Slashdot Mirror


Father of the CD, Norio Ohga, Dead At 81

lightbox32 writes "Norio Ohga, who was Sony's president and chairman from 1982 to 1995, died Saturday at the age of 81. He has been credited with developing CDs, which he insisted be designed at 12 centimeters (4.8 inches) in diameter to hold 75 minutes worth of music — in order to store Beethoven's Ninth Symphony in its entirety."

180 comments

  1. Sayonara, Ohga-san by MrKevvy · · Score: 5, Funny

    "After a private ceremony, Mr. Ohga will be microwaved."

    --
    -- Insert witty one-liner here. --
    1. Re:Sayonara, Ohga-san by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh god, that was so bad. I couldn't help myself. I had to laugh. ...and I feel horrible for doing so.

    2. Re:Sayonara, Ohga-san by paiute · · Score: 1

      "After a private ceremony, Mr. Ohga will be microwaved."

      I hear the Mythbusters are going to spin him on a modified Rotozip.

      --
      If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
    3. Re:Sayonara, Ohga-san by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod down, outright disrespectful.

    4. Re:Sayonara, Ohga-san by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Better than used as a coaster

    5. Re:Sayonara, Ohga-san by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "After a private ceremony, Mr. Ohga will be microwaved*."

      *Really tiny hand waving goodbye.

    6. Re:Sayonara, Ohga-san by Hogwash+McFly · · Score: 1

      Let's hope the hinges on his coffin lid don't snap off.

      --
      Mother, do you think they'll like this sig?
    7. Re:Sayonara, Ohga-san by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      All this has him spinning in his grave

      52x that is

    8. Re:Sayonara, Ohga-san by davidbrit2 · · Score: 2

      He will be buried in a flimsy plastic case that will crack if you look at it wrong.

    9. Re:Sayonara, Ohga-san by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We would have also accepted: "He will be cremated and his ashes put into a large clam shell."

    10. Re:Sayonara, Ohga-san by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is it a good idea to microwave Mr Ohga? Let's find out! :D

    11. Re:Sayonara, Ohga-san by clang_jangle · · Score: 1

      I lol'd for real and startled my poor dog. Glad I'd finished my tea few minutes before.

      :D

      --
      Caveat Utilitor
    12. Re:Sayonara, Ohga-san by CapOblivious2010 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      He will be buried in a flimsy plastic case that will crack if you look at it wrong.

      No, that's not his worst sin.... not making room for the friggin song titles is!

      Seriously: you've got 700MB to play with, and you can't find room for song titles that are less than 1K total?

      That's CRIMINALLY stupid... Frankly, I'm glad the guy's dead... this way I won't be tempted to hunt him down and kill him.

      Now if only I could use a time machine to go back and kill Benjamin Franklin before he invented Daylight Savings time... stupidest invention ever.

    13. Re:Sayonara, Ohga-san by keeboo · · Score: 1

      No, that's not his worst sin.... not making room for the friggin song titles is! Seriously: you've got 700MB to play with, and you can't find room for song titles that are less than 1K total?

      The original specification had 747 MB (raw) 650 MB (with error correction) and that was an absurd amount of data to work in the early 1980s. Also, the first players (well, even the ones produced in the early 1990s) did not behave much more inteligently than a vinyl player and tried to play as sound even pure-data CDs (the result sounding something like a 8-bit-computer software recorded on an audio tape).

      Still, I agree with you in part: they could have reserved a small CD section for songs' names as an optional CD-DA feature (to both CDs and players) or, at least, "for future use, fill this with 0s".

    14. Re:Sayonara, Ohga-san by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      You got me on that one, I LOLed. This would probably be a good time to point out the good things the man did, such as KILL THE DAMNED FLOPPY dead dead dead! When those first CD burners hit it was like manna from heaven, no more trying to store data on those damned POS floppies, where half the time you'd get a read error on disk 15 out of 26 and be SOL. Anyone remember what that last version of Windows that came on floppies weighed in as? i remember there was a fricking pile of the damned things.

      To me the passing of the CD/DVD era will be a sad one, as I have yet to see anything as economical for passing out files or long term storage than the CD/DVD. Even now for my customers in the sticks as a courtesy I give them Windows Updates via DVD for three months free, and being able to hand out the latest freeware via a CD with custom menu is nice and makes it simple for even the most clueless user. Sure USB sticks are nice but I don't ever see them getting down to the 17c a piece I currently pay for CDs and DVDs, and for things you don't want back handing a CD is a hell of a lot easier than keeping up who you handed your thumbstick to.

      So RIP Ohga, and thanks for killing the damned floppy and giving us a cheap and easy way to hand out software and backup files. I still have a couple of backup CDs from my first burner and damned if they still aren't readable after 15+ years. I don't see these new USB HDDs ever getting that kind of long term storage ability!

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    15. Re:Sayonara, Ohga-san by simcop2387 · · Score: 1

      There was a "for future use" kind of thing, but it came about too late and never saw much adoption in players i've ever seen. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CD-Text

    16. Re:Sayonara, Ohga-san by PIC16F628 · · Score: 1

      Thank you Ohga-san for the wonderful magic of letting me listen to pure music and sounds. I still go with my CDs and have no time for mp3s (other than work related recordings which are in mp3). Watching a CD reflecting brillant colours as I tilt it and then gently lay it into the CD tray gives me a feeling of holding the music that I am going to hear. What's a black box of a million mp3s? - it has no soul no body. It certainly does not create any such joy. Prior to CDs the only recorded media I had was cassette tapes - which frequently got entagled into the driver rollers then getting twisted and damaged, or the heads would become so smudgy it sounded as if all frequencies above 2KHz where non-existent on the media. Another aspect of CDs that most of us do not pay attention to is its abilitiy to be stored as an archiving (for personal use) medium. I still listen to CDs I first encountered in my life in 1992 (and that I purchased even before having any devide to play it). They are just as shiny, crystal clear and a joy to hold and play. Whenever the regular fungus (its hot and humid in my area) grows on the CD, I clean it with a hand soap and water, wipe with a soft cloth and then just let it dry for a minute. Not a trace of fungus or dirt! Whereas SDCards have abruptly been corrupted, hard-disks have suddenly developed disk errors. Give me CD anyday for preserving data.

  2. [insert subject here] by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    to store Beethoven's Ninth Symphony in its entirety

    It is also the case that they chose that size because it's slightly too large to fit in most pockets, thus discouraging casual sharing.

