NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #3/NN_1993_3.iso/spool/rec/audio/19602

Text File | 1993-01-28 | 1.6 KB | 35 lines

Newsgroups: rec.audio
Path: sparky!uunet!ftpbox!news.acns.nwu.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!caen!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!torn!nott!dgbt!ted
From: [e-mail] (Ted Grusec)
Subject: Re: Dolby S vs. DCC etc.
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Keywords: nr, compression
Organization: The Communications Research Centre
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 93 21:40:34 GMT
Lines: 23

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Bob Davis) writes:
>


>By the way, this NOT an endorsement of DCC and MD.  I am loath to even
>talk about these formats seriously at this point, since they are techni-
>cally in a negative direction -- mass marketing of sonic compromise.  If
>I could, I would encourage avoiding these formats.  Hopefully, the
>competing formats will kill each other in the market via the resulting
>confusion and lack of consumer confidence.  Whatever, I'm not buying.
>
>I do think lossless or nearly lossless compression approaches are worth
>looking into, but the approaches used in DCC and MD formats don't qualify.

I presume everyone knows that one unstoppable event is digital radio
and this will use lossy compression (bit-rate reduction) that is
similar to that in DCC - unstoppable because of bandwidth
restrictions.  I presume this means that digital radio will be
condemned for a long time to being less than an ideal medium.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Ted Grusec - Communications Research Centre, Ottawa, Ont., Canada
Internet: [e-mail] - [phone] - Fax [phone]