Disc players

[Vlado]

what you think about this:

Linn Products has announced that it will cease production of its range of CD players from the start of 2010. Managing Director Gilad Tiefenbrun said Linn will concentrate instead on its DS digital music streaming products. ?Our customers have fast recognized the limitations of CD players in the age of home networking,?
said Tiefenbrun at a press conference in London?s Covent Garden. ?CD players no longer belong in the specialist domain.?
...............

Linn Products will continue to produce its LP12 turntable and its Unidisk ?universal? disc player and Linn Records continues to release music on CD and SACD
as well as LP and download.

[hifi_dave]

I believe there are two reasons for this:

1. Linn are unable to sell their CD players and it's not viable for them to continue.

2. The announcement is a marketing exercise for their streaming system.

They could also have announced that turntable systems are finished but they do sell some of these, so they wouldn't want to rock the boat.

It is marketing, pure and simple.

[garmtz]

We are Linn dealer and are not selling Linn CD players at all! This is because streaming your music is easier and sounds better. A Majik DS will easily better an Akurate CD, try it yourself! No more moving parts, the ability to play high resolution recordings instead of only 16bit/44.1kHz, it all speaks for streaming!

Streaming is the future and Linn is leading the way! A very good choice!

[Vlado]

Streaming is the future and Linn is leading the way! A very good choice!



Hi garmtz,

This is the point of view of the seller. What says the opposite side about the physical owning of the record?

[Thanos]

Hi garmtz,

This is the point of view of the seller. What says the opposite side about the physical owning of the record?

Hi,

I would like to put a question here, in order to understand what is really happening:

- What can reproduce music most naturally? DS, CD payers or vinyl?

I do understand that the vast majority of populations will buy or follow what is called "advanced technology", then sellers are totally dependent to marketing laws, but - IMHO- real music is constantly descending, while digits take the lead in order to simulate the music. Because that's exactly what digits do. A digital recording/reproduction will NEVER catch what an analogue recording/reproduction will... And that's not a point of view, it's a physical law!

In order to survive, Linn -or any other firm- will play the game. They are surely excused to do so. But we, old dino's of another -almost dead- era, do have the right to want in our living rooms something much alike what we heard in a cocert hall or a jazz club.

I own about 500 lp's, more than 1500cd's and 200 cassettes. I wish I would have only lp's and cassettes, also -if I was a bit older- an old REVOX or UHER and many many reels... Don't care about being easier to put that little silver disc in a player or get stuck in front of my PC. I prefer the sweet torture of reels and vinyls.

Sorry, don't want to try to change anybody's opinion, yet I do feel bitterness when seeing this new digital era developing... Romantic or stupid, call it as you like, but it's not gonna change for the rest of my life.

Thanks for reading,
Cheers from Athens,
Thanos

[douga]

It is hard to say how much "better" streaming willl be. Will it be "Perfect Sound Forever" as was said of CDs originally? Or just "Perfect Sound Until Your Hard Disk Crashes and You Find Out Your Backup is Corrupted?"

I would also be very interested to see a business model under which downloads or streaming music would be sold. If you buy and then lose a download, how would you retrieve it again? Or would you have to buy it again?

The idea that downloads could be sold leads to the idea of per-buyer copy protection, which begs the question "is there a copy protection scheme that can't eventually be broken?"

Just my rambling thoughts on the whole streaming/downloadable music issue...

One thing I believe is true...this will impact the revenue stream of all the record companies that will be able to sell the same music in yet another format simply by saying "Better Than CD Quality!" for the streaming offerings. And who knows, it may well be.

[Vlado]

One thing I believe is true...this will impact the revenue stream of all the record companies that will be able to sell the same music in yet another format simply by saying "Better Than CD Quality!" for the streaming offerings. And who knows, it may well be.

