Subject:THE END-ALL CD ARCHITECT POST. LISTEN UP....

Posted by: nlamartina

Date:3/19/2001 6:01:58 PM

Honestly folks, I don't see what the big hub-bub is
about. Like you, I also am an avid CD Architect user who
expressed a desire to upgrade to Sound Forge 5 from Sound
Forge 4.5 (XP in my case). Like you, I was also a bit
surprised to find CD Architect it won't dock with Sound
Forge 5. Maybe even a tad disappointed. However, this
hasn't stopped me from using both Sound Forge 5 AND CD
Architect. Why? Simply because I use CD Architect as a
seperate program from Sound Forge 5. It's not that
difficult. Here's the process:

1. I mix my tracks in ACID 2...
2. Master them in Sound Forge 5 (resample to REDBOOK)...
3. Print them to disc with CD Architect.

Is it too much to have both SoundForge 4.5 XP and Sound
Forge 5 installed on my system at the same time? Absolutely
not! Sound Forge 4.5 XP (the one CD Architect is docked to)
still has its own little icon on my desktop. Its presence
doesn't offend me. It doesn't shout out "MEAN STUPID SONIC
FOUNDRY HATES CUSTOMERS LIKE YOU! UP WITH PROFIT! DOWN WITH
ARTIST!". No, it just sits right next to the Sound Forge 5
icon, only it's now labeled "CD Architect". When I want to
run it, I just double-click, go to "Tools", then "CD
Architect". Vola! CD Architect is open and running, ready
to meet my every need. Is that so hard? No! Is my
investment in Sound Forge 5 worth the two extra clicks it
takes to get CD Architect open, or the miniscule amount of
harddisk space it takes up? YES! DO THE MATH FOLKS! Not
buying Sound Forge 5 just cuz it doesn't dock CD Architect
is silly, especially if you have it already. But hey, it's
your loss, and not mine.

Still a thoroughly pleased CDA and SF5 customer,
Nick LaMartina

Subject:RE: THE END-ALL CD ARCHITECT POST. LISTEN UP....

Reply by: sreams

Date:3/19/2001 6:42:04 PM

Neat.... but what about new users? Those who want to have
the functionality that you are talking about... CDA can no
longer be purchased. There is the core of the problem.

-S

Subject:RE: THE END-ALL CD ARCHITECT POST. LISTEN UP....

Reply by: Doug_Marshall

Date:3/19/2001 8:31:23 PM

Sounds reasonable as you say it, Nick, however, without
further upgrades the end of the line for CDA and 4.5 is
assured as hardware and OS leave them behind. I understand
from reading other posts that there are also issues that
crop up if you have to reinstall 4.5 after 5.0 is on your
system. Enjoy the peaceful coexistence while you can! :-)
Doug

Subject:RE: THE END-ALL CD ARCHITECT POST. LISTEN UP....

Reply by: nlamartina

Date:3/19/2001 9:55:25 PM

Ah, but yes it CAN be purchased. You just have to do a
little digging around. Here are a few options I've
collected for you:

OPTION #1: EBAY AUCTIONS.
Sure, you put yourself at a risk more or less, but how bad
do you want this? Check out this one:

http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?
ViewItem&item=1222734982

This copy of CD Architect is currently at $10.50 right now.
4 days left. Nearly flawless feedback profile on the
seller. Are you drooling yet? GET BIDDING!

OPTION #2: BUY A SAF CD-RW DRIVE.
"What?" you ask, "I already have a CD-RW. Why should I go
out and buy another?" Well, simply because all Smart &
Friendly drives COME BUNDLED WITH CD ARCHITECT. And even
though your shelling out for the drive itself (about $220),
your still saving money since buying CD Architect outright
costs between $250-$500! So go buy the package, keep the
software and sell the drive on EBAY. Good deal, right?
Below are a few resources for SAF drives. As the company
has gone out of business, you might have some difficulty
finding the drives in stock, so be prepared to hunt a bit.
Remember, you want this software, right?

Symphony Music, CD Factory Package:
http://www.netstores.com/dwos-bin/add.pl?
nccust=synthony&item-no=6069/C

Smart & Friendly End User merchants:
http://smartandfriendly.com/htb_cdturbowriter_retail-rw.htm

Smart & Friendly Resellers:
http://smartandfriendly.com/htb_cdturbowriter_dist-rw.html

OPTION #3: BUY CD ARCHITECT DIRECT
There are a number of distributors out there that sell CD
Architect. Most are out of stock, but check with them
anyway to be sure. More may come in. It's worth a try.

Muscian's Friend:
http://www.musicfriend.com/ex/shop/0103191917141980601922046
29434?pid=707216
(Stock is due today. Who knows, it might have come through.
Give it a shot.)

Software Paradise:
http://193.195.0.171/cgi-bin/195.173.147.143/prodfnd.pl?
direct=direct&vatradio=vatyes&wordsanywhere=CD+Architect+4.0
+Win95&NT&top20prod=
(Currently out of stock)

OPTION #4: GET IT FROM A WAREZ SITE OR COPY A FRIEND'S CD
Neither honest nor noble, but hey, if you're in to that
kind of thing, I can't stop you. Don't ask me how to find a
Warez site, and don't ask me for my copy. You're on your
own with this one.


There you go! Those are the four things I came up with in
10 minutes. 10 MINUTES. The eBay option looks like your
best bet right now. If I were you guys, I'd head over there
and bid like crazy RIGHT NOW. Don't be afraid to e-mail or
call one of the above-listed distributors. It's worth a
shot. Best of luck to you, and if I find a diamond in the
rough, I let you all know.

Nick LaMartina

Subject:RE: THE END-ALL CD ARCHITECT POST. LISTEN UP....

Reply by: Rednroll

Date:3/19/2001 10:21:37 PM

Nick,
If I was using CDA for strictly personal use I would have
no problem like you as using 2 seperate programs to do this
work. This however method of working looks very
unprofessional when you're working with clients and have to
constantly save in one program and then open in another.
Perception is half the success in being successful in the
studio business. My clients aren't stupid and usually ask
when I'm working on their material, "why are you opening it
in the old version software?" Then I have to spend extra
time explaning to them how I'm closing it out of the 24bit
new program and reopening it in the 16 bit program so that
I can use CD architect. Plus it takes twice as long to
close and then reopen, which causes more problems when your
clients are watching the clock. So there's more problems
for this type of work ethic!!!

Subject:RE: THE END-ALL CD ARCHITECT POST. LISTEN UP....

Reply by: nlamartina

Date:3/20/2001 1:39:58 AM

Rednroll,

You make the assumption I use CD Architect STRICTLY for
personal use. I don't. Like you, I do professional
recordings, for students here at Albertson College of
Idaho. I also intern with a sound engineer outside the
school that owns his own business and has won multiple
arwards. I have also scored music beds with a professional
videographer, who is also an award-winner. Both have
monitored my work habits and the process I go through.
Neither have found them odd. Concerning my own clients, my
process is a bit different than yours. I don't have them
breathing down my neck when I work, as none have ever asked
for an active position in mixing/mastering their material.
Nor have I ever had a displeased client. But that's not my
real response to your query. Keep reading, sir...

I think you exaggerate a bit, at least from my point of
view. This claim "...it takes twice as long to
close and then reopen, which causes more problems when your
clients are watching the clock..." seems a bit odd to me.
TWICE as long? No offense, but if it takes you twice as
long to just do four more clicks of a mouse, CD Architect
compatibility is the LEAST of your problems. So please,
let's be a bit more realistic here.

The way I see it, there is no difference between using
SoundForge and Vegas (for multitrack) than Sound Forge 5
and Sound Forge 4.5 with CD Architect docked. They are
seperate programs, desired for seperate functions. If
someone asks you, "Why are you doing that?" just say, "I'm
opening my CD Architect program." If you want to avoid
looking foolish "opening it in the old version software",
then change the name of your shortcut to "CD ARCHITECT".
This way, you edit, mix, master, and save in SoundForge,
minimize, and double-click your "CD Architect" icon. You
client thinks, "Oh, what an advanced fellow! He not only
spent cash on this fine piece of software called SOUND
FORGE 5, he's got ANOTHER program JUST FOR DISCS! My
product's gonna have the best of both worlds!"