    1. Re:[insert subject here] by Le+Marteau · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Back in the day, the problem with Beethoven's ninth, and cassettes in particular, was the times of the movements. From one version:

      1st Movement: 13'32"
      2nd Movement: 13'09"
      3rd Movement: 14'21"
      4th Movement: 23'22"

      There is no way to put these movements on a two sided cassette without having about 17 minutes of unused space, unless the 3rd movement was split between sides.

      So what many (if not most) versions on cassette would do to conserve tape is put the 1st, 2nd, and PART of the 3rd movement on side A of the cassette, and the remaining part of the 3rd movement and the 4th movement on side B. It was kind of jarring to have the tape fade out in the middle of the 3rd movement to switch to the other side.

      --
      Mod down people who tell people how to mod in their sigs
    2. Re:[insert subject here] by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe it should be shorter? If you're gonna have it, you gotta make it fit so they cut it down to 3:05 is the quote that fits the bill here. It seems Symphonies and all were created in those halcyon days of "live performances" and weren't designed for certain types of media whether it be radio (not enough advertisements fit) or tape (you explained that issue well). I guess CD was a boon for these types of recordings. I sure wouldn't know; my daughter plays violin in an orchestra (high school) and I just loathe going to the performances because I hate the music.

    3. Re:[insert subject here] by jd · · Score: 1

      Never had any problems fitting CD cases in jacket pockets. Mind you, I don't wear American jackets, so maybe you should check to see if the RIAA owns the fashion industry that side of the pond.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    4. Re:[insert subject here] by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is total rubbish - not just your comment but the entire idea that he made the CD to fit Beethoven's 9th. In what world does Beethoven's 9th have a set length? I could happily conduct it to make it last for 85 minutes, or to make it last for 65. If I could easily enough get a variance of 20 minutes in the whole thing, timing it to the nearest second for individual movements is a farce. There aren't set lengths for orchestral music, you know.

      Of course, he might have done it so a particular recorded performance of Beethoven's 9th fitted. But I do find the idea of a set radius for the disc a hell of a lot more convincing than some "this symphony will fit on the disc assuming that you pick this particular performance of it".

    5. Re:[insert subject here] by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 1

      It seems Symphonies and all were created in those halcyon days of "live performances"

      Don't be silly. I'm sure Beethoven had an ipod.

    6. Re:[insert subject here] by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 0

      Or alteast a tablet (say iPad).

    7. Re:[insert subject here] by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, they chose this size because Philips already had a production facility for 10cm discs up and running. Sticking with the original design would have given Sony an immediate disadvantage on the market. The "Ninth symphony excuse" was an interesting argument, but it wasn't the real reason.

      No, I don't have a link for that.

    8. Re:[insert subject here] by uglyduckling · · Score: 1

      Isn't it "if you're gonna have a hit..."

    9. Re:[insert subject here] by Le+Marteau · · Score: 1

      > In what world does Beethoven's 9th have a set length? I could happily conduct it to make it last for 85 minutes, or to make it last for 65.

      Well, that's swell. But maybe Ohga wanted one of Toscanini's version of the 9th (which are the times above), and not Anonymous Coward's sped up and slowed down version.

      > There aren't set lengths for orchestral music, you know.

      I know. That's why I said the times are "From one version"

      --
      Mod down people who tell people how to mod in their sigs
    10. Re:[insert subject here] by Kjella · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is total rubbish - not just your comment but the entire idea that he made the CD to fit Beethoven's 9th. In what world does Beethoven's 9th have a set length?

      Facts: The prototype was 60 minutes. The final product was 74 minutes. Surely they argued what would fit in 74 minutes but not in 60 minutes. Like you say, there's no set length but pretty much all agree Beethoven's ninth takes more than 60 minutes. Most recordings do in fact fit within 74 minutes, including the one most consider the "reference recording".

      That's really where the facts end and the speculation begins. Most likely Beethoven's 9th was mentioned as an example of what wouldn't fit a 60 minute disc. There's no credible source to say it HAD to fit. The whole mythos seem to assume everyone else agreed on 11.5 cm, but one man insisted on 12 cm. There's really no proof of that, there was a prototype and they agreed to tweak it a little making it half a cm bigger. When people asked why, Beethoven's 9th was probably a convenient example to use. So after turning a feather into five hens this became this huge mysterious legend.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    11. Re:[insert subject here] by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It seems Symphonies and all were created in those halcyon days of "live performances"

      Don't be silly. I'm sure Beethoven had an ipod.

      That would explain why he went deaf.

      --
      If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
    12. Re:[insert subject here] by PCM2 · · Score: 2

      Pink Floyd also did this with some (maybe not all) cassette versions of the album Animals. The song "Pigs (Three Different Ones)" would be split half on one side, half on the other. There was a trick to hitting the auto-reverse button at just the right moment, so the song wouldn't be interrupted by the leader tape.

      As far as I know, the album was never presented this way on the LP vinyl version, because it's less important that a record be the same length on both sides of the vinyl. You don't end up with dead air on one side of a record just because the other side is longer.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    13. Re:[insert subject here] by RDW · · Score: 1

      'There is no way to put these movements on a two sided cassette without having about 17 minutes of unused space, unless the 3rd movement was split between sides.'

      Well, there was the approach taken by DG's excellent value 'Walkman Classics' series, which was just to stuff something else on the tape until it came close to 90 minutes:

      http://www.talkclassical.com/7444-performers-old-dg-walkman.html

      (Note to younger readers: the 'Walkman' was one of the technologies that bridged the gap between wax cylinders and your grandfather's hard disk based iPod).

      With their Beethoven symphony series DG generally filled up the space with overtures at the end, so the first 3 movements of the 9th were on side A with no break. The downside was that (unless you had some sort of super snazzy programmable player that detected tracks by the gaps between them) you had to stop the tape manually as soon as the last movement of the 9th ended on side B (as having Leonore #3 starting up randomly at that point just sounded wrong).

    14. Re:[insert subject here] by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oddly enough, for that exact same album, they had a problem with the eight-track tape version (four equal time slices, with a loud and awkward 'kerchunk' changing between them), and put in "Pigs on the Wing" part III - The only place that was ever released.

      It's also only a two-minute guitar solo, so you're not missing much.

    15. Re:[insert subject here] by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 1

      The CD single failed in the marketplace.

    16. Re:[insert subject here] by tbird81 · · Score: 1

      Thanks for your post.

      It was a rare example of rational thinking that's seldom seen on Slashdot.

