krankshaft format solution found

[mike c]

getting krankschaft pressed on LP really isn't THIS big an issue :(
I knew Steve would have if he could have and for now, he can't.
case closed there!!
NOT a big deal!!!

On 4/3/11, Carl Edlund Anderson <cea at carlaz.com> wrote:
> On 03 Apr 2011, at 16:31 , Jerry G wrote:
>> If it's audio, I'm thinking either SACD or DVD-A.
>
> Probably.  Neither of those ever really took off because, I think, there was
> no real consumer need.  I think convenience played a big role in moving
> people from LP and cassette to CD -- but is improved sound quality (from CD
> to SACD or DVD-A) really that key in the mass market?  I doubt it.  I think
> the driver in digital music uptake is, again, convenience.
>
> I have a 2TB drive sitting on my desk that is not quite half full of mostly
> losslessly ripped music.  A present, it would play music (and a few audio
> books, etc.) for 4 months without repeating (well, except for cases where I
> have duplicate songs from different albums, or different releases, that
> sorta thing).  It takes up about as much space as a hefty-ish hardback
> novel.  I can search it easily and things do not tend to get misplaced,
> misplaced, or fall down behind the sofa. So far, it is out of reach of the
> baby (who is rough on optical disks!).
>
> Now pretty much all of that is stuff I ripped myself, but I would happily
> forgo the ripping if I could simply buy CD-quality (or better) digital
> tracks that were already correctly tagged with all the right metadata.  I
> would not want to pay as much as I do for a CD, since clearly there is no
> physical product and thus no physical production costs, transportation
> costs, etc.  And if I can't "try before I buy" (in one way or another), then
> I am unlikely to take a chance on anything that I'm not pretty sure I'm
> gonna like unless we are talking about very low prices indeed.
>
> But, really, here again, we are talking about convenience.  There is
> considerably more competition for people's entertainment budget, in terms of
> both time and money, than there used to be.  Ultimately, someone is going to
> look for the maximum entertainment for some function of time vs. money.  How
> different people will define "maximum entertainment" will surely vary, but
> they will all look for it, whatever it is.  Only if someone defines
> entertainment as "kollekting rare vinyl editions" will they pay for that,
> and invest the necessary time to do it.  If someone's definition of
> entertainment is met more easily by listening to the radio -- or downloading
> the new hit single (legally or illegally) and listening to it a few times
> before downloading the next hit single (rinse, repeat) -- then that's what
> they are going to do.
>
> The trick -- whether for artists or whatever the new paradigm in attempting
> to "organize" the music industry turns out to be -- is figuring how to
> capitalize on people's tendency towards the easiest path, and also how to
> make the most of what are likely to be a variety of different "easiest"
> paths of very different sizes and characteristics, depending on the
> particular interests of different kinds of consumers.
>
> Cheers,
> Carl
>
> --
> Carl Edlund Anderson
> http://www.carlaz.com/
>