Honestly, I find it silly to think that you'd lose "half"
your customer's satisfaction since they see you opening
another program. Professional artists (like 3d graphic
artists) ALWAYS USE THIS SETUP: One program renders the
cool 3D stuff (like 3DSMAX), and another spices it up
(PHOTOSHOP). Is this unorthodox? No, absolutely not. Then
don't derail from this train of thinking just 'cuz your two
pieces or software has the same name. A plugin is a
PROGRAM. It's a program that runs off a host. SOUND FORGE
AND CD ARCHITECT ARE TWO DIFFERENT PROGRAMS. I mean, heck,
if you're worried about appearance, why not just open SF
4.5, activate CDA, maximize it, and LEAVE THE SUCKER OPEN
BEFORE YOUR CLIENT GETS THERE. Then when you click
SoundForge 4.5 on the toolbar, "TADA!" CD ARCHITECT!
MAXIMIZED! WITHOUT A TRACE OF SOUND FORGE! Really, why
close it when you're done? That's not productive to begin
with. Then all they'll see is the "Sound Forge XP 4.5" on
the toolbar below, before you click it. If THAT'S not good
enough, grab the little edge of the toolbar on the left or
right, and drag it over till all you see is a little "XP"
icon. For all your clients know, it could mean "eXtra
sPecial". Honestly sir, there are more ways around
this "ethical problem" than you're giving credit to. Buck
up and give one of the above examples a try. I'm sorry, I
just don't buy your excuse. If you need a SCREENSHOT of
what I'm explaining, I'd be DELIGHTED to send you one.

I REALLY HOPE THIS HELPS.

I will monitor this thread for any further questions you
may have.

Best wishes,
Nick LaMartina

Subject:RE: THE END-ALL CD ARCHITECT POST. LISTEN UP....

Reply by: ATP

Date:3/20/2001 8:41:54 AM

Nick, i see your point. of course, it's only a few extra
clicks so why whine so much about it, right? well, first of
all do you remember how CD Architect got dumped? faster
than you can blink your eyes. i think this speaks volumes
about this company's policy towards their customers. THAT's
what bothers me, not that i have to use two programs now
(not that i use SF5).

it's the apparent disinterest in the customer's wishes that
has me staggered. after all, this is a professional company
right? and they don't appear to give a damn about the
people who PAY MONEY to use their products.

second, take a good look at Sound Forge 5. can you tell me
why i need to use this program rather than 4.5? what
exactly has been added, beside a slicker layout and some
extra FX, which i already have? when you unwrap SF5 from
its shiny golden paper package you'll see it's still the
same program underneath. they would have been more honest
naming it Sound Forge 4.6 or something like that.

CD Architect itself is not the issue for me. to me it IS
however a good example of how Sonic Foundry treats their
customers and potential new customers. and THAT's what's
what i find so dissappointing.

Subject:RE: THE END-ALL CD ARCHITECT POST. LISTEN UP....

Reply by: nlamartina

Date:3/20/2001 1:23:38 PM

ATP,

Thank you for your reply. I think you bring up an important
issue in this debate concerning the use and support of CD
Architect, which, in all honesty, should be the core of
this discussion.

First off, let me say that I, like many others here, am a
Sonic Foundry customer because I believe in quality
software, powerful features, and easy interfaces. I own
almost the entire line of Sonic Foundry products, ranging
from ACID to VEGAS to XFX. I can see the masses knowingly
nodding their heads, as you all know, SONIC FOUNDRY KNOWS
MEDIA SOLUTIONS. That's why we buy their software like it's
going out of style (ironically enough).

So why the screams and shouts when CD Architect fades to
black (pun intended)? Granted, yes, it's unfortunate. I
like CD Architect. A lot. If it weren't for that awesome
little program, I'd probably still be doin' this "track-at-
once" business, or be a few hundred dollars in debt because
I had to buy another CD program that could do all the jazzy
PQ edits and such. But that's not the case. I have CD
Architect. And you know what? It does everything I need it
to. There is nothing a professional fab can do that I can't
right here on my PC. That's why it's a pro tool. I can
arrange tracks, use volume envelopes, do advanced PQ edits,
load playlists, write codes, and all while being totally
non-destructive (plus it supports my CD-RW drive, which is
a plus). As far as I'm concerned (and as far as Sonic
Foundry's concerned too, probably), it's a complete
program. I haven't stumbled across any bugs. Sure, others
may not be so fortunate, but look, it's version 4.0g.
Hardly anything can be wrong now. It's final, whether we
like it or not.

Is this unusual in the software industry? No. Stuff like
this happens all the time. Products get discontinued.
Versions stop. Stock runs out. It always happens for one
reason or another, and in Sonic Foundry's case, I know it's
not, "Well we really don't care about the rest of you. I
think I'll go kick a homeless man now, right after I make
the AcidPlanet community page crash again..." Honestly
folks, Sonic Foundry doesn't make decisions like this to
piss you off. If I could get paid to piss people off, I'd
be a freakin' millionaire. But that's not the situation.
Sonic Foundry is refining their mission, and it comes time
for us to decide whether or not our needs are being met in
this time of change.

What is this change? Well, media solutions are changing. As
the internet continues to grow, the preference of mediums
by which we, as artists, choose to distribute our material
is changing, and Sonic Foundry is responding to this
change. Yeah, it may seem a bit unorthodox now, but try
instead to see this as the first step toward the future.
Think about it: in the past, demos and passable media were
distributed on cassettes. They were cheap, easy to use, and
relatively compact. Then recordable CD’s came out. Now we
had a cheap CHEAP media that was dependable, reliable, and
high quality. Sonic Foundry responds with CD architect, as
most distributed media is in hard copy form (remember,
they’re a MEDIA SOLUTIONS business). What’s happening now?
Times are changing! Streaming and compressed internet media
is starting to become the cheapest and easiest form of
distributing material as broadband internet access
proliferates. Think about it. No material cost to buy blank
media. No need to mass-produce. The “media” can’t be broken
like a CD or unwound like a tape. It’s next to impossible
to lose, and your user/fan base is humongous. It’s the
INTERNET.

Take a look at each of Sonic Foundry’s current products.
ALL HAVE THE ABILITY TO SAVE IN SOME TYPE OF COMPRESSED,
STREAMING FORMAT. Not to mention the fact that there’s
Viscosity, and web graphic design tool, and Stream
Anywhere, a program SPECIFICALLY designed to deliver
streaming media. Sonic Foundry has made it loud and clear
that they intend to be an INTERNET MEDIA SOLUTIONS COMPANY.
Are you all ready for change? If anyone wants to grumble
about this change to streaming internet media, then gripe
to the INDUSTRY. Don’t criticize Sonic Foundry for
responding to an INEVITABLE TREND. If that kind of logic
flew, we’d still be recording on those rusty metal
cartridges called “cassettes” and lamenting over the crack
in our favorite LP. Think about it.

What this all comes down to is that change is happening.
Sure, a lot of people will still want CD’s, and to those of
you who are in this boat, my heart goes out to you. But you
know what? CD’s are going to die out eventually, too. I
wouldn’t be surprised if Sonic Foundry eventually comes out
with a SACD or DVD disc program someday if those formats
make internet media unprofitable. That’s how the industry
works folks. Remember the Sonic Foundry credo, “One source.
Countless solutions.” Not, “One source. A few outdated
solutions that’ll cost you more money in the long run.”
It’s alright to be pissed guys. No one likes change. It’s
never much fun, but someone has to respond to it. Don’t
rebuke Sonic Foundry for their timely response. Applaud
them. Yes, the school of thought is splitting right here,
but you have to choose your path. Will you stay in the
past, or prepare for the future? It’s your choice. Choose
wisely.

Best wishes to you all,
Nick LaMartina

“The way of the Creative works through change and
transformation, so that each thing receives its true nature
and destiny and comes into permanent accord with the Great
Harmony: this is what furthers and what perseveres.”
-- I Ching

Subject:RE: THE END-ALL CD ARCHITECT POST. LISTEN UP....

Reply by: ashdown

Date:3/20/2001 6:50:18 PM

Nick,

Frankly, I'm astonished at your comments.

So you can still use CD Architect with Sound Forge 4.5, so
there's a copy at eBay, so "it CAN be purchased. You just
have to do a little digging around"... well that's alright
then.

Clearly, you're happy to plan your life around Sound Forge
4.5. What does it matter if future drives won't be
supported? I'm sure you'll find something compatible on
eBay. What does it matter that it might not run with future
version of Windows? I'm glad you're so happy with 98, Me,
and 2000.

So "Stuff like this happens all the time. Products get
discontinued"? I can't think of a single example of a
similarly pre-eminent application being discontinued.
Perhaps you could give us some examples (it happens all the
time so you must have lots).