I miss one point in the Linn philosophy. Linn is a very marginal music issuer, what would undertake the majors? Posting unprotected high rez music on the web? I doubt. Remember the MLP at the DVD Audio or the missing digital output stream at SACD. I'm sure they will clash against and will impose some "cactus". At that date all machines becomes obsolete.

What about the possible Sony royalties for the BluRay? A good opportunity to make a lot of cash with a new audio only format on BluRay. BD Profile 3.0 ???

[macraddy]

I was a Linn Devotee for years and have heard pretty much everything they?ve made since the first CD player. (Karik/Numerik.) I?ve owned quite a bit of Linn Kit too. Including the Unidisk 1.1. I realise that all hi-fi is subjective, but am annoyed at the assertions made by folk for whom selling this kit is their livelihood. I found the top DS machine (Klimax DS), with the Klimax Kontol Pre-Amp, and a pair of Klimax Solo mono blocks through a pair of their Akurate floorstanding loudspeakers to be pretty poor. I also tried the system with other loudspeakers (B&W 802) and there was no improvement. To describe the sound, it was thin, severely rolled off top ends which took the air and natural sound from violins &c. It just generally sounded like an average electronic reproduction of the real thing. I only listen to classical music, so have a specific set of ?wants? but IMHO Linn have lost it, and it?s clearly marketing. That said, all Linn kit ?bounces along? magnificently and their ?PRaT? is as good as Naim?s. (I?d take a Naim system over a current Linn any day however ? but not their dreadful ?DS? device either!)

(I?ve also listened to the Unidisk 1.1 through Harbeths ? before the obvious in the above text is pointed out to me!)

I?m only giving my opinion, but there was a time when you could?ve cut me down the middle and found Linn writ through! So really do have no axe to grind. I suggest folk listen themselves before believing ?announcements?! Luckily I own all the Linn Silver Discs I want so this won?t affect me. I?ll be interested to see how this affect their artists in the medium term...

[A.S.]

All I can contribute to this is my recollection of attending the 1984 (approx.) hi-fi show in its golden days when it filled the Olympia hall in west London. As mentioned recently, the CD player was launched on 3 March 1983 - I bought one that very day and still have it and it's carton. I recall passing the very large and impressive Linn stand, bedecked with their fine turntables. Knowing a thing or two about how the business world of supply and demand worked I asked the salesman how long it would be before Linn ('inevitably' I think was my expression) launched a CD player.

He had steam coming from his ears and was almost foaming at the mouth telling me that never, ever under any circumstances whatever would his company countenance digital technology - the future was analogue, analogue, analogue. I reminded him that business was about finding markets for ones wares and that for convenience reasons alone the LP would be sidelined and they better get real. Obviously the management did. I have never since experienced such rabied, myopic view of the consumer world so it sticks in the mind.

Another vision flashes through the cell - of being carried anonymously along with a crowd of VIPs at a lavish overseas reception in a very swanky hotel for a high end system. Beautifully made electronics. Well finished speakers. Huge ticket price. Eye watering profit margins. But the sound was horrendous, mainly the speakers I guess. The speakers must have looked a trivial design issue compared to the electronics (that's how it must seem to an electronics company) and the dead-hand of marketing was all over the final result. It could have sounded very good, even great but it just wasn't given enough development time. And/or those who signed the project off were poor judges of sound. I often wonder in situations like this, did the management really appreciate, in their heart of hearts that the system was under baked but that marketing would save the day? Or - worse - did they truly think it was a world-beater? This is one of the problems of selling what you design - and why I'm perfectly happy with portable radios at home.

Needless to say, a) the reviews were gushing and b) all those involved had departed within months.

[hifi_dave]

Unfortunately nowadays, the development budget of many products is far, far less than the marketing budget. What does it matter if you churn out junk, the marketing men will make it sell and everyone is happy - everyone, that is, except the poor old consumer who reads the blurb and wastes his money.

[A.S.]

