Why hasn't a blu-ray based audio disc become the new standard for audio discs yet...

>65,536 values for loudness of each sample (which are impossible to play back without automatically blending into a perfectly smooth curve you can view on an oscilloscope)
>not enough range
okay

You know what would have been sweet, MiniDisc with the density of Blu-ray. MD is the patrician optical format.

Plus CDs in cartridges are cool.

>services still not offering lossless
plenty of them do

DVD audio never get as popular CD audio.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Fidelity_Pure_Audio

Vinyl quality comes from warn,random errors over precise digital format.

MD used a lossy compression.

Floppy disks and Famicom carts are the real patrician format. The former goes in a (((very expensive))) grand piano, and the latter requires not being too helpless to find it and a Famicom or use an emulator.

There is just no demand and no need for it.

>This would allow the gap in quality between vinyl and red book CD to be closed
Don't you mean it would make it wider?

Nice to see Jow Forums is redpilled on audio. I don't know /mu/ - are they also grounded in reality or are they vinyl fagets?

Attached: gnome cuck.jpg (375x400, 21K)

vinyl is warmer than CD due to its random errors. CD's are precise, robotic and sterile sounding.

But Mega Drive is a great audio player

Vinyl is written into the master by an actual robot, now always from a digital source.

Because it would mean making CD Players redundant and they mostly are replaced by MP3 Players.
CD players still have their uses in cars and home media.

Cool meme

Not always I'll bet, that White Stripes person man would probably do some shit to avoid that. He's one of those audio purist nuts. Hmmm has it replaced religion hmmm

The so called "artists" are nothing more than a scam and they can barely fill up a 700mb cd with songs, let alone a 25/50GB bluray.

It would be actually quite fun - to have releases of blu-ray or whatever that contains separate drums\guitar\voice\ etc. so anybody can mix them to his taste.

We don't need bluray discs for better audio, we just need new codec in place of extremely old CDA standard which is utter shit compared to modern audio codecs.

They don't want you creating, only consuming.

It would be just another way of consuming, not really "creating" things. Like DIY kits where you just solder all together.

Because even lossless 5.1 channel 96kHz 24bit audio doesn't take up that much space for a single album, there's no point in using blu-ray discs for something that takes up less than 7GB of space.

Attached: metallica - metallica.png (363x481, 17K)

>music
>5.1

Attached: 1530313656416.jpg (664x440, 486K)

>new codec
I wouldn't want for CDs to go lossy all of a sudden, and with lossless there is a sharp limit on what you can do. Even WavPack at the highest setting won't give you more than 2x compression.

Nothing you can't simulate with a playback filter. The best explanation I have seen for why people prefer vinyl (even if they don't themselves understand the exact reason) is that vinyl's *narrower* dynamic compared to CDs has been protecting it from the loudness wars.

I think vinyl will most likely outlive cds and many current digital formats.

I'm 19, and FLAC is the only audiophile format that i have seen being used

Sure it will, its easy to sale, hard to pirate (russian "rock on bones" does not count, its shit quality, though its quite fun to look at), and you will need to buy a new record as old degrades over time.

just rent your music online goy
less money in yiddish pockets because of physical media, goy

Blame the audio format war between SACD and DVD-Audio, format wars are a death sentence if you're talking about niche products. Blu-ray Audio exists but it's rarer than hell and limited to mainly classical.

I just wish more music was mastered in surround. Quadrophonic was a massive failure and every CD successor has largey been niche.

Yes user, I'm well aware that music is very rarely mastered in 5.1 and even rarer actually recorded in 5.1 to begin with. It was an example of why there's no reason for blu-ray audio to ever be a thing.

people have 2 ears, no need for all those speakers

For the same reason audio DVDs didn't became the standard, CDs are already overkill for audio.

>the mastering
this, it won't matter while tasteless morons and corporate suits are giving orders

Normies don't give a shit about audio quality

coalburning whore

It's weird how we still don't have FLAC streaming yet outside of an expensive Tidal sub. It's garbage that iTunes and Google Play still sell lossy files as well. Mp3, AAC, Vorbis and Opus are all pointless now that internet speeds are relatively high. It's like normies don't even care about rotational velocidensity.

They don’t even let the artists have masters. What makes you think they would ever just give them to consumers?

You're right, it's because they don't. Regular users are fine with low quality audio and if lossless was the norm, people would be wondering why their monthly bandwidth limits were being eaten up so quickly.

Can you blame her with that manlet by her side?

the thing about high precision is that you can precisely record imprecision as well
the only difference between a vinyl and a cd with a recording of a vinyl on it is that the cd copy will sound exactly the same as that specific playback of the vinyl, while the vinyl will sound a tiny bit different, and progressively worse, each time it's played
but if you were to play the vinyl and record it at the same time, then play the cd back, you will not hear any difference whatsoever, as the cd format covers the entirety of useful human hearing range

also, the irony in that is that if you want the best sounding vinyl possible, you should make your first playback a digital recording, that way you can listen to the vinyl in it's peak condition over and over