"Take a look at each of Sonic Foundry’s current products.
ALL HAVE THE ABILITY TO SAVE IN SOME TYPE OF COMPRESSED,
STREAMING FORMAT." So what? In the context of Sonic
Foundry's software division, streaming media is nothing
more than what you yourself have implied: just another file
format. Have you any idea just how easy Microsoft and
RealNetworks have made it to bolt on this functionality?

Positioning themselves as "an INTERNET MEDIA SOLUTIONS
COMPANY" may have looked very clever a year ago but it
isn't doing them much good now. You do watch the share
price don't you?

Unless Sonic Foundry take advantage of every asset they
have and get things well integrated pretty damn quickly,
they're history. Contrary to your analysis, I'd been
wondering if they haven't perhaps seen the error of their
ways. Sound Forge 5.0 is an absolute disgrace and an insult
(unparalleled in my experience) to those who waited around
for the upgrade but the fact that it was released at all
was something of a surprise in the end.

"Honestly folks, Sonic Foundry doesn't make decisions like
this to piss you off". No they don't, but not because they
love us so much (I hope this isn't too painful for you):
what makes you think they give a damn what we think?
Nowadays they're just running a business like anyone else
(and unfortunately, not doing it very well).

Incidentally, you seem very keen on the publicity material;
have you noticed the opening paragraph from the current
catalogue?

"We’ll continue to offer high-quality, user-friendly
software with an outstanding range of capabilities for
users at all levels of expertise. No matter which product
you decide to purchase, you can be confident you’re using
an award-winning, professionally engineered product. We’re
proud of our reputation as the premier provider of
software, services, and systems for multimedia creation and
distribution, and we appreciate the trust you’ve placed in
our products and staff. You can rely on us to continue to
develop and support professional software for digital
content creation and delivery." (Rimas Buinevicius,
Chairman and CEO)

What can one say?

N.

Subject:RE: THE END-ALL CD ARCHITECT POST. LISTEN UP....

Reply by: ATP

Date:3/21/2001 6:17:20 AM

posted by ashdown:
"Sound Forge 5.0 is an absolute disgrace and an insult
(unparalleled in my experience) to those who waited around
for the upgrade..."

i couldn't have said it any better.

Subject:RE: THE END-ALL CD ARCHITECT POST. LISTEN UP....

Reply by: sreams

Date:3/21/2001 2:09:42 PM

To make the blanket statement that Internet streaming media
is the way to go and that CDs will die is absolutely
rediculous at this stage. CDs have MANY years left in them.
I have yet to have a single client ask for their project in
a streaming form. They ALL want CDs, and they ALL will for
years to come. Moving exclusively to streaming media may
eventually be the thing to do, but certainly not this
year.... or the next.... or the next.

-S

Subject:RE: THE END-ALL CD ARCHITECT POST. LISTEN UP....

Reply by: nlamartina

Date:3/21/2001 7:58:11 PM

Ashdown,

So you’re astonished at my comments? Well, I would be too.
Considering how this thread has become the Whiners United
Club, I would be quite surprised to find one voice in the
forum speaking clarity among the din of mindless, spoiled
complaining (although that’s up to interpretation, not
doubt). As you’ve brought up a number of arguments in your
response, let me address them one at a time…

First of all, let’s discuss this idea of “[planning] [my]
life around Sound Forge 4.5”. Are you suggesting I haven’t
the versatility of someone who has scrapped SF and CDA for
another program? Let me reiterate what I said before, that
FOUR MOUSE CLICKS IS NOT A LOT TO ASK. I’m sorry, but I
don’t consider that “planning my life around it”. Maybe
some of you do. Maybe that’s why a select few of you
continue to whine and complain without even entertaining an
alternative approach. With attitudes like this, it’s a
wonder some of you call yourselves “professionals”.

Next, you ask, “What does it matter if future drives won't
be supported? I'm sure you'll find something compatible on
eBay…” (BTW, I love your profound grasp of sarcasm. Have
you considered poetry?) Let me put it to you this way Ash:
By the time the CDA-compatible CD-Writers are all obsolete,
CD Architect will be too! These “future drives” you speak
of needn’t worry about being compatible, because by the
time the need presents itself (the need of replacing my
current CD-Writer), Redbook audio will on its way out. SACD
and DVD are the audio storage mediums of the not-so-distant
future, and as fun as it’s been waving my little flag and
spouting anti-DVD rhetoric, I, like everyone else, have to
recognize that times are changing. Redbook audio, in all
honesty, sucks. Think about it. The human ear can hear in
increments as small as 5 microseconds, slightly over a 192
kHz sample rate. Redbook audio captures less than a quarter
of that information. It’s time for something new. CD
Architect is becoming a dated product (which is why your
going to have to hunt for it). As we speak, Sony and
Panasonic are continuing to shape the inevitable future
with their SACD and DVD formats that will soon change the
audio standards. But I’m sure you already knew that. You do
follow industry trends, don’t you?

The same arguments stand for “the future [versions] of
Windows”. Let’s see, we’ve got Whistler coming up (aka
Windows XP). That’s about it for the next, what? 5 years?
Oh and you’re worried about compatibility, aren’t you?
Well, if you had done your research, you’d see that the
consumer edition of Windows XP is based on the current
Windows 2000 kernel. Which means we’ll have pretty much the
same Windows we have now, just with NTFS partition support
(which is a plus, BTW). So any future incompatibility
problems should have already been reported by Win2K users,
right? I can’t cite any problems. How about you? Oh, and
you know what else? When ANOTHER version comes out five
years later that renders the Win2K kernel obsolete, Redbook
audio will have been long dead. So CD Architect will have
served all the purpose necessary before a new, better
format is ushered in. Interesting, isn’t it?

In your next paragraph, you state, “I can't think of a
single example of a similarly pre-eminent application being
discontinued. Perhaps you could give us some examples.” You
probably can’t think of one because you haven’t used one
outside the AV platform, or else you would have been aware
of at least the MetaCreations sell-off. But let me
embellish a bit. You’re correct. I can give you examples.
Here are a few:

THE METACREATIONS TRANSITION
About a year ago, MetaCreations had a highly regarded and
powerful line of 3D graphic design tools. Some of their
more prominent ones were Bryce (the definitive landscape
generator), Poser (the award-winning figure editor), and
Ray Dream Studio (the leading choice among graphic
composers), to mention a few. Each of these products were
regarded as top-of-the-line and cutting-edge. But what
happened? MetaCreations decided to make the transition to
internet marketing and focus mainly on their Viewpoint
Experience Technology. They sold off everything else. Yeah,
I was a bit pissed at first, but hey, I’ve matured since
then and taken great joy in using these classic programs.
What has happened since then? With Poser, almost nothing.
One patch from Curious Labs in more than a year. Bug fixes.
No new features. Bryce? Well, Bryce 3D (the one I own) has
all but been forgotten, totally discontinued. Bryce 4 got
one patch from Corel. One new feature. A few bug fixes.
That’s it. Am I pissed? No. Bryce still works great. I love
the interface, the power of a ray-tracing NURBS engine, and
versatile file exports. Same with Poser. Beautifully done
figurines, awesome integration with other programs, and a
flexible interface. I don’t care if they’re discontinued,
nor does any other artist. We will use our software until
it’s unprofitable or inefficient to do so. We haven’t
griped and chided MetaCreations for their move. We’re proud
to own their products. Products that continue to work as
they become more dated each day. Why should the rest of you
cranky musicians be any different with CD Architect?

MGI, ONE VERSION AFTER ANOTHER
Version 7.0 of PhotoSuite was discontinued long ago. It is
not possible to upgrade it anymore. It’s no longer
supported, nor is it sold. The interface and philosophy is
completely different now (a new program with the same
name). As each new version comes out (2, 3, now 4, and
Platinum), users must make a decision whether to buy
something new, or keep what they’ve got if they feel their
needs are being satisfied. Sound familiar? They do the same
with their VideoWave series, now at version 4 as well.

BLIZZARD SOFTWARE/ID SOFTWARE, ETC
Okay, when’s the last time StarCraft was patched? Ages ago.
Why? Because it works fine. Is there still support for it?
No more than CD Architect from SF has now. Yet the user/fan
base continues to grow each year. Ask yourself why. The
Quake and Doom series from id Software are no different.
Both are so old that their source codes were long ago
released. Are people furious over the lack of support? No.
Both communities are still active. And don’t even try to
tell me these aren’t “pre-eminent”. Doom and Quake
transformed the multiplayer online community and FPS genre
into what it is today. They are the two most important
games in digital entertainment history. Ask any
gamer/developer worth his salt and he’ll tell you the same
thing.