    17. Re:[insert subject here] by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There was a trick to hitting the auto-reverse button at just the right moment, so the song wouldn't be interrupted by the leader tape.

      Here in Europe, auto-reverse has never needed to be hit. Hence the "auto".

    18. Re:[insert subject here] by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The CD single failed in the marketplace.

      What you mean is that the 8cm CD single format failed in the marketplace.

      There were plenty of CD singles sold during its heyday in the 1990s, but the vast majority were the same size as a standard CD (i.e. 12cm).

    19. Re:[insert subject here] by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There was a trick to hitting the auto-reverse button at just the right moment, so the song wouldn't be interrupted by the leader tape.

      Here in Europe, auto-reverse has never needed to be hit. Hence the "auto".

      Auto reverse (I can't believe I'm actually responding to a thread about tapes btw) would get to the end of the tape and auto... uhh... reverse. If you hit the reverse button at the exact end of the song, instead of waiting for the auto reverse, the tape would be spooled to the very beginning of the music on the next side, skipping the few seconds of silence. I'm posting AC as I've already modded, and I'm just embarassed to comment.

    20. Re:[insert subject here] by operagost · · Score: 1

      80 mm CDs fit just fine, and if they weren't a part of the original standard they were added very early.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    21. Re:[insert subject here] by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, that's swell. Or maybe Ohga didn't want Toscanini's version at all and you're just talking out of your doubtless oversized, hairy arse?

    22. Re:[insert subject here] by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As the AC who made that post, thank you for your reply. It is, indeed, a reasoned, sensible post which on Slashdot these days is pretty rare. And it sounds totally reasonable, too.

  3. Good thing he wasn't a Wagner fan! by Atmanman · · Score: 4, Funny

    Good thing he wasn't a Wagner fan!

    1. Re:Good thing he wasn't a Wagner fan! by kc8jhs · · Score: 2

      Or Ramones. No track would be allowed to be longer than 2 minutes.

    2. Re:Good thing he wasn't a Wagner fan! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, the Ring would have been easy in terms of label design.... just as big as a Laserdisc!

    3. Re:Good thing he wasn't a Wagner fan! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good thing he wasn't a Wagner fan!

      They nuked all of them in 1945.

    4. Re:Good thing he wasn't a Wagner fan! by Solandri · · Score: 3, Informative

      Or not so good. CDs could potentially hold 2 hours of music losslessly, except the spec calls for sound intensity to be stored on a linear scale. Human hearing works on a logarithmic scale. So on the really quiet parts, there probably isn't enough granularity between different intensity levels. Meanwhile on the loud parts, the granularity is so fine that there's no way you'll notice even (relatively) large changes on the linear scale. If they'd gone with a logarithmic scale, they could have cut down the sound file size considerably and squeezed more music onto a single CD. An 8-bit u-law (logarithmic) sound file is considered roughly equivalent to a 14-bit wav (linear) sound file (CDs are 16-bit linear).

      There are lots of theories as to why they did this. The most credible IMHO is that the studios balked when a 2 hour CD was proposed. They wanted something around 1 hour to better match the length of an LP (45-50 min) or cassette (60 min) album. They didn't want their customers questioning why they were only filling up half the CD with music, and they didn't want to have to put 2 hours of music on each CD. So they picked a deliberately inefficient sound format to fill up half of the CD with useless "data".

      Of course they got hoisted by their own petard when MP3s came out. Because the raw files ripped from CDs were about twice as big as they needed to be, it made MP3 files look twice as small in comparison. That increased the desirability of and accelerated the adoption of MP3s.

    5. Re:Good thing he wasn't a Wagner fan! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This makes absolutely no sense and is nothing but pure conjecture.

      Given how primitive technology was when the CD was invented, it would have been absurd to introduce any kind of compression. Compact discs provide a serial bitstream which cheap DACs convert directly into audio. No additional processing is needed.

      You seem to have no idea what's involved with decompressing MP3s. For you youngsters out there, it took some very heavy processing power to decompress MP3s in real-time. The Amiga needed an external DSP alone to do it at first.

      It's easy in retrospect to make up wildly inaccurate stories and false histories to justify things you don't understand. The reality is that linear PCM data was the easiest to store and the easiest to decode for real-time playback. That's it. No crazy conspiracies or other tall tales. Stop lying.

    6. Re:Good thing he wasn't a Wagner fan! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Untrue. There's quite a bit of background available (http://www.exp-math.uni-essen.de/~immink/pdf/cdstory.htm). Remember that it's a format that dates back to the early seventies. It's older than the Apple I, for instance. Digital electronics were just becoming feasible. For instance, the ECC required $50 worth of RAM - 16kB.

      As for the length argument, that just doesn't hold. One of the main benefits of CDs was the smaller physical size. If you could fit 2 hours of music in 12 centimeters, you'd be able to fit one hour in 8 centimeters. That would have made the format cassette-sized (which is 10x6 centimeters), which was the real competing format. Competing with MP3, a standard that came out two decades later? Hardly a concern.

      Note that both Philips (DCC) and Sony (Minidisc) later introduced audio carriers that did use audio compression. But as we now know, CD was good enough - MP3 only won because it wasn't tied to a specific carrier.

  4. Re:Beethoven as an Empiral Measurement of mastery. by Vectronic · · Score: 1

    What?

  5. Re:Beethoven as an Empiral Measurement of mastery. by s0litaire · · Score: 1

    Beats using the "Minute Waltz" as an empirical measurement.

    --
    Laters Sol "Have you found the secrets of the universe? Asked Zebade "I'm sure I left them here somewhere"
  6. Re:I don't see what's "compact" about those discs by laffer1 · · Score: 1

    Compare it to a full record and you will see ..

  7. Re:Missing a moderation option by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fair enough: too soon.

    BTW Iain M. (he deems it important) Banks also said the capacity for suffering was the sign of sentience. Go figure, if he's not insightful he's at least witty.

  8. Re:Missing a moderation option by hitmark · · Score: 2

    Double entendre?

    --
    comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
  9. may he go back to the source by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    his invention of the cd has given me endless joy. thank you Mr Ohga.

  10. Re:I don't see what's "compact" about those discs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lets say I have a 8 GB microSDHC card full of mp3s

    Let's say you had that in 1980. Oh, that's right, you didn't.

    8 GB microSDHC card full of mp3s ... would need about 100 of these 12-cm discs.

    What are you going to do with the 88 leftover discs?