Unfortunately nowadays, the development budget of many products is far, far less than the marketing budget. What does it matter if you churn out junk, the marketing men will make it sell and everyone is happy - everyone, that is, except the poor old consumer who reads the blurb and wastes his money.We shouldn't write-off all marketing as bad as it most certainly isn't. I'm 'marketing' when I set aside time to correspond here. The problem is that marketing is a core business activity that is rarely at the core of a business. It's refreshing to observe that although the Chartered Institute of Marketing has seen unimaginable changes in society, consumption and channels of communication over the past fifty years, but still uses the same definition ....

Marketing is ... "The management process responsible for identifying, anticipating and satisfying customer requirements profitably."

Nothing wrong with that at all. The issue we here all find noxious is when marketing, via it's subordinate functions of PR and advertising, is used to compensate for ineffectual product design. If somebody somewhere is willing to pay $$$ for a few metres of cable, then 'marketing' has fulfilled its role in our economic society. If said product fails to hold the buyers long term satisfaction, then it hasn't.

The problem as I see it is threefold:

1. Unreasonable shareholder expectations of the global high-end audio industry
2. A widespread economic model that links profit to sales to consumption
3. Globalisation: the rapidity and ease with which new, complex, manufactured products can be brought to market pulling together component parts according to engineering drawings and written specifications.

As for 3, in my opinion, the software that 'caused' globalisation and revolutionised manufacturing was not Windows but AutoCAD which predates Windows. Regardless of language, cultural, social or economic barriers, an engineering drawing is universal. If you cannot speak one word of the supplier language, providing he is running AutoCAD, he is your supply-chain partner. Have a look here (http://download.autodesk.com/us/industries/manufacturing/consumer-products/product_workflow/consumer_products_workflow_570x473.html) at how the design-to-market process has been shortened - to months. Imagine how executives would begin to take advantage of these powerful design tools and would be pressurising their marketing people on a daily basis for new product ideas to funnel down this design pipeline - at zero cost. No physical models. No expensive prototypes. And - very important point - the modern way is to work from the outside cosmetic design, inwards. Too bad if the inside has to be compromised - no one looks inside!

The issue is not where the parts are made, since no country has a god-given mandate over resources, it is how they are made; with what care and how that is monitored.

[Jon Palmer]

I heard a program on the food industry today and it was discussing the fact that the large company set up is very risk adverse. It will not develop new brands but it will buy them once established, like Cadburys buying Green and Blacks or I think it was Unilever that bought Ben and Jerry's.
It takes someone working at their kitchen table to develop new brands as they have perhaps, less to lose. Smaller companies also are not tied by the same constraints. In my case, I produce small volumes of a product so material costs are less important. The main cost is machining time. This means I can use more material and of a higher quality where a real benefit is to be gained. If on the other hand, it was a large volume production, then material costs would become a higher cost than the actual machining.
I suppose what I'm getting at here is that some companies design products to a price point while others design a product without compromise and have to worry about that later :-)

[Thanos]

We shouldn't write-off all marketing as bad as it most certainly isn't. I'm 'marketing' when I set aside time to correspond here. The problem is that marketing is a core business activity that is rarely at the core of a business. It's refreshing to observe that although the Chartered Institute of Marketing has seen unimaginable changes in society, consumption and channels of communication over the past fifty years, but still uses the same definition ....

Marketing is ... "The management process responsible for identifying, anticipating and satisfying customer requirements profitably."

Nothing wrong with that at all. The issue we here all find noxious is when marketing, via it's subordinate functions of PR and advertising, is used to compensate for ineffectual product design. If somebody somewhere is willing to pay $$$ for a few metres of cable, then 'marketing' has fulfilled its role in our economic society. If said product fails to hold the buyers long term satisfaction, then it hasn't.

The problem as I see it is threefold:

1. Unreasonable shareholder expectations of the global high-end audio industry
2. A widespread economic model that links profit to sales to consumption
3. Globalisation: the rapidity and ease with which new, complex, manufactured products can be brought to market pulling together component parts according to engineering drawings and written specifications.