PRECISION COMPUTER SYSTEMS
Once the standard for educational inventory and scholastic
networking, Precision has stopped developing and selling
their software. Are people pissed? No. Why? Cuz it works
fine as it is, and will continue to do so until a better
product replaces it.

NEED MORE EXAMPLES? HERE ARE A FEW:
Painter 3D, ArtDabbler, Kai’s Power Tools, Kai’s Power
SHOW, Kai’s Super GOO, Office Advantage, Headline Studio…
all highly useful and regarded graphical composition
programs. Do I need to continue?

Next we have the argument that: “streaming media is nothing
more than … just another file format”. Please excuse me
while I laugh, sir! Just another format? Are you living
under a rock? Take a look around you! The internet is
growing, and it will continue to do so! Broadband access is
becoming more and more mainstream each day. Internet 2 is
in the middle of development (and if you don’t know what
that is I suggest you look it up). Streaming media is
becoming THE CHOICE MEDIUM of corporate business,
electronic artists, and marketing alike. Why? Because it’s
small, it’s cheap, it’s stable, and easily used. Find me
another medium that can promise all that. Think of it this
way: If you, as an artist, want your material to get as
much exposure as financially possible, what’s the best way
to it? Well, obviously, the internet is the way to go. More
people subscribe to an ISP than any magazine or cable
service. You target audience is HUGE. Millions of people
can be reached at a fraction of the cost. So you make you
webpage. How are you going to let them sample your
material? Send everyone a gift wrapped CD? Please. You’re
going to have to post your material on the page itself. But
what format? How are you going to let EVERYONE listen?
Well, there’s MP3, which is good in it’s own right, but how
many people would want to wait 15 minutes to download your
song (an artist they’ve never heard before), when they can
just point, click, and stream with the competition? Think
about it. So please, don’t insult my intelligence by
calling streaming media “just another file format”. As an
artist or producer, I’d be interested in seeing how long
one might keep their job with that kind of attitude.
Shameful.

I love this next paragraph: “No [Sonic Foundry] [doesn't
make decisions to piss us off], but not because they love
us so much (I hope this isn't too painful for you): what
makes you think they give a damn what we think?” Now as
STUNG as I am by your comment (please note the sarcasm in
my voice), I’d like to tell you why I think SF does indeed
care about what I think. No, they don’t send me flowers
every month, I don’t get phone calls asking about how my
day went, and I have yet to receive a birthday card from
them. Boo hoo. I don’t trust SF out of some blind
affection. I’ve bought other good products from good
companies. Take for instance MGI. I own several of their
programs. Each one, I use a lot. Do I trust the company
based solely on this? Nope. I don’t really like MGI to be
honest with you. The same goes for Eidos, d-Lusion, and
Microsoft… I like their products, but I don’t really have a
trust in the companies. Why is Sonic Foundry different?
Because the quality I get from their products and their
customer service is unparalleled. Now of course, a few of
you will scream and shout about how terrible customer
service is, how Sound Forge 5 sucks, etc etc. Well let’s
see, what was the biggest complaint about Sound Forge 4.5?
People wanted 24-bit file support and higher sample rates.
Sonic Foundry listens and then delivers, and then some. And
yet you chide them.

I question some of these claims that customer service is
terrible. Granted, Sonic Foundry isn’t a perfect company,
but every single time I’ve had to call customer service or
e-mail tech support, I get nothing but cooperation from
them. No lip, no wait, no cop-out answers. That leaves a
heavy impression on me. The software I’ve bought from them
is top notch. It allows me to express myself in ways I
didn’t think were possible, and helped me find my voice as
a musician. So yeah, I watch the stocks. I’ve watched them
drop steadily since last March. But does that stop me from
taking joy in expressing myself with this software? No.
Does that make me regret the rather large investment I have
in this software? No. I’m happy with what I have. These are
good times for me. I’m enjoying myself. I’m proud to be a
Sonic Foundry customer, and neither you, nor the stock
market can take that away from me. I can’t say that about
many other companies I’ve dealt with.

And then this Sound Forge 5 business, that, “Sound Forge
5.0 is an absolute disgrace and an insult…” Ash, I don’t
even know where to start here. A disgrace? I guess 192 kHz
sample rates and 32 bit floating point file resolutions are
out of style huh? I guess the fact that these
specifications exceed the finest audio hardware on the
planet is an insult to your intelligence. I guess having
software that guarantees you’ll have support for the
highest quality components available today is just silly,
isn’t it? Give me a break! I suppose free stuff insults you
too, doesn’t it? I guess you don’t want Acoustic Mirror,
XFX 1, 2, and 3. I suppose a better, more productive user
interface is a waste of time, huh? I gather that Perfect
Clarity Audio is a meaningless feature, right? And I guess
you’d rather spend more money on a compressor besides Wave
Hammer?

A disgrace and an insult? For a program that let you be
more integrated, efficient, and productive? Not the mention
that the investment in your expensive hardware is finally
realized? Gee, maybe I’m in the wrong industry or
something, because that sounds like a hell of a bargain and
a smart move for a miniscule $100. Or maybe the rest of you
complainers need to open your eyes, pull the sticks out of
your rear ends, and take a look at what a good deal you’ve
been dealt. I wouldn’t go back to Sound Forge 4.5 unless my
life depended on it, which oddly enough, some of you are
acting like. I’m proud of my investment. Sound Forge 5 has
been worth every penny. It was an absolute steal. I use
this program to make money. It’s integral to my career. And
you know what? I’m not scared, nor should I be. Believe me,
it paid for itself within weeks.

Overall Ash, all I can say is that… Well, I don’t know what
else I can say that I haven’t already. We’re on two
separate sides of a fence. You and everyone else around
here. Like I said, the school of thought has split. I think
the majority of you are making a mountain out of a
molehill. An insult? A disgrace? Flawed business? A company
that doesn’t care? I don’t know what planet you live on,
but back here on Earth, things are quite different. I’m not
out to change your mind. I can’t do that with anyone. Nor
can I make you all happy with your investments. It’s not my
job, nor do I really care. All I can tell is that I’m
happy. I’m not afraid. I notice trends. I make adjustments,
and I’m preparing for the future. I ask one more time… Are
you?

Nick LaMartina

Subject:RE: THE END-ALL CD ARCHITECT POST. LISTEN UP....

Reply by: nlamartina

Date:3/21/2001 8:01:05 PM

Sreams,

I never stated that we should just throw out CD's and move
on to streaming media. You misinterpret. My point is that
by the time CD Architect is obsolete, the Redbook audio
standard will be as well. Additionally, that comment was in
refrence to data distribution, and as I said before, that's
in the next few years, by which time the Redbook standard
will have been replaced.

Nick LaMartina

Subject:RE: THE END-ALL CD ARCHITECT POST. LISTEN UP....

Reply by: ashdown

Date:3/22/2001 10:14:06 AM

Nick,

Well I was going to be generous and assume that your
arrogance ("the end-all CD Architect post") might at root
be insecurity (paradoxically, perhaps just a different
manifestation of anxiety about Sonic Foundry's future that
quite a few of us seem to share?) but while you persist in
dismissing everyone's comments as "mindless, spoiled
complaining" and making wild assumptions about my
occupations (hilariously wide of the mark in most
instances - how I've ever managed our network without the
benefit of your profound knowledge of Windows I'll never
know), you're just making a fool of yourself.

Let me make this clear, my principal concern is with the
discontinuation of CD Architect and the minimal development
of Sound Forge as symptoms of a malaise within Sonic
Foundry. It's all very well you talking about the media of
the future but if the company doesn't survive that long,
what's the point? You do care about Sonic Foundry don't you?

You're happy with your studio. That's fine. You're
confident that future compatibility won't be a problem.
That's nice for you; I'm specifying and buying stuff for
other people and I simply can't be so casual.

Disregarding the dubious relevance of your "examples" (CD
Architect hasn't been sold, superseded by another product
from the same developers, made open source (it's news to me
that the Quake series has been discontinued incidentally),
and it's never been the mainstay of the company), I am
truly amazed (I'm almost impressed) that you can accept the
discontinuations with such equanimity. I accept that
sometimes there is no way development can continue but this
shouldn't have been the case with CD Architect (or Sound
Forge). I have to say that you almost seem to be deluding
yourself in your readiness to exonerate the company: "CD
Architect is becoming a dated product (which is why your
going to have to hunt for it)." Nothing to do with Sonic
Foundry discontinuing it then?

