?
Apple's iTunes may be the most visible and the most successful legal download service, but it still doesn't account for the majority of tracks that people load on their iPods. I don't know the stats, but I think I read that the majority of iPod owners still use MP3s.
The iPod has become popular, while other portable players failed, because of Apple's more effective marketing and advertising and because the iPod was a better designed product. From 1998-2002, I worked for Sonic Foundry and was the PM for a product called Siren Jukebox. We supported file transfer to portable players, just like MusicMatch, Real Jukebox, etc., did at the time. To insure compatibility, we purchased or were lent almost every MP3 player that was out there. None of them were well designed, elegant, easy to use players. They all suffered from too little storage, poor battery performance and slow transfer speeds. The manufacturers knew this, but didn't do anything to improve the players. When asked, they responded that the parent companies didn't want to invest in a lot of product development and marketing because the market was not there. So it was pretty easy for Apple to come in and steal it away. Apple basically made their market. In fact, I wonder if the sales of Creative's Zen portables have increased because of the greater product awareness due to the iPods popularity. Most people don't know that there were portable MP3 players before the iPod. My children and their friends generically refer to all portable players as iPods.
I would like to see Apple come out with a preamp/amp using Freescale's technology. I think it would be a step toward getting iTunes users to listen to music with higher quality sound over speakers instead of their earbuds. Once they get a taste of that, maybe they will want something better. Then they may appreciate the quality of sound they will get from the type of amps based on the technology from Lars, Hypex or Coldamp, etc.
Apple's iTunes may be the most visible and the most successful legal download service, but it still doesn't account for the majority of tracks that people load on their iPods. I don't know the stats, but I think I read that the majority of iPod owners still use MP3s.
The iPod has become popular, while other portable players failed, because of Apple's more effective marketing and advertising and because the iPod was a better designed product. From 1998-2002, I worked for Sonic Foundry and was the PM for a product called Siren Jukebox. We supported file transfer to portable players, just like MusicMatch, Real Jukebox, etc., did at the time. To insure compatibility, we purchased or were lent almost every MP3 player that was out there. None of them were well designed, elegant, easy to use players. They all suffered from too little storage, poor battery performance and slow transfer speeds. The manufacturers knew this, but didn't do anything to improve the players. When asked, they responded that the parent companies didn't want to invest in a lot of product development and marketing because the market was not there. So it was pretty easy for Apple to come in and steal it away. Apple basically made their market. In fact, I wonder if the sales of Creative's Zen portables have increased because of the greater product awareness due to the iPods popularity. Most people don't know that there were portable MP3 players before the iPod. My children and their friends generically refer to all portable players as iPods.
I would like to see Apple come out with a preamp/amp using Freescale's technology. I think it would be a step toward getting iTunes users to listen to music with higher quality sound over speakers instead of their earbuds. Once they get a taste of that, maybe they will want something better. Then they may appreciate the quality of sound they will get from the type of amps based on the technology from Lars, Hypex or Coldamp, etc.
what me wory?
koolkid731: " ... Fast Eddy, knowing Steve Jobs's love for secrecy, I wonder how you could possibly know those details. If you worked for Apple, you can count your days there! ..."
Oh, my .... well, anyone who follows the Apple Corp with eager anticipation of the next insainely great thing should be able to likewise make those and similar predictions.
Apple makes large flat screen monitors ... soon bigger and better.
Apple keeps enhancing the iPod .... soon more diverse models with real fat audio pipelines (also Apple invented FireWire, before there was a 1394 spec.).
Apple is running away from the herd with the iTunes GUI front end and the Apple music publishing methodology .... a logical addition would be better quality reproduction equipment, especially if these can be sold at a profit. (Incidently, I like profits myself. Creativity is rewarded by profits.)
Freestyle has been making chips for Apple for quite a while ... Apple probably gave them a challange = make this insainly great new audio thingy that whips butt all across the board ... and we will buy more of your chips ... again.
As for me, I don't get my paycheck from Apple ... but I do get business and make money because of Apple's efforts ... and have for about 25 years ... and ... and ...
(I've been called on the carpet before about my predictions re: Apple coming attractions ... ... and I've been told alternately to keep it up and to cut it out ... sometimes at the same time ! ... they usually forgive snd forget ... usually ... 
)
koolkid731: " ... Fast Eddy, knowing Steve Jobs's love for secrecy, I wonder how you could possibly know those details. If you worked for Apple, you can count your days there! ..."
Oh, my .... well, anyone who follows the Apple Corp with eager anticipation of the next insainely great thing should be able to likewise make those and similar predictions.
Apple makes large flat screen monitors ... soon bigger and better.
Apple keeps enhancing the iPod .... soon more diverse models with real fat audio pipelines (also Apple invented FireWire, before there was a 1394 spec.).
Apple is running away from the herd with the iTunes GUI front end and the Apple music publishing methodology .... a logical addition would be better quality reproduction equipment, especially if these can be sold at a profit. (Incidently, I like profits myself. Creativity is rewarded by profits.)
Freestyle has been making chips for Apple for quite a while ... Apple probably gave them a challange = make this insainly great new audio thingy that whips butt all across the board ... and we will buy more of your chips ... again.
As for me, I don't get my paycheck from Apple ... but I do get business and make money because of Apple's efforts ... and have for about 25 years ... and ... and ...
(I've been called on the carpet before about my predictions re: Apple coming attractions ...
... and I've been told alternately to keep it up and to cut it out ... sometimes at the same time ! ... they usually forgive snd forget ... usually ... )Harvard's study on the matter has shown the claims of declined sales made by the record companies to be erroneous. The record companies claimed them to be in error... who do you find to be more believable??????
In fact if I recall correctly Harvard's study demonstrated how illegal downloads have helped boost cd sales, which is probably why they're dabling in the market now, by offering single downloads of low quality and limited rights at greater cost than ever before.
They fight it of course simply because they're the only one's who stand to lose by a free distribution system, since they're third party all the way with the sole purpose of emptying everyone's pockets. It's amusing to watch the struggle progress... especially with them suing their customers in an effort to terrorize them into staying with their parasitic business model... reminds me of stockholm syndrome in some way.
This has gone way off topic but, it's been a good discussion.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.