  11. Re:I don't see what's "compact" about those discs by tepples · · Score: 3, Informative

    CDs were far smaller than the vinyl phonograph records of the day.

  12. Re:I don't see what's "compact" about those discs by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

    Lets say I have a 8 GB microSDHC card full of mp3s. That nail-size is too large, so let me burn the music to a digital audio COMPACT disc. Uh oh, I would need about 100 of these 12-cm discs.

    You are missing an important variable, here.

    --

    "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

  13. Re:I don't see what's "compact" about those discs by larry+bagina · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Don't forget LaserDiscs. Unlike DVDs, they didn't compress the audio or video. If you want to watch the Star Wars trilogy (before George Lucas butchered it), LD (or an LD rip) is the only option.

    --
    Do you even lift?

    These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

  14. Re:Missing a moderation option by moonbender · · Score: 1

    The "significance" of the initial M. is that he writes mainstream fiction as Iain Banks and scifi as Iain M. Banks.

    --
    Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
  15. The CD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yet another Sony format that never caught on. When will they learn?

  16. Re:Beethoven as an Empiral Measurement of mastery. by magnusrex1280 · · Score: 1

    Someone's off his rocker.

  17. Re:I don't see what's "compact" about those discs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm having difficulty determining whether you're a troll or just incredibly stupid.

  18. it was a great invention by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Too bad the record industry spoiled it with lousy packaging. Flimsy plastic jewel boxes covered with shrink wrap and security tape that is really a pain (occasionally, literally) to remove.

    1. Re:it was a great invention by jd · · Score: 1

      The plastic boxes weren't nearly as much of a problem as the cardboard insets they used to use - the sulphur content would literally dissolve sections of the CD.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    2. Re:it was a great invention by qubezz · · Score: 1

      Too bad the record industry spoiled it with lousy packaging. Flimsy plastic jewel boxes covered with shrink wrap and security tape that is really a pain (occasionally, literally) to remove.

      You weren't around to remember how CDs were originally packaged? The jewel case was put in a 12" long cardboard box up until 1993, quite wasteful since you would immediately throw out that big box. It was probably designed so that record shops could use their old record bins for holding the box (and to visually justify the 50% more expensive product that cost less to produce.)

      What is unfortunate is that is that for an equal amount of plastic as the jewel box, the design could have included putting the disc into a caddy, floppy disk style; the end product could have had real art printed right on it, and would have been less susceptible to scratches and dust.

      I remember not being able to figure out how to get my first cd out of the jewel box.

    3. Re:it was a great invention by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

      You weren't around to remember how CDs were originally packaged? The jewel case was put in a 12" long cardboard box [yormeister.be] up until 1993 [latimes.com]

      Eh? Is that true?! I live in the UK and bought CDs from the late-1980s onwards, and I don't recall *ever* having seen one inside one of those stupid longbox designs.

      The article implies that this was a US-only thing ("[switch to jewel boxes] as is already done in virtually every other country?"), but I'd expect to have at least heard of it anyway. I thought they'd only use packaging like that for stupid, contrived, multi-disc box sets.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    4. Re:it was a great invention by Demolition · · Score: 1

      We also had CD "longboxes" in Canada from the mid-'80s to the early '90s. Most of them displayed the expanded version of the jewel case cover art and some had slightly larger booklets and extras (such as posters). Nowadays, I hear that these things are collectible because of the expanded artwork and bonus inserts.

      As for why the longboxes were developed in the first place, qubezz already mentioned one reason (i.e. re-using the old LP bins to hold two longboxes side by side). The other reason was that unpackaged CDs were easy to shoplift. The 12" longboxes made it just that much harder to stuff in a jacket pocket or down one's pants.

    5. Re:it was a great invention by RDW · · Score: 1

      'Eh? Is that true?! I live in the UK and bought CDs from the late-1980s onwards, and I don't recall *ever* having seen one inside one of those stupid longbox designs.'

      I saw a few in a classical CD sale in London just a few years ago. Must have been languishing in a warehouse somewhere for well over a decade.

    6. Re:it was a great invention by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

      What is unfortunate is that is that for an equal amount of plastic as the jewel box, the design could have included putting the disc into a caddy

      Some of us had caddy-loading CD-ROM drives. For that matter, some car CD changers still use caddies... Nonetheless, caddies came, and for the most part they went away. It ended up being just another thing to break, lose, etc. And the caddies themselves were annoyingly expensive without adding much value.

      --
      Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    7. Re:it was a great invention by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I remember the longboxes, they actually presented the product in an attractive manner somewhat similar to vinyl LPs. However, consumers quickly learned that they had no function other than as a miniature in-store billboard, to be ripped open and discarded as soon as possible. Then presumably some "green" types complained about the waste of trees, and bean counters probably pointed out the inefficiency in shipping, so the industry agreed to move to the shrink wrap. Unfortunately, the shrink wrap was not nearly as attractive a package as either the LP or the longbox, and did nothing to curb resentment of the CD's premium prices.

      In retrospect a "shortbox" (perhaps 1.3 x 1.0 the size of the CD) would've been a better, compromise packaging. Maybe they could've given away a bonus stick of bubble gum in the extra space, like Topps baseball cards heh heh.

    8. Re:it was a great invention by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 1

      I believe I still have a few of those laying around somewhere.

  19. Re:I don't see what's "compact" about those discs by jmitchel!jmitchel.co · · Score: 2

    Or, to use another media contemporary with the CD, around 6666 Double Sided, Double Density 8" floppy disks.

  20. Re:Beethoven as an Empiral Measurement of mastery. by sirdude · · Score: 1

    You covered a lot in that brief rant. Snopes provides a little more information.

  21. Re:Missing a moderation option by jd · · Score: 1

    I get worried when Slashdotters start ranking microwaved geeks by taste. Masterchef this isn't.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  22. rumor hinted; origins of hymenology uncorked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    just an unproven note from all of the unproven deities indicating that if they wanted us to have them (hymens), then monkeys would almost certainly have them too, so, it may remain an indefinable historically unlocatable possibly divinerable 'mystery', although almost inextricably attached to the current never ending chosen ones' .5 billion population 'finish line' crusadiacal holycost? stay tuned for melodious monday.

    1. Re:rumor hinted; origins of hymenology uncorked by magnusrex1280 · · Score: 4, Funny

      I've found it to be incredibly difficult to locate LSD in the last few years. I'm glad to see someone is having better luck than I.