From the point of view of production, streaming media is
just another file format. I just can't see how you can
disagree with this: in the end one always has to head for
Save As and simply choose from a list of file types.
Whether the destination is a streaming media server or a CD
is as trivial a matter to me as whether I'm saving an image
for the World Wide Web or for print and I have to say I
find your apocalyptic warnings and zealotry ("I’m not
afraid. I notice trends. I make adjustments, and I’m
preparing for the future. I ask one more time... Are you?")
incomprehensible. In what way do you assume I'm unprepared?
Presumably you would encourage Adobe to abhor Postscript
since XML etc. is unquestionably the way forward.

I retract everything I implied about your love affair with
Sonic Foundry. On further reflection I realise you don't
give a damn and that I, the critic, am paradoxically the
one who cares. I do need to trust the company otherwise I
can't buy their products (at least not for other people).

Sonic Foundry lied about Sound Forge 5.0. There has been
minimal development and it was not done when I and others
were told it was being done. 24 bit support was indeed the
most requested enhancement but the point is not that Sonic
Foundry has been generous in providing this now ("Sonic
Foundry listens and then some"!) but that it was madness
that it wasn't in place long ago. 32 bit resolution is good
of course but could they really have provided anything
less: this is now par for the course. As to the "free
stuff", in what sense is this free? If it hadn't been for
these things the list of new features would have been very,
very short (come to think of it the list was very, very
short anyway). Poor value for $99 though? Not at all. A
disgrace and an insult? In the context of its history, yes.

N.

Subject:RE: THE END-ALL CD ARCHITECT POST. LISTEN UP....

Reply by: nlamartina

Date:3/22/2001 12:56:54 PM

Ash,

As I take a closer look at this lengthy debate that has
ensued between us, I'm starting to realize that I've gotten
a bit out of hand. I'm not going to change my mind about
certain issues, but what I will do is admit is I've gotten
far off-topic out of the thirst for some kind of answer
stemming from my own dissatisfaction with the situation.
That frantic search led me to the rather odd behavior we
see in the previous posts. I was wrong to make accusations
about your career, education, etc. Please understand that
it was never my motivation to slander you, although I
realize it could be interpreted that way. For that, I
apologize to both you and the community. Musicianship and
artisanship is no excuse for immaturity and childish
banter. So I'll end that here.

Let me also say that I believe in the validity of your
concerns. Yes, I love Sonic Foundry products, and I
wouldn't have stuck with them unless customer service
echoed some amount of care toward me. That is my
experience. And you are right. Part of my exaggeration
comes from a bit of uncertainty. I've waited too long to
find software that lets me express myself this way, and to
think that it could all just evaporate in an instant is a
horrifying thought. So good catch there.

As to our differing views of the future of media, I believe
I'm going to stick with my opinions for now. Granted, I
could be wrong, just as easily as you or anyone else
(including Sonic Foundry, for that matter), but I'm going
to try my best to continue to please both my potential
listeners and clients. The best way I can excuse
my "apocalyptic warnings and zealotry" (and I genuinely
smile when I read that) is that I'm excited about the
future. I really am. I love audio, with a passion. I've
noticed that with each passing day, as I become more and
more of an audiophile, I'm becoming more and more
dissatisfied with current technology. We've been promised
for almost two decades now, "It's almost like being there."
I'm not swallowing it anymore. Yeah, it's a bit of a
mission of mine to try and advocate the proliferation of
new audio technology that will finally allow us
the "experience" audio, not just listen to it. However,
with all passions, unless a harness is used to keep that
bubbling energy in check, things can get a little out of
control (view some of my previous posts for examples). So
again, I apologize for not acting with maturity. Even
though I consider myself a pretty successful
engineer/musician, I've still got a lot of learning and
growing to do. Thankfully, I've still got lots of time for
that.

So where does this leave us? Well, a bit closer in position
that I thought. As I've started this whole mess, let me try
and end it by saying that yes, I am upset over this whole
situation. No, I'm not happy with the decisions Sonic
Foundry has made thus far. Yes, I'm a bit worried about the
future, and I think we all share these feelings, as
musicians, as producers, and as enthusiasts. Bickering
doesn't fix things. That is my lesson learned. I don't feel
any better or any more secure after this whole thing. In
fact, I feel a bit worse. What should have been a simple
suggestion in the first place, turned into an unproductive
and silly battle. I place the blame on myself. Thank you
for your thoughts, though. Some of this discussion has made
me think a bit more critically about the future. I'm sure
it will help.

Humblest apologies,
And I truly wish the best to you,
Nick LaMartina

Subject:RE: THE END-ALL CD ARCHITECT POST. LISTEN UP....

Reply by: sreams

Date:3/22/2001 2:24:33 PM

Agreed... and that is when CDArchitect should be
discontinued... years from now.

-S

Subject:RE: THE END-ALL CD ARCHITECT POST. LISTEN UP....

Reply by: nlamartina

Date:3/22/2001 2:51:13 PM

Let's just hope that this rumored "replacement" of CD
Architect will come out "before Christmas", as stated in an
old forum response by a SF rep. I can't say that I'm all
that optimistic, considering how long we've been waiting
for Acid 3.0, and that's a confirmed product, not a rumored
one.

Nick LaMartina

Subject:RE: THE END-ALL CD ARCHITECT POST. LISTEN UP....

Reply by: ashdown

Date:3/25/2001 5:05:57 PM

Nick,

Thanks for your message. No harm done - assuming Sonic
Foundry aren't encouraged to dump any more products!

If only for the fact that you now recognise how painful the
abandonment of CD Architect is for some people, this really
hasn't been a fruitless conversation.

I'm still not sure we do have greatly "differing views of
the future of media". I look into the future as avidly as
anyone; it's just that for me the increasing importance of
streaming media is simply a fact of life rather than
anything particularly good or bad.

The problem I have with Sonic Foundry is not their
commitment to streaming media technologies (which is
absolutely necessary), but that they seem prepared to
neglect the core of their business (and therefore the
existing customers). Does anyone in these forums really
think of Sonic Foundry as a media solutions provider
(whatever that means)? Does anyone not think of them as an
audio (and now video) tools developer? As I've said, I can
understand why positioning the company in this sector
seemed clever a year ago but it's proving catastrophic now
(another 17 per cent lost from the shares this week). How
long can they go on like this? What can morale be like?

Sonic Foundry (though comparatively tiny) remind me of
Borland making their Inprise detour (though even then, I
don't recall any products being discontinued). It was all
very grand but it was a hell of a mistake and thank heavens
they went back to their core business (rehiring the same
developers in many cases) before things (both the company's
financial viability and the goodwill of clients) were
unrecoverable. It cost the CEO his job of course...

N.

Subject:RE: THE END-ALL CD ARCHITECT POST. LISTEN UP....

Reply by: Rednroll

Date:3/25/2001 6:23:29 PM

Nick, you astonish me with arrogance of knowledge, or as I
perceive it the lack there of. Let me give you a little
background about myself and education in the audio field,
so you can insult me some more. I have been an audio
engineer working in the field for the past 10 years doing
music and national advertising work. I am also an
instructor who teaches recording techniques at a trade
school. Currently I own my own recording studio. I also
have a degree in electrical engineering and work with an
international company who developes CD and DVD technology
products(ie Panasonic/Sony). I think your claims of
Redbook audio Cd's disappearing in the near future is
absurd, and misinformed on a global basis. Do you know my
company sells 5000 cassette players per day, to countries
south of the equator. That's cassettes!!, CD players are
even more than that, so they're not going away anytime
soon. I have done tests on human hearing and 90% of the
people can't even hear frequencies over 15Khz...now that's
a real world test, so I imagine the 22Khz frequencies of
CD's is not too shaby. My knowledge comes from actual
personal experience tests, where does yours come from? Now
I don't know who you know, that can actually hear 196Khz
frequencies, but you are truly misinformed. I believe the
bit resolution is the major improvement from CD's compared
to DVD's not the increased sampling rate. DVD very well
might take over the redbook audio CD, but don't be too
sure. Do you know there are CDR's that are being developed
which have 6 layers per side on 1 CD....that would be
6x650Meg, per 1 side of a CD of storage space, not too
shaby either. Do you truly know what "redbook" means?
Redbook is not only a standard of how data is written to a
Disc, but also the dimensions of the CD itself. If you are
an intern as you claim, then you should learn from the
pros, not criticize them. Opening and closing programs is
not a big deal, for me and doesn't take much time, it's the
perception of the client that I expressed my concerns
about. When you have done as many sessions as me and
worked with many different kinds of clients you will some
day understand my point. Protools is the leader in this
kind of understanding and that's why everything is
integrated into 1 program. Just like you can get to sound
forge from Vegas, you should be able to get from the latest
version of Sound Forge to CD architect. My clients aren't
stupid and won't be tricked by a short cut which reads CD
architect and the program opens saying "sound forge 4.5" on
the title bar. Clients like to see you're using the latest
technology, even though you may not even be using all of
that technology to it's full potential, like I said
perception is everything, once you get some more experience
you will learn that some day.