As for 3, in my opinion, the software that 'caused' globalisation and revolutionised manufacturing was not Windows but AutoCAD which predates Windows. Regardless of language, cultural, social or economic barriers, an engineering drawing is universal. If you cannot speak one word of the supplier language, providing he is running AutoCAD, he is your supply-chain partner. Have a look here (http://download.autodesk.com/us/industries/manufacturing/consumer-products/product_workflow/consumer_products_workflow_570x473.html) at how the design-to-market process has been shortened - to months. Imagine how executives would begin to take advantage of these powerful design tools and would be pressurising their marketing people on a daily basis for new product ideas to funnel down this design pipeline - at zero cost. No physical models. No expensive prototypes. And - very important point - the modern way is to work from the outside cosmetic design, inwards. Too bad if the inside has to be compromised - no one looks inside!

The issue is not where the parts are made, since no country has a god-given mandate over resources, it is how they are made; with what care and how that is monitored.

Hi Alan and everybody,

Alan you're right and you have a very balanced thinking. I do agree with your last phrase, but you have to reconsider one thing that probably makes a big difference. When we bought our speakers, it wasn't just because they were made simple and excellent. We did that for some more reasons. They are tradition and history. The British flag on the packages which represents a historical origin and role. The BBC sound is not just a memory recorded in human "ear history", it's something more complicated and meaningful.

As Mozart would feel insulted if he had to hear his compositions through speakers, so some of us would feel the same if that very natural and traditional approach to music would vanish within the years to come between digits, globalisation, marketing and cheap labour with shiny external looks.

You see, craftsmanship with history and with excellence cannot be anywhere... They have origins, defined geographical space, identified nationality and tradition, something like a living monument, a preserved and living value. I cannot imagine Acropolis not being Greek, it's spirit dead in terms of philosophy and culture, I also cannot imagine Harwood or Hughes or Shaw working their projects through Chinese paths... Not even for labour cost reasons.
So, it is BBC, East Sussex, British tradition and craftsmanship, European spirit, you yourself and your team, that make the composition perfect.

I don't know for how long it will last and preserve it's values, but I do know that I grew up knowing that Linn is a famous turntable manufacturer -a loyal servant of the analogue philosophy- and not a compromised seller of digital sound, without actually being a child of Scotland anymore. I would not like to become older seeing things flatten out and losing my sense of natural music and tradition, anyhow the current world doesn't smell, feel, taste or hear better than the one 40 or 50 years ago did. Would You?

Thanks for reading,
Thanos

[davidlovel]

A very interesting thread,

I suspect that Linn may have got it right; at least for any newcomer who wants the best reproduction of music and is about to start collecting recorded music.

For those of us with legacy collections on LP, open-reel tape, CD or DAT life will be more complicated. All of these historical media rely on 'streaming' in the sense that once you drop the needle or press the play button sound is created as a function of elapsed time by some 'conversion'. There are potential 'timing' problems with all (e.g. wow, flutter, speed stability on analogue, jitter on digital), potential problems with accurate retrieval of the sound (e.g. tracking distortion on LPs, dirty heads on analogue tape readers, errors in reading digital media), and potential problems with the accuracy of D to A conversion on digital.

If I understand it correctly what Linn describe as "digital music streaming products" do not stream in the same fashion as the above. The digital data is held on hard disc and read in the same manner as any other computer data. I'm not au fait with the current hard-disc technology but each stored byte / word could be read up to 256 times to ensure 100% accuracy of data retrieval (as this applies to system programs etc, if this were not the case our computers would be failing very frequently and basically be unusable). The audio data should thus be 100% accurate and is stored in an asynchronous buffer. Thus most of the errors associated with legacy media are avoided. Of course there still remains the D to A conversion of the stored data, which is where the true 'streaming' starts. Obviously this is susceptible to problems of noise and jitter, but has the potential to be much better than (say) a DAC connected to a conventional CD player.

