some examples to laugh... digital gear obsolescence..

In 1997 I bought an 02R V2, meter bridge, 3 adat cards. Soemthing like $10,0000 in Brazil
Now you can buy a used one under $4000.

In 1998 I bought a PT 24TDM rig.. something like $7000. Now it hardly reaches $2500.

However, my nice microphones keep the same price since day 01. I am talking about At4050´s and so. Not C12´s or B&K´s.

MisterBlue,
here in Brazil you can find Cds for R$1.99, something like U$0.80.
Today a client of mine appeared with a very good theory about Terrorism X CD/DVD/CDROM/VHS piracy; how do guys find alternative ways to finance their madness and so. I will stop here so as not to go off topic.
something funny that is happening in my country is that you can not find very good stuff in piracy. You can find some Hits compilation or shit like Sertanejo/pagode ( very popular musical styles here) and maybe Britney or those familiar clones.
I have never seen a Cd of George Benson, Satriani, pet Metheny or Toto pirated.
My point is that people who buy crap are not worried about quality, if they have the original CD cover and so.
Recording companmies are realizing that ordinary people do not want to pay for a Cd with only 4 good songs. It is easier to download kazza or something similar and get it for free in a few weeks.
People that pay over $10 for a CD most have a minimum quality requirement.
I am talking about my country´s situation where the minimum wedge is ridiculously low as U$80. Yes, U$80 - you will ask me how can people live with that. Cds here are cheaper than in the Us, soemthing like U$8 to U$12 but quite expensive for the market.

Hold on here! Internet bandwidth is the choke-point on people passing quality files? Isn't the internet the most dynamic and quickly evolving technology ever invented? Either data compression will get better (smaller files) or the bandwidth will grow (bigger pipeline).
Doc

That's just it Doc. The bandwidth is not getting bigger in the near future here in Europe.
I just read an article in PC Answers about the internet in UK. 60% of Great Britain is on ADSL now, the rest is dialups 56k. And they're not in a hurry to expand. I have'nt heard or read about any big plans to expand the bandwidth in the US, just remote technology(bluetooth).
However the file storage technology is getting stronger with, now USB dongles, and creditcardlike devices in the near future with massive storage space.
The Internet is now and I fear, allways will be behind.
If that were not the case, engineers would not use theyr portable Firewire drives as much as they do. :c:

Are there any other users besides musicians and recording enthusiasts who really need more bandwidth on the internet? Judging from the response of the industry, I would say no. We are a small segment of the user population and wider bandwidth would probably create an exodus from cable providers of television signals, endanger network television more than it is being threatened now, as well as other segments of the home entertainment industry. Add to this that the format we are using (PCM) is probably near the end of its life expectancy anyway, most communications providers probably don't see a future in wider bandwidth. What they want to do is figure out ways to shrink file size. They would probably like to see us all recording to mp3 multi-track! Kurt

I am sure we will be watching movies-on-demand (streaming) via internet, with high quality sound, in the next three to five years. I am not talking pirated stuff, but legit commercial outlets. If we can do that, I am sure people will be able to download high quality song files. I am talking about North America, I don't know how long this will take to go overseas. Doc

Doc,
I would say, while that may happen, it will most likely be using compressed file formats. I still anticipate tremendous resistance from movie producers, cable providers, broadcast television networks and local stations (NAB). I don't think increased bandwidth will be the reason this happens. Kurt

I can not remember now but I saw somewhere on the web a portable mp3 workstation. It looked like those boss small boxes.
!!!!!

I think my point is getting lost:) I debate the validity of the following argument-

Best quality sound not important
BECAUSE
No one can hear the difference
BECAUSE
Everyone is downloading crappy MP3s
AND
Crappy MP3s are all anyone is going to listen to anymore (not a better sounding downloadable format, or CDs, or SACD)
BECAUSE OF
Internet bandwidth limitations.

Cheers, Doc

Doc,
The problem is telephone (dial up) can't support higher bandwidth than 56k and DSL isn't even available everywhere. In a lot of cases you can't get it unless you live in a metropolitan area. It's not available where I live and at best my phone line only supports 32k or so.. now I could get a satellite dish, but I'm not going to dump another $60 a month so I can download music over the net. Screw that, these guys are already getting too much of my dough! I still see it as shrinking file size not increasing band width. Kurt

Exactly. From Kurts last post I would presume that things are the same in USA as in UK. Metropolitan areas get DSL, and the rest are Hillbilly's. I for one would rather go and buy a quality CD in a shop once or twice a month than getting me a sattellite dish.

Kurt,
Shrinking file size, better compression formats, does seem to be a likely solution. I don't argue that at all. In fact it has been a part of my argument all along ("Either data compression will get better [smaller files] or the bandwidth will grow [bigger pipeline]").
It would be great if someone would develop a completely transparent compression format that would allow us to record 24/96k and have files only a quarter of the size. We would save a ton of disk space.
Is this thread still on track? I don't even remeber what this is about. :D Doc

Doc,
Hmmm...? Is there a way from here to there? Well, it has changed focus a bit but it's relevant, I think.. I would love to see bandwidth expand but I don't think it is technically feasible. ... look how long ISDN has been around and almost no one uses it except the BIG GUNS! I see file downsize as the solution everyone is leaning towards because not only is it easier to send and receive, but it is easier to process and store, puts less demand on computer resources.

I also think that PCM is at its end times, DSD is going to be the format of choice in the near future. I mean, now that the OEMs have reached 192k, where do they have to go now? Will they be content to just stay at 192 and sell fewer systems to the point of market saturation? I don't think so. This sounds dumb but I really don't know the answer, does DSD have smaller or larger file size? More or less data? Kurt

Are we sliding OT? :)

OT??? No way! Aren't we still talking about that irrigation problem in the Peruvian Andes? ;) lol!