Best regards,
Brian Franz

Subject:RE: THE END-ALL CD ARCHITECT POST. LISTEN UP....

Reply by: nlamartina

Date:3/25/2001 7:19:33 PM

Rednroll,

Whoah, hang on a second there bud. Let me clarify a few
things here. There's no need to get hostile (although
that's like the pot calling the kettle black).

First off, I don't claim Redbook audio is going
to "disappear", no more than cassettes have. It IS however,
my prediction that this format will be replaced by
something more advanced in the near future. You are as
entitled to your opinion as I am of mine. Just because your
education is superior to mine doesn't make me stupid,
wrong, or misinformed. Opinions are just that. Opinions.

Now to the 192kHz thing. I have taken this data from course
material, sir. I don't make stuff up. When I say that
humans can hear slightly above a 192kHz sample rate, I mean
just that... SAMPLE RATE. I didn't say that humans can
audibly percieve frequencies at 192kHz. Yes, I've done my
research, and I know that we actually "sense" frequencies
between 4Hz and 40kHz. We audibly hear between 20Hz and
20kHz. Our brains sample audio data above 192,000 times per
second, or 192kHz. See the difference?

Yes, I do know redbook refers to dimensions, as well as the
data standard. I use the term a bit liberally sometimes,
yes, but I was not incorrect in my use of the term. Yes, I
know about the multi-layed CD from Sony, but I see this
simply as a stepping stone to recordable DVD's. I also know
about the 1 TByte flourescent disc that uses similar
principles. Believe me, I may not be the best intern in the
world, but I'm not an ignorant one.

Finally, I had no intention of insulting you in my
response. Our experiences differ, so I gave you a
comparison. A fair one at that. I even made suggestions to
try and help you. If you don't like that, fine. I'm not
going to tell you how to run your business, but please
don't throw it back in my face and make assertions about my
experience, my expertise, or my integrity. That's not
appropriate. As for criticizing the pros, it's something I
need to do. If I disagree with something, I need to voice
this and get feedback. It's called learning, sir. I'm sure
you did the same thing when you were my age. If I do a
phrase period/analysis of a Beethoven or JS Bach piece in
my theory class, and I come across what I feel is an
inappropriatly placed 6-4 inversion or an odd half-cadance,
you better believe I'm going to say something about it to
my professor. And you know what? We could battle for days
with no conclusion, but it's the debate that makes me grow
(him too!). So please, don't chide me because I disagree.
That's how we define ourselves as people.

So you see, no harm done. Now that that's all clarified, I
hope you have a wonderful evening.

Best wishes,
Nick LaMartina

Subject:RE: THE END-ALL CD ARCHITECT POST. LISTEN UP....

Reply by: sreams

Date:3/25/2001 10:13:53 PM

You said:

"Now to the 192kHz thing. I have taken this data from
course
material, sir. I don't make stuff up. When I say that
humans can hear slightly above a 192kHz sample rate, I mean
just that... SAMPLE RATE. I didn't say that humans can
audibly percieve frequencies at 192kHz. Yes, I've done my
research, and I know that we actually "sense" frequencies
between 4Hz and 40kHz. We audibly hear between 20Hz and
20kHz. Our brains sample audio data above 192,000 times per
second, or 192kHz. See the difference?"

What research tells you that we sense up to 40KHz? I have
heard these types of statements before, but they have never
been backed up with proof.

Also... if you are talking about being able to sense up to
40KHz, then you should know that the associated sampling
rate is 80KHz (Nyquist frequency is half of the sample
rate)... so where does 192KHz come from?

Subject:RE: THE END-ALL CD ARCHITECT POST. LISTEN UP....

Reply by: nlamartina

Date:3/26/2001 12:11:44 AM

Sreams,

I'm glad you ask this question, and I'd be more than happy
to explain. I'll try one more time to explain this
mathematically, but I'll also quote from some of my reading
material so I don't sound ill-educated. Here we go:

THE 192KHZ ARGUMENT
- According to tests, almost everyone can hear a 15
microsecond time delay. This is determined by having a
subject listen to a stereo recording and phasing the
speakers out so that one is delayed by 15 microseconds.
It's easily detected.
- Of that group, most can hear a delay as little as 5
microseconds (meaning our brains must be detecting samples
at or above that rate).
- If you were to sample noise (a band, a voice, etc.) every
5 microseconds, you'd end up with around 196,000 samples
after one second.
- This translates to a sample rate of about 196 kHz.
- Thus, we can conclude that the human brain can sample
data at or above 196 kHz.
- Thus, the best audio techonology would have 24/32-bit
resolution with a sample rate of 192 kHz to truly represent
the auditory image.

Here're a few quotes from my course material, written by
Bill Gibson (bio below):

"It’s been determined that time delay differences of 15
microseconds between left and right ears are easily
discernible by nearly anyone. That’s less than the time
difference between two samples at 48kHz (about 20
microseconds). Using a single pulse, one microsecond in
length as a source, some listeners can perceive time delay
differences of as little as five microseconds between left
and right. It is therefore, indicated that, in order to
provide a system with exact accuracy concerning imaging and
positioning, the individual samples should be less than
five microseconds apart. At 96kHz (a popularly preferred
sample rate) there is a 10.417-microsecond space between
samples. At 192kHz sample rate there is a 5.208-microsecond
space between samples. This reasoning suggests that a
sample rate of 192kHz is probably a good choice. As
processors increase in speed and efficiency and as storage
capacity expands high sample rates, long word length will
become an insignificant concern and we’ll be able to focus
on the next audio catastrophe. Maybe full integration of
tactile virtual audio and video imagery."

I hope that helps explain my contentions. Now...

THE 4HZ - 40KHZ ARGUMENT
- The current school of thought states that since most
humans can only hear between the 20 Hz and 20 kHz range,
that everything outside of it is useless. This is why all
CD players have gates that filter out this "useless
information".
- However, forward thinkers are starting to deduce that we
need to start recording things outside the sonic spectrum,
ie, between 4 Hz and 40 kHz. This is done to preserve audio
intergrity, truly representing the sound, and not just what
we can audibly "hear".
- It's a well known fact that humans can "feel" waves
outside this spectrum. Think of a bass drum. You hear its
sound, but you feel its punch when you're there live.
That "punch" can't be heard. It's only "felt", since its
frequency is below 20 Hz. Therefore, in order to truly
represent the live event, one must record outside the sonic
spectrum to capture the moment.
- It's difficult to fully legitimize this practice since
ultrasonic noise is considered to have more an emotional
impact on listeners, and assists in aural perception. This
is hard to conclude with actual scientific data.

Here are a few supporting quotes. First, from Bill Gibson
again:

"Controversy follows the question of whether there is a
need for higher sample rates and longer word length. Some
feel that a sample rate of 44.1kHz is ample, since filters
effectively eliminate any artifacts above 20kHz, and 20kHz
is the upper limit of mankind’s hearing range. Some feel
that a 16-bit word provides more than adequate resolution
for accurate audio. However, since all frequencies interact
acoustically and work together to create a waveform, it
seems believable and practical that capturing a broader
frequency range and a more accurate resolution is
justifiable. We don’t yet realize the impact and result of
high-frequency content above 20kHz on the emotional and
physical perception of sound. Though the debate continues,
many—I think, justifiably—contend that, at the very least,
we should be archiving important audio material at the
highest sample rate and most exact word length that’s
technologically feasible."

Next, a quote from David Blackmer, president of Earthworks
(they make microphones and preamps):

"There is much controversy about how we might move forward
towards higher quality reproduction of sound. The compact-
disc standard assumes that there is no useful information
beyond 20kHz and therefore includes a brick-wall filter
just above 20kHz. Many listeners hear a great difference
when 20kHz band-limited audio signals are compared with
wide band signals. A number of digital systems have been
proposed which sample audio signals at 96kHz and above, and
with up to 24 bits of quantisation.