  23. Re:I don't see what's "compact" about those discs by jd · · Score: 1
    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  24. Re:I don't see what's "compact" about those discs by Osgeld · · Score: 1

    + 1 stupid

  25. Re:Beethoven as an Empiral Measurement of mastery. by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 1

    This Wired article is a bit more detailed.

    Ironically, the mastering techniques of the day limited CD recordings to 72 minutes. The unusually long Furtwängler "Ninth" was not released until 1997.

  26. he died? so in other words... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He's now a coaster?

  27. Re:Missing a moderation option by marcello_dl · · Score: 5, Funny

    "After a private ceremony, Mr. Ohga will be microwaved."

    -1, tasteless

    Try adding soy sauce.

    --
    ---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
  28. Terrible packaging from unresponsive oligopolists by wombatmobile · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Yes, the packaging sucked! The tabbed hinges on the case cover are fragile and break when dropped from any height. The only thing holding the product together was the shrink wrap, which was impenetrable. But the music industry cartel was so powerful, the packaging experience persisted unchanged for a quarter of a century! And then the industry died.

  29. Re:I don't see what's "compact" about those discs by Cinder6 · · Score: 1

    Actually, this is no longer the case. You can get combo DVDs that have both the theatrical and the "special" versions. Here. Unfortunately, the theatrical is only in Dolby 2.0 and the video hasn't been remastered like the re-release, but it's certainly better than VHS.

    --
    If you can't convince them, convict them.
  30. yet another defective "standard" that caught on by dltaylor · · Score: 2, Informative

    Too bad they couldn't have used even a $0.10 (back then) codec to get the bit density up, though. Even four more bits per sample (each for left and right), or, better, eight, and, 56,000 samples/second, would have made the CDs actually sound pretty good, and would not have changed the cost of production of the CDs, themselves.

    Sure, they were more difficult to scratch than vinyl, and repeated plays on low-cost equipment didn't do damage, but the dynamic range is way down (12-18 dB, depending on the vinyl preamp quality) and the lower sample rate led to audible filter artifacts that particularly affect imaging, most noticeably on orchestral pieces.

    All-in-all, I'd really rather he had waited to do it better, or not bothered.

    1. Re:yet another defective "standard" that caught on by Dogtanian · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You seem to forget that the equipment required to decode and handle even uncompressed CD audio would have been very complicated by early-1980s standards. And for any very primitive compression techniques that they could have come up with, you could have used the "wait a bit longer" argument because something better would have come along soon, all the way up to the early-1990s when the compressed MiniDisc media came out.

      Oh, except the compression on that is crude by modern standards, so you could argue that they should have waited a bit longer... and a bit longer....

      Yes, it would have been an *excellent* idea for them to have postponed the CD by 20 years! *cough*

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    2. Re:yet another defective "standard" that caught on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Any worthwhile codec would've been subject to litigation for the next 30 years, with patent trolls large and small coming out of the woodwork to demand stop-shipment and/or billions in royalties. No matter that some of the claims would seem to have post-dated the invention of the CD, that's part of the wonders of the patent system.

    3. Re:yet another defective "standard" that caught on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      uhh, just so you know, the effective dynamic range of a normal 16bit CD is about 90 dB.

    4. Re:yet another defective "standard" that caught on by dltaylor · · Score: 1

      Actually, the last bit is subject to quantization noise, so it's really 84. Compared to top-quality preamps with 96-+ dB signal to noise, it's down by 12, at least.

    5. Re:yet another defective "standard" that caught on by Brett+Buck · · Score: 1

      Even four more bits per sample (each for left and right), or, better, eight, and, 56,000 samples/second, would have made the CDs actually sound pretty good, and would not have changed the cost of production of the CDs, themselves.

              CDs 'sound pretty good' as they are. If they don't, get a better DAC.

    6. Re:yet another defective "standard" that caught on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really? no... i mean Really? Ok, I won't go on - I usually try not to feed trolls.

    7. Re:yet another defective "standard" that caught on by Haeleth · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes, it was terrible that they were so inept as to replace a fragile crackly hissy medium with one that the vast, vast majority of people are literally physically incapable of distinguishing from a live performance.

    8. Re:yet another defective "standard" that caught on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, they were more difficult to scratch than vinyl, and repeated plays on low-cost equipment didn't do damage, but the dynamic range is way down (12-18 dB, depending on the vinyl preamp quality) and the lower sample rate led to audible filter artifacts that particularly affect imaging, most noticeably on orchestral pieces.

      theoretically yes. good luck finding a recording and playback system that does over a useful halflife. most vinyl is low quality, played with low quality styli, and mastered from analog tape that is decades old. cds aren't perfect, but they're a hell of a lot better than 99% of the vinyl out there. As it is, I highly doubt your hearing comes close to the nyquist cutoff filters used in cd players. if you hear artifacts in a cd version of a recording that are not present in the vinyl, either the cd is revealing imperfections in the master, or the studio mastered it badly.

        To keep things clear, I'm talking about the cd format itself, not the loudness war, which is really a political problem.

    9. Re:yet another defective "standard" that caught on by dltaylor · · Score: 1

      You forget that the filters used in the digital-to-analog conversion have phase artefacts that extend several octaves below the nominal sample frequency, decreasing with "distance" from the filter cutoff frequency. The phase artefacts affect the perception of location by the instrument. Violins, or female voice in the upper registers, in particular, are location-obscured because the overtones have a different phase relationship than the fundamentals.

      I don't have to have 22K hearing to observe the phase effects, since they occur noticeably down to 5500.

      This was one of the problems addressed by the 176KHz conversion process used in some extremely high-end CD players. By oversampling the 44.1 (doing a bit of interpolation while at it), the filter artefacts were moved to frequencies well above even good human hearing.

      The Nyquist number doesn't indicate anything to do with signal to noise. 16 bits is just not enough to encompass what the human hearing system can distinguish.

      Both of these are fundamental problems with the format, and, if you've ever listened, as I have, to back-to-back blind samples of good vinyl (like the albums I bought in Europe) and even the best CD, the difference is glaringly obvious.

    10. Re:yet another defective "standard" that caught on by tbird81 · · Score: 1

      That's pretty rude! You shouldn't take his suggestion about codecs so personally!

    11. Re:yet another defective "standard" that caught on by lowy · · Score: 1

      Perhaps, but there is no excuse for not including meta-information like track names. That would only have taken up less than 1Kb

    12. Re:yet another defective "standard" that caught on by tuffy · · Score: 1

      CD-Text was invented to fix that problem. But when CDs were first developed, the notion of playback devices that could display such information probably didn't occur to them so it wasn't in the standard.

