This site provides a forum for opinions on everything from modems to mopeds. It is open to the staff of Maxwell Shmerler & Co., CPAs and everyone else. This means you. Is there something you want the world to know? Do you have a strong opinion on a topic and want to express it for the world to read, Now is your chance. Topics can range from televison, tax, and tea, to crayons, computers and cooking. In other words, on almost anything (g-rated only, please). Send your opinion to us e-mail, and you never know, it might end up right here.
This week's opinion follows. Responses are welcome.
Back in the early 1980's, the commercial introduction of the Compact Disc (CD) brought with it some high and mighty claims for its fidelity and longevity. The most popular claim was "Perfect Sound Forever". Although many consumers were satisfied with the fidelity (although not the price), and pleased with the features the players had, such as multi-track programming, the high-end audio community quickly determined that the sound was neither "perfect" nor "forever" (CDs do degrade over time). Combined with the discovery of less than stellar sound reproduction, prices that were over twice that charged for LPs (Long Playing) also added to the disatisfaction. Yet, first time listeners were, and still are impressed with CDs lack of background noise and wider dynamic range (at least in theory). This did and continues to convince many people that CDs are far superior than any other means of audio playback.
As the price of CD players decreased, combined with the almost complete disappearance of LPs in most popular record stores, CD sales quickly grew. Yet at the same time, CD player manufacturers started to improve their "perfect" players, with increased over-sampling rates, better error and jitter correction, and recently, with processes such as HDCD. Yet, even with CD playing equipment whose price rivals a four bedroom house, I and most other audiophiles still prefer analog. This preference is because the LPt sounds more "natural", whereas CDs sound more "processed".
Having said that, what about the new HDTV? HDTV, or High Definition Television, is a newly agreed upon format for sending digital television signals to TVs that, if equiped, will provide "superior" picture and sound. Or so claimed. In fact, the claims for HDTV rival those made for the Compact Disc when first introduced. So should we be skeptical? I wondered myself. Unlike audio playback, which does attempt to replicate reality, video playback, being two dimensional, does not. So will conversion from analog-to-digital have the same downside?
HDTV viewing is not readily available at this time. But another system, called DSS (and other competitors) digitize the signal during satellite transmission and reception. DSS claims their pictures are far superior to over-the-air television or cable, and in many respects they are correct. There are no ghosts (unless the home installation is faulty) and dark images are darker (and light images are lighter) than with analog television. The resolution (scanned lines across the picture) is also improved, althought the source signal and television set must take advantageof this capability (not all do).Yet, having viewed a number of DSS systems connected to relatively expensive televisions, there does seem to be something different. The picture seems "processed", almost as if there is a glaze over the images. It takes some concentrated examination to see this, but it is there.
The major winners in the CD sweepstakes were the record companies. The cost to manufacture a CD was far less than an LP, yet the price was almost three times the price of an LP. The other winner to a lesser extent, was the hardware companies and their suppliers that had new and expensive (original CD players were over $1,000) CD equipment to sell to the general public.The losers were the manufacturers of record players (although some moved into CD) and the general public, who spent more for less.
When HDTV becomes available, television sets will be expensive, and the signal, probably supplied by cable or phone companies will most likely make today's cable bill seem like pocket change. The television manufacturers and cable/phone companies will win. Will the general public win also? Or will we again be paying more for less? Only time will tell.
NEXT WEEK's OPINION: "A FAN BY ANY OTHER NAME..."
TAX GUIDE FOR INDIVIDUALS AND BUSINESS - THE IRS IS WAITING