Many engineers have been trained to believe that human
hearing receives no meaningful input from frequency
components above 20kHz. I have read many irate letters from
such engineers insisting that information above 20kHz is
clearly useless, and any attempts to include such
information in audio signals is deceptive, wasteful and
foolish, and that any right-minded audio engineer should
realise that this 20kHz limitation has been known to be an
absolute limitation for many decades. Those of us who are
convinced that there is critically important audio
information to at least 40kHz are viewed as misguided.

We must look at the mechanisms involved in hearing, and
attempt to understand them. Through that understanding we
can develop a model of the capabilities of the transduction
and analysis systems in human audition and work toward new
and better standards for audio system design.

What got me started in my quest to understand the
capabilities of human hearing beyond 20kHz was an incident
in the late eighties. I had just acquired a MLSSA system
and was comparing the sound and response of a group of high
quality dome tweeters. The best of these had virtually
identical frequency response to 20kHz, yet they sounded
very different.

When I looked closely at their response beyond 20kHz they
were visibly quite different. The metal-dome tweeters had
an irregular picket fence of peaks and valleys in their
amplitude response above 20kHz. The silk-dome tweeters
exhibited a smooth fall off above 20kHz. The metal dome
sounded harsh compared to the silk dome. How could this be?
I cannot hear tones even to 20kHz, and yet the difference
was audible and really quite drastic. Rather than denying
what I clearly heard, I started looking for other
explanations."

"The human auditory system, both inner and outer hair
cells, can analyse hundreds of nearly simultaneous sound
components, identifying the source location, frequency,
time, intensity, and transient events in each of these many
sounds simultaneously and develop a detailed spatial map of
all these sounds with awareness of each sound source, its
position, character, timbre, loudness, and all other
identification labels which we can attach to sonic sources
and events. I believe that this sound quality information
includes waveform, embedded transient identification, and
high frequency component identification to at least 40kHz
(even if you can't 'hear' these frequencies in isolated
form).

To fully meet the requirements of human auditory perception
Ibelieve that a sound system must cover the frequency range
of about 15Hz to at least 40kHz (some say 80kHz or more)
with over 120dB dynamic range to properly handle transient
peaks and with a transient time accuracy of a few
microseconds at high frequencies and 1°-2° phase accuracy
down to 30Hz. This standard is beyond the capabilities of
present day systems but it is most important that we
understand the degradation of perceived sound quality that
results from the compromises being made in the sound
delivery systems now in use. The transducers are the most
obvious problem areas, but the storage systems and all the
electronics and interconnections are important as well."


There's some of the information I've gathered for you. Here
are the author bios:

Bill Gibson (www.artistpro.com):
"Bill has spent the last 20 years teaching, writing, and
recording music. He holds various degrees in education,
composition and recording and has taught music theory and
performance programs in Seattle, WA. Currently owner of
Northwest Music and Recording, Bill is the author of the
best-selling MixBooks series, The Audio Pro Home Recording
Course Vol.'s I-III."

David Blackmer (I couldn't find his bio, but here's the
bibliography from the paper I read) (www.earthwrks.com):
An Introduction to the Physiology of Hearing, 2nd edition,
James O. Pickles, Academic Press 1988 ISBN 0-12-554753-6 or
ISBN 0-12-554754-4 pbk.

Spacial Hearing, revised edition,
Jen Blauert, MIT Press 1997
ISBN 0-262-02413-6

Experiments in Hearing, Georg von Bekesy, Acoustical
Society of America

ISBN 0-88318-630-6

Hearing, Gulick et al, Oxford University Press, 1989
ISBN 0-19-50307-3


That should do it! I hope you find this as educational as I
have. I'd love to hear your thoughts on this stuff.

Regards,
Nick LaMartina

Subject:RE: THE END-ALL CD ARCHITECT POST. LISTEN UP....

Reply by: sreams

Date:3/26/2001 1:33:26 AM

Nick,

I am very much aware of the fact that very small time
delays across the stereo field can be perceived. This
becomes useful in a sound reproduction system only when mix
engineers start using time delays in place of pans... so,
existing mixes typically will get no benefit on this level.
Time delay panning is used in very rare cases... perhaps it
will become more commonplace as sample rates increase...
perhaps not. We'll see.

As for the argument that humans "feel" audio above 20KHz...
all I can see from the article you posted is that this is
the authors opinion. There are exactly zero indisputable
real-world tests that prove this to be true. Brickwall
filtering is necessary to avoid aliasing artifacts. Since
many lower-end converters provide less-than-adequate anti-
aliasing filters, you WILL hear a quality improvement when
moving to 96KHz... But I challenge you to take a set of
Apogee A/Ds and tell the difference between 48KHz and 96KHz
with them. The filtering is excellent and pretty much
eliminates aliasing... which in my book is the only thing
proven to be inferior with 44.1/48KHz sampling. What we
need are blind tests showing subjects can repeatedly
distinguish between 48KHz and 96KHz audio (with quality
converters). Tests such as these have been attempted, but
none have shown any valid results to date. Even if you were
to discover that 2% of listeners can tell... the other 98%
simply cannot, and do not care to invest in the technology.
Yes, down the road it will be commonplace... but we are
somewhat far from there now. You have to remember that
every component of your system must be able to handle and
reproduce these frequencies. That's expensive... especially
when you talk about speakers... at this point in time.

-S

Subject:RE: THE END-ALL CD ARCHITECT POST. LISTEN UP....

Reply by: Rednroll

Date:3/26/2001 12:42:04 PM

Well Nick, you have some very useful data base of
information, which will probably never be implemented in
the real world, but must still exists on a scientific
level. I just don't know of any scientists doing audio
engineering and if they are I bet they're mixes sound like
shit :-). By the way, when things are recorded, they are
sampled at much higher frequencies than 44.1Khz and 48Khz,
this is known as "over sampling", usually 4 times those
frequencies. You know in theory analog recordings are
sampled at an infinite sampling rate and also an infinite
bit depth, so why not just use analog to get the resolution
you think CD's are lacking? You know what Nick? even after
all that knowledge you quoted verbatim, I still want CD
architect to be implemented into Sound forge 5.0 so I don't
have to save and reopen in 4.5 when I'm doing mastering
work, plus the ability to edit a mix in cd architect and
it automatically get's updated in SF 4.5, plus when I save
a bunch of regions it shows up in CD architect. I use
these features a lot when doing editing and mastering
work. Wouldn't it be even nicer if CD architect was still
available to burn DVD audio disks instead of just letting
it die? Don't worry, Steinbergs wavelab will be around
doing just that when it's time comes, but where will Sound
Forge be without it? Answer: Out of business

Subject:RE: THE END-ALL CD ARCHITECT POST. LISTEN UP....

Reply by: nlamartina

Date:3/26/2001 1:08:21 PM

Sreams,

Thanks a lot for your response. I've been thinking about
this data for a long time and it's exciting to get some
feedback from artists other than myself, so that I may
continue to tailor my personal ideas in recording theory.

You are correct in your analysis that most of this theory
is currently only opinion, and that conclusive tests have
yet to show hard data that confirms these beliefs. As my
academic studies continue, this will be something I'll
probably focus on in my personal ventures (perhaps it will
be the topic of my senior thesis, who knows). Perhaps my
view is a bit biased, as one who can notice a pitch
detuning by as little 1Hz, and hear well into the 20kHz
gate (although I need earphones that go beyond the 20kHz
mark to find my limit). Naturally, I want to hear
everything that is humanly perceptible in my recordings.
And maybe as part of that 2% that you site, I'm one out of
the mass that desires this technology, making it a
financial gamble, if not financial suicide. Who knows?
Certainly, I’ll keep my potential listeners’/clients’ needs
in mind, though.

As for your challenge, I'll gladly take it (when I can
afford it, that is). I've got my eye on some equipment that
I intend on acquiring this summer, and testing with this
setup is one of my main motivations. And yes, I’ve been
aware about the need for EVERYTHING to be up to
specification, for as the Mackie credo goes, “You can blow
gazillions on fabulously expensive mics, esoteric tube gear
and tera-hertz-sampling-rate processors… but you won’t hear
the difference without accurate near field monitors.” I
look at that quote, and I say, “You know what, they’re
absolutely right.” And then I say, “Until Hell freezes
over, I can’t afford those monitors.” You’re right, that at
this point in time, it’s not a particularly feasible idea.
Hopefully by the time I’m done with my schooling, it will
be! =)

Thanks again for your reply. I really appreciate your input.