      --

      Ita erat quando hic adveni.

    13. Re:yet another defective "standard" that caught on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LZ78 was certainly doable back in the early 1980s. Don't forget that CD players have to perform Reed Solomon error correction anyway, which is a fairly expensive operation in itself. Very simple compression wouldn't have been all that taxing, relatively speaking (though if it's a choice between either compression or error correction, but not both, they made the right choice).

    14. Re:yet another defective "standard" that caught on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What a load of garbage. I will concede that properly cared-for LP sounds great. But to say that LP has better dynamic range is completely false.

    15. Re:yet another defective "standard" that caught on by BrokenHalo · · Score: 1

      Exactly. There are plenty of crappily-recorded CDs on sale here and there that highlight any deficiencies of the medium, but there are plenty of others (examples: just about anything from the ECM label) that are as near to perfect as the human ear can impartially judge without a lot of unnecessary shaving of palms.

    16. Re:yet another defective "standard" that caught on by eamonman · · Score: 1

      I remember having this new 'CD player' in my parents' brand new entertainment system way back in '85. It was this really heavy, flat, dense thing (it looked like a flatter, simpler version of the CDP-101); I loved it because those few CDs we did have sounded far better than all of those tapes we had... even though all it could display was the track digit and the time on the CD/track.

      CD-text would have been good, but hey, expecting CDs to work in a 'computer-ish' manner (like reading files) wasn't happening till the mid 90's. I mean, I didn't have a cd-rom in a computer till '95 I think. Before that you looked at CDs as simply music items, like a tape.

      Note that heavy CD player still works today; I think my parents still use it to play music for get-togethers and what not.

      --
      0- Eamonman Proud member of DNRC
    17. Re:yet another defective "standard" that caught on by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

      Perhaps, but there is no excuse for not including meta-information like track names. That would only have taken up less than 1Kb

      Well, yes, but that's something entirely different to the point you were originally trying to make.

      For what it's worth, I *do* however agree on this point 100% and I've made it myself in the past. Some have argued that full-text information displays would have been too expensive/complex to implement when the CD format launched. However, if that *had* been the reason it would have been extremely short-sighted; technology was moving all the time and it should have been doable in the near future- all they had to do was include it in the spec, and the early players could just have ignored the information. (One cynical guess is that perhaps they didn't want their early players to be seen not being able to implement something that was in the CD spec itself).

      I seriously doubt that including it would have increased the mastering complexity by a significant amount, and it certainly wouldn't have taken up much of the 650MB of space on the disc, a few kilobytes at most even if they were being generous. (Incidentally, 650MB would have been a shockingly large amount of storage for a consumer product in 1982!)

      As others have mentioned, CD Text was meant to be a solution, but (according to Wikipedia) it didn't come out until 1996, 14 years after the format launched and long after it had become established.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    18. Re:yet another defective "standard" that caught on by lowy · · Score: 1

      Well, yes, but that's something entirely different to the point you were originally trying to make.

      I was not this thread's original poster. My first and only comment was about the meta-data.

      Glad to hear we agree, though. :-)

    19. Re:yet another defective "standard" that caught on by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

      CD-text would have been good, but hey, expecting CDs to work in a 'computer-ish' manner (like reading files) wasn't happening till the mid 90's. I mean, I didn't have a cd-rom in a computer till '95 I think. Before that you looked at CDs as simply music items, like a tape.

      Except that we weren't talking about "computer-ish... reading files", 90s style multimedia, et al. We were talking about something *far* more straightforward that would have been very simple to add to the CD specification- a few short strings identifying the track names and artist. That's something that even your technophobic early-1980s consumer would have appreciated and been impressed by, and should have been an obvious "easy add" feature even at the time.

      As I mentioned elsewhere, the increase in mastering complexity would have been negligible (probably could have slapped ASCII-style-encoded strings in the subchannels), the space required would have been laughably small next to the 650MB capacity, and early players could simply have ignored the information in favour of simple track numbers if the text displays would have been too expensive and/or complex to implement at its launch. (Or rather, *if* that last reason was why the feature wasn't included, it would have been laughably short-sighted for a format that was otherwise state-of-the-art and cutting edge at its launch)

      So IMHO the lack of text *was* a short-sighted failing of the CD spec, albeit a side-issue that doesn't really detract from its main technical achievements per se.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
  31. Good riddance by Stormwatch · · Score: 0

    Fact: the CD sucks.

    Isn't it contradictory how a supposed fanatic for sound quality settled for a poorer format? But the CD was "good enough" for most people, as well as convenient, not too expensive, and consistent. You need a good, well-maintained turntable to surpass even the cheapest CD player. But when you surpass, boy, you do surpass. Like monitors: an LCD is always so-so, which is much better than a low-end CRT, but when you get a good CRT, the limitations of LCDs become obvious.

    So, technically superior music formats like SACD or DVD-A had no chance of going mainstream. I wonder if anything ever will: not only we had a generation raised on the CD, but worse: now we have kids for whom low-bitrate MP3 files and even Youtube videos are acceptable!

    Also, Ohga was the one who pushed Sony into becoming a media company, rather than a pure technology company. That makes me dislike the guy even more.

    1. Re:Good riddance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      What are you talking about ? LPs are terrible, and they were even worse when the CD was invented. All that compression and EQ necessary to get music to fit on an LP - all that scratching, dust, static ?

      I'd say most people, including people who call themselves audiophiles, would have a great deal of difficulty distinguishing between the CD and the musician's final master tape in a double-blind test (the only kind of test which really makes sense).

    2. Re:Good riddance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      technically superior music formats like SACD or DVD-A had no chance of going mainstream

      Super Audio CD and DVD-Audio were DRM delivery mechanisms that offered marginal improvements in sound quality, relative to human hearing. The surround sound aspects weren't that important, and the record companies were never interested in using them for delivering lots more music on one disc.

      Perhaps DRM-free versions would have caught on. But as conceived, these formats deserved to lose to CD.

    3. Re:Good riddance by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      but worse: now we have kids for whom low-bitrate MP3 files and even Youtube videos are acceptable!

      320kbps = low-bitrate?
      Besides, you could try judging music by how good it is, instead of what medium it was published on.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    4. Re:Good riddance by icebraining · · Score: 1

      Not all MP3 files are 320kbps. 128 and even 64kbps are common among my 12 year old brother's friends. Of course, they listen to it on a cellphone speaker, so higher bitrates wouldn't necessarily improve the sound quality.

    5. Re:Good riddance by Stormwatch · · Score: 1

      320 kbps is not bad, but I once downloaded music in 96kbps. It sounded like absolute shit, of course, but the person who encoded it didn't realize he was doing it seriously wrong. And I bet that, if you pointed it to him, he would call you a nitpicker. After I saw my sister listening to music on her cell phone -- and I mean without earbuds, really using the phone's tiny, crappy built-in speaker -- I realized that people are used to absolute crap sound.

    6. Re:Good riddance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, I love pop, scratch, rumble, hiss and click. That shit makes my day. And I really love the RIAA curve that is applied to records and how that demphasis distorts the quality of the sound belched out by even the best LP systems, even the crazy ones that shoot lasers from their tonearms. The best is the improvement on that curve which cuts out anything under 20 Hz. That's hot. I never wanted to be able to feel my music.

      Puhleeez. Unless you are a pregnant teenager, you cannot hear anything higher than what a CD can perfectly reproduce. Even so, it's questionable if the average turntable that people could afford (say, at a price UNDER $300) would be able to accurately and precisely reproduce a sound above 22 kHz.

      16-bits is extremely high fidelity and you will be hard pressed (although it will not be impossible) to find anyone of any age who can tell the difference between that and live (live being played via headphones to the listener, live without headphones is completely different, of course).

      The superior formats had no chance of being mainstream because they were wholly unnecessary to anyone with a total investment under $5,000 in audio equipment.

    7. Re:Good riddance by realityimpaired · · Score: 1

      When you realize that the 320kbit MP3 you've downloaded is actually ripped from a 192kbit CD, however...

      MP3 is a lossy codec, though. A trained ear can hear the difference between a CD and an MP3 quite easily, and once somebody's pointed it out to you, you'll notice a big difference between an analog source and a digital source. You do need high end hi fi equipment to hear the difference, but when you're in that range, you won't ever want to go back to digital.

      The problem is, it's precious difficult to find actual analog sources these days. There's no point in getting an analog pressing of something that was recorded in a digital studio, because the loss is happening at the source. Remember in the early days when CD's used to have a mark on the jewel case indicating AAD, ADD, or DDD, to indicate how it was recorded, how it was mastered, and how it was distributed? They stopped doing that when everybody went digital, and since then there's really no point in seeking out an analog media. But when I compare the CD version of my Deutsche Grammophon recording of Beethoven's 9th against the Vinyl version (which I also have), the Vinyl version comes out way ahead, even though they're based off the same master tapes, and the records are 30 years older than the CD. Ironically, of course, short of inviting you into my home to hear it in person, there is no way for me to prove it to you, because the moment I record it to a digital medium, or put it on Youtube, you'll lose the very information I'm complaining about losing in the CD. :)

    8. Re:Good riddance by Abstrackt · · Score: 4, Insightful

      MP3 is a lossy codec, though. A trained ear can hear the difference between a CD and an MP3 quite easily, and once somebody's pointed it out to you, you'll notice a big difference between an analog source and a digital source. You do need high end hi fi equipment to hear the difference, but when you're in that range, you won't ever want to go back to digital.

      So I need a trained ear, someone to point it out, and high end equipment just to hear how much my CD collection sucks? When you put it that way... I'd rather remain ignorant.

      --
      They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it's not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance. - Terry Pratchett
    9. Re:Good riddance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I used to work for a radio station while at Uni, and the one lesson I learnt about music production is that ignorance is bliss. The more you learn about sound quality the more money you need to spend and the less satisfied you become. I made a decision back then to never think about it again and have never been happier.
      CD's were awesome, MP3s are awesome. The awesome comes from the music itself, not the engineering snob value associated with the medium it is recorded on.

    10. Re:Good riddance by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

      320 kbps is not bad, but I once downloaded music in 96kbps. It sounded like absolute shit, of course, but the person who encoded it didn't realize he was doing it seriously wrong.

      I'm not really defending 96kbps- at least, not for MP3- because I doubt that you could *ever* get great sound at that bitrate. But using files you downloaded (possibly years ago) as an example is flawed.

      I downloaded quite a few tracks during the early-2000s. They were 128kbps- the de facto standard bitrate at that time. Many of them *were* obviously poor quality and demonstrated why 128kbps MP3s were maligned by those who cared about sound quality. But the thing is, I encoded many of my own MP3s at 128kbps, and they were *miles* better. Not hifi, but significantly better.

      Why? One major cause was likely the encoder. Apparently a lot of the early MP3 encoders that came with the popular software of the time were very crude and poor-quality. On the other hand, I was using a "lame"-derived encoder (lame was considered one of the best encoders back then). Plus, it's possible that some of them were transcoded and/or re-converted. In short, you can't blame poor sound quality solely on the bitrate, particularly where Napster-era MP3s are concerned.

      That said, the guy should probably have realised that they sounded awful. But then, my Dad appeared happy with the (very low) default encoding bitrate of Windows Media Player a few years back, even though *I* could hear artifacts so obvious they showed up clearly even on the sub-£10 speakers that came with the computer.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    11. Re:Good riddance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I suppose you don't even have $500 AC cords for your stereo, or have $2000 polarized speaker cables. Or even a vacuum tube preamp to warm up those digits from your CD player. Sigh.

  32. nope, he wasn't part of Philips by Hazel+Bergeron · · Score: 5, Informative

    Gregg invented in the laserdisc in 1958 (!), selling patent to MCA who developed commercially with Philips. Sony contributed some work on error correction to the Red Book standard, but the hard work of hardware design and modulation technique came from Philips, building on their laserdisc work.

    What Sony did, and has ever done since, was see a market to exploit.

    1. Re:nope, he wasn't part of Philips by dfghjk · · Score: 1

      Right, because Laserdisc and CD are nearly the same.

    2. Re:nope, he wasn't part of Philips by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      They're certainly more similar than the CD is to the DVD (except, obviously, for diameter). I thought it was widely accepted that Philips and Sony collaborated to produce the compact disc, based on the earlier laserdisc work.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    3. Re:nope, he wasn't part of Philips by nwf · · Score: 2

      They're certainly more similar than the CD is to the DVD (except, obviously, for diameter). I thought it was widely accepted that Philips and Sony collaborated to produce the compact disc, based on the earlier laserdisc work.

      I disagree. Laserdiscs were analog, whereas CDs and DVDs are all digital. CDs and DVDs are just bit buckets where you can put whatever digital data you'd like. They had video CDs for a time. There are standards as to how to encode stuff to be playable, but they are still much more similar than an analog format.

      --
      I don't know, but it works for me.
    4. Re:nope, he wasn't part of Philips by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LD is analog. CD and DVD are digital.

      Size included, in what way does the CD have more in common with the LD than the DVD?

    5. Re:nope, he wasn't part of Philips by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      LD is analog. CD and DVD are digital.

      This isn't strictly true. Laserdiscs could have either analog or digital audio, and few discs still used analog by the end. When I was a kid (80s and 90s), most laserdisc players could also play audio CDs. And unlike DVDs, neither CDs nor laserdiscs used a filesystem.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    6. Re:nope, he wasn't part of Philips by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      Laserdiscs were analog, whereas CDs and DVDs are all digital. CDs and DVDs are just bit buckets where you can put whatever digital data you'd like.

      No, this isn't really true. Red Book audio CDs can't store anything but audio, and the data is played back at a consistent rate of speed, in a kind of "mock analog." Laserdiscs also supported digital audio tracts that were encoded in the same way as CD audio, though you are right in that some laserdiscs were pure analog. Still, the CD-ROM format came later, and was more of a "bit bucket," but there was no way for commercial CD players to play back audio from CD-ROMs until the invention of CD players that supported MP3 (or other audio file formats).

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    7. Re:nope, he wasn't part of Philips by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I disagree. Laserdiscs were analog, whereas CDs and DVDs are all digital. CDs and DVDs are just bit buckets where you can put whatever digital data you'd like. They had video CDs for a time. There are standards as to how to encode stuff to be playable, but they are still much more similar than an analog format.

      From your post I can tell that you live in softwareland.

      The difference between decoding a laserdisc and a CD is pretty much a firmware issue. The difference is that for CD's you will have to check the sampled value against a treshold to decide if it should be encoded as a 0 or a 1 whereas for laserdic you will input the analog value to the video decoding code.
      DVDs require different electronics.

      The development work to turn a CD-player into a laserdic player vs the work to turn a CD-player into a DVD-player would roughly be about 1:10

    8. Re:nope, he wasn't part of Philips by Hazel+Bergeron · · Score: 1

      Well, early Laserdiscs were totally analogue, but digital audio eventually dominated. And the CD didn't start digital audio recording - PCM was discovered in the 1930s and we've had recorders since around 1970. Worthwhile historical overview.

      Whether CD is more like laserdisc or more like DVD depends on how you weight the differences (purpose, physical structure, manufacturing technique, modulation, encoding / error correction, data structure, etc.), of course. And LD too 's just pits and lands.

    9. Re:nope, he wasn't part of Philips by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Video part of laserdisc was analog, but the laserdisc had a digital audio track. It also had 2 analogue FM audio track. Even the FM analogue audio track was digital it cold be demodulated and you would gt 5.1 dolby digital audio.
      Once MCA got rid of the discovision business all they did was collect royalties from the patents. DVD's cds all of those optical media things had to give monies to discovision.

    10. Re:nope, he wasn't part of Philips by Arcady13 · · Score: 1

      You're listing the specs for LaserDisc as if they were always the same. The 70's discs all had analog stereo audio (although many movies of the time were mono.) In the early 80's they added the digital audio tracks, but the analog FM tracks were also still present for backwards compatibility with older players that couldn't decode the digital PCM tracks. Most players capable of decoding the digital audio could output Dolby 2.0 Stereo and also had CD playback. In the 90's they added a 5.1 AC-3 track using one of the analog tracks, leaving a mono analog track for backwards compatibility. (By that point very few original analog players were still around.) You needed a player with the AC-3 RF output and a compatible receiver or decoder box to actually make use of the AC-3 track.

      All LaserDiscs have a composite analog video signal encoded on them, however some were recorded frame by frame (CAV) and others in a stream (CLV). You could fit more content on the CLV discs, so it was more common, but it could not do trick-play like freeze and slo-mo, at least in the early players.

      I still own all of my original LaserDisc equipment, covering all of these advances. Of course, the only thing I use it for is to watch old copies of un-ruined Star Wars movies and a couple of other titles that have never made it to DVD.

    11. Re:nope, he wasn't part of Philips by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      What are you talking about? Laserdisc was analogue. It almost has more in common with vinyl than with CD...

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    12. Re:nope, he wasn't part of Philips by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Audio was the smaller component of the Laserdisc's function, so that's neither here nor there -- video, the key purpose for which LD was used, was analog either way. In other words, this is a nitpick. CDs and DVDs are digital media, period, whereas the same cannot be said for LD.

      Also, we are talking about the medium, not a particular book format. Red book didn't use filesystems; Orange book most certainly did.

    13. Re:nope, he wasn't part of Philips by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      "but there was no way for commercial CD players to play back audio from CD-ROMs until the invention of CD players that supported MP3 " Isnt that what that little 4 pin cable that used to go from CD-ROM drive to soundcard was for?

      --
      Good-bye
    14. Re:nope, he wasn't part of Philips by Hazel+Bergeron · · Score: 1

      Vinyl.

      LD and CD.

      From a disc construction and reader hardware perspective, LD is like CD and nothing like vinyl.

    15. Re:nope, he wasn't part of Philips by jonwil · · Score: 1

      No, that was a way for CD-ROM drives to play audio CDs, and was used until OSs and media players could read the data from the audio CD digitally.

    16. Re:nope, he wasn't part of Philips by blind+biker · · Score: 1

      Gregg invented in the laserdisc in 1958 (!), selling patent to MCA who developed commercially with Philips. Sony contributed some work on error correction to the Red Book standard, but the hard work of hardware design and modulation technique came from Philips, building on their laserdisc work.

      What Sony did, and has ever done since, was see a market to exploit.

      Jesus H Christ on a popsicle stick, comparing the laserdisc to CD is total engineering fail! The laserdisc is an ANALOG medium - it uses pulse width modulated analog signals, not digital - not ones and zeroes. The length of the "pits" in a laserdisc is not a quantized value. The CD uses a digitally coded signal (so the length of the pits is quantized, which introduces some engineering challenges in exactly counting the number of digits that a given length of a pit represents) with addressing and redundant data (cross-interleaved Reed Solomon) on two levels (two concatenated RS codes).