I'll keep away from the issue of the sound quality of analogue versus hi-res digital. All I would say to the analogue proponents is: do go and have a listen to a good DS system inserted in your setup, and playing (say) a 24 bit / 192 kHz version of something in your LP collection. I can guarantee that it will sound different - only you can decide which you prefer.

Personally I do not agree with Linn's statement, for the reason noted by douga earlier. I'd never wish to put all my eggs in one basket; even if Linn are offering a RAID 1 style backup system there would still be scope for a common-mode failure (house fire?). I prefer the approach taken by PS Audio who regard CDs not as a music streaming medium, but as an optical disc data storage medium which is complementary to the magnetic hard-disc data storage medium on computers. I've kept every CD I've bought over the past 25 years and they sound better than ever, particularly when played via the PS Audio Perfect Wave Transport (which treats them as data discs). I'm experimenting with a low-end hard-disk based music (iTunes via an AppleTV); it is marginally better than my old CD player but nowhere near as good as the PS transport.

Sorry for the long post!

David

[Thanos]

Hi David,

First of all, agreed. You're an engineer, thus you talk with evidence and simple logic in accordance with science. But, with all respect, I find your opinion a bit "clinical". I mean that analogue has its downsides, you've already mentioned many guidelines, while digital gets better -in technological aspects- every day. But is that the heart of the matter?

In my age (52) I saw the world becoming digits, and then world again... Reminds me of the film "Matrix" where reality and virtual reality are in conflict. Same with analogue. It isn't of course real, as the musical matter itself, but it is closer to it than digital. The latter could be named perhaps an almost perfect idol. Yet, getting involved with analogue recording/reproduction, as a procedure and way of communicating seems to me more natural, more original if you like... It also has a meaning of preserving something old but valuable. Let's say like a Guarneri violin. I'm trying not to stand against improvements or technological development, yet I feel more & more like getting inside something strange, in a kind of cage. Birds are better examined into their natural environment aren't they? I think converting music to digits and then digits back to music again has something artificial (increasingly so) that gets us more away and apart from it. And it builds on and on, every day.

Well, things change and we probably can't stop them. Preserving something old, romantic or even anachronistic might prove a mistake. Might not. But I have lived with analogue. I'm sui generis an analogue lover. Hope you are too, in a way.

Pardon me for my English and length of comment and thank you for reading it,

Cheers from Athens,
Thanos

[davidlovel]

I see where you are coming from Thanos and empathise, however if I'm listening in a darkened room to (say) Janet Baker singing Dido's Lament " When I'm laid in earth" and feel tears welling up, it is totally irrelevant to me what medium is the source (I have this 1962 recording on both LP and CD). My focus has always been on the music so that is why I probably sound clinical about the media and equipment in general; after all these are transitory in the timescale of great music (Purcell 1659!).
Happy listening
David

[Thanos]

I see where you are coming from Thanos and empathise, however if I'm listening in a darkened room to (say) Janet Baker singing Dido's Lament " When I'm laid in earth" and feel tears welling up, it is totally irrelevant to me what medium is the source (I have this 1962 recording on both LP and CD). My focus has always been on the music so that is why I probably sound clinical about the media and equipment in general; after all these are transitory in the timescale of great music (Purcell 1659!).
Happy listening
David

Thanks for replying David,

That's nice, Dame Janet Baker is special to me too, Dido & Aeneas, isn't it? Please go and read above at musical recommendations my comment about Ms Anna Netrebko and her itnterpretation of Lucia's di Lammermoor mad scene. Hope you have the EMI's issue with Callas and try to compare. Both almost superlative...

Yes, at the end of the day, it's the music... At least we have its blessing together with our ears (there are millions of deaf people in our world).

You too listen and enjoy,
Best wishes,
Thanos