Nick LaMartina

Subject:RE: THE END-ALL CD ARCHITECT POST. LISTEN UP....

Reply by: sreams

Date:3/26/2001 3:09:24 PM

I look forward to hearing about your findings...

Something else that I just thought of...

Currently it is a known fact that humans can hear time
delays in the stereo field that are as low as 5-10
microseconds. When you try to reproduce delays this small,
you run into another very real issue... you would have to
remain absolutely still in the exact center point between
your two speakers for there to be any usefulness to this
idea. Any slight motion or change in position will ruin the
effect of a delay that small, so while it is theoretically
beneficial to go to 192KHz, it is pretty much useless on a
practical level. So... this leaves the frequency spectrum
question. And all hat we need to reproduce the theoretical
40KHz limit is an 80KHz sample rate... so let's see what
you find out in regards to this.

-S

Subject:RE: THE END-ALL CD ARCHITECT POST. LISTEN UP....

Reply by: nlamartina

Date:3/26/2001 3:22:22 PM

Rednroll,

Thanks for your reply. You are correct in stating that this
theoretical data is far from coming out of a lab. Further
yet is it from industry standard. However, I doubt it will
stay that way. Technology always gets better. How many
years down the road this stuff is, I haven't a clue. But
one must at least acknowledge the possibilities. Oh yeah,
and I agree with your comment concerning scientists doing
mixes. What would you call them? Doctor Jockeys instead of
Disc Jockeys? =)

Oh yeah, I understand how down-mixing works, simply because
it's a practice I employ. When I record a performance, I'm
well aware that all the data will eventually end up on a
44.1kHz sampled disc, but I record at 48kHz for down-mixing
purposes. It not only makes acoustic sense, but logical
sense. And you're right. Acoustic sound devices and
recordings create a TRUE representation of the way sound
waves travel through the air, better than any digital
recording will (that's why I get my parents' record player
in the will). However, since the industry demands a cheap,
durable, easily copied, and accurate medium, we need
digital devices. Acoustic devices howl at high volumes. The
mediums can break down over time. There’s generation loss.
That’s why the future demands digital technology. The only
way to bridge that gap is to gather more data digitally
than our ears are capable of processing (Speaking from an
audiophile point of view, not a consumer. The common
consumer could care less about this stuff, and probably
doesn’t know the difference anyway). That's why I think the
192 kHz sample rate is a great idea, for entertainment
purposes (and maybe someday, the industry). Realistically,
no. For fun and enjoyment, yeah.

Oh, speaking of record players, check this out:

http://www.elpj.com/

It’s a record player that uses lasers to track the grooves.
No scratches, no dust noise, no warping, and even minor
cracks aren’t an inconvenience… Nothing but acoustical
goodness. THAT is the pinnacle. If only…

Finally, you are correct in saying that none of this
conversation helps the CD Architect situation. However, I
can’t help but wonder if Sonic Foundry plans on releasing a
replacement that will write non-Redbook CD’s, or SACD’s, or
DVD’s for that matter. It’s been rumored that it could
exist, we now have SF software that can create the high-
quality images, and so logic would show that we’d soon get
an architect program that can deliver hard copies. Dunno.
We’ll have to just wait and see.

Good luck and best wishes,
Nick LaMartina

Subject:RE: THE END-ALL CD ARCHITECT POST. LISTEN UP....

Reply by: sreams

Date:3/26/2001 4:20:32 PM

>It’s a record player that uses lasers to track the
>grooves. No scratches, no dust noise, no warping, and even
>minor cracks aren’t an inconvenience… Nothing but
>acoustical goodness. THAT is the pinnacle. If only…

Laser Discs were the best example of the potential of
analog... looks and is tracked (laser) like a big CD, but
the video is analog. Imagine analog audio on this medium...

-S

Subject:RE: THE END-ALL CD ARCHITECT POST. LISTEN UP....

Reply by: nlamartina

Date:3/26/2001 5:06:59 PM

Sreams,

Excellent catch! I never considered that moving one's head
even slightly to-and-fro would throw the monitors out-of-
phase by the same miniscule amount testing would use to
prove someone is hearing a difference, because of speed
(which also would cause detuning), and distance. However,
I'm sure the testing group took this into account and most
likely used headphones to avoid this problem. Or did they?
I'm not sure since the data doesn't specify, but I'll look
into that.

Also, this observation doesn't necessarily remove the need
(want) for a 192 kHz sample rate. The "phase" tests were
only done to try and gauge the amount of "resolution" our
ears gather data at, not to validate the use of some funky
phase-out effect. Mathematically, this shows our brains
sample auditory data around 196 kHz, and that’s regardless
if we're static or moving, if our source is in phase or out
of phase, or if we perceive the source as tuned, or
detuning because of speed. So regardless if the phasing is
lost or not, our ears would still hear a nearly exact
representation of what was actually there in a 192 kHz, 24-
bit recording. Even during playback, if listener motion
were to detune the aural perception, or throw it out of
phase, it would be no different than if we had actually
been there, since the same effects occur in real life.
Primary reflections would still be primary, as would
secondary reflections be secondary (although playback venue
interaction would change this using a loudspeaker setup,
thus presenting a serious need for headphones). That's why
we take so much care at setting our microphones on a steady
surface when we record, instead of running around the room
with them like hooligans. In my mind, it's about capturing
all the sound, all that we are capable of sensing, if not
hearing, just as it was presented (so for me, that includes
things we can’t hear, since air still moves at a frequency
below 20Hz and above 20kHz). For fun, maybe we should even
throw in a dummy-head/torso recording to capture the HRTF’s
(Head Related Transfer Functions). There is more going on
at a performance than we can hear. Anyone can admit that. I
hold close to the theory that we should then be recording
outside our aural limits to capture the moment, and not
just the sound. Unorthodox? Absolutely. Unnecessary? Time
will tell. Until I get all the equipment together and
running real blind tests, I can’t tell you myself (that
includes the validity of the 4Hz – 40kHz idea). I’ll keep
doing more research, and I’ll let you know if I find
anything interesting. Thanks again for your input.

Nick LaMartina

Subject:RE: THE END-ALL CD ARCHITECT POST. LISTEN UP....

Reply by: nlamartina

Date:3/26/2001 5:27:56 PM

Hehe, don't make me drool! It's a classic example of the
right technology with the wrong specifications (namely, its
humongous size that makes it less profitable for production
reasons). Now when you say that the video on a LaserDisc
was analog, how exactly was this data stored? I'm afraid
you've stepped into an area of expertise I know little
about. Were LaserDiscs not printed with pits and lands on
aluminum like CD's (corresponding as 1's and 0's for PCM)?
If they were, then how could the signal be considered
analog if it was stored digitally? Was another method
beside PCM used? If the pit and land approach wasn't used,
what exactly was the printing like? A high-res record with
a varnish seal? Thanks for any help you can give on this
subject.

Nick

Subject:RE: THE END-ALL CD ARCHITECT POST. LISTEN UP....

Reply by: sreams

Date:3/26/2001 9:39:36 PM

"For fun, maybe we should even
throw in a dummy-head/torso recording to capture the HRTF’s
(Head Related Transfer Functions)."

When recording this way (some classical recordings are done
using the "binaural" method... a dummy head is used)... it
is ONLY useful when played back from the same location at
which it was recorded. Binaural recordings only reproduce
correctly with headphones. If you want the closest thing to
being there with speakers... you must do this...
theoretically:

Let's say it's an orchestra in a concert hall. As the
recording engineer, you should stand in the exact spot at
which what you hear is what you want those listening to
your recording to hear... Then, place a pair of mics in
front of you exactly where a pair of speakers would be. The
concept is that the sound is captured at a particular point
in reference to the listener... and then emitted from the
same exact point again when played back on a speaker
system. The same is true for binaural recording... thus
mics in the "ears" equals speakers in the ears (headphones).

-S

Subject:RE: THE END-ALL CD ARCHITECT POST. LISTEN UP....

Reply by: sreams

Date:3/26/2001 9:43:07 PM

My understanding is that it's like a big optical record.
There is an audio track alongside the video that is
digital, and is stored using the same method as a CD, but
the video is closer to what is stored on VHS. Vinyl vs
cassette equals Laserdisc vs VHS tape. All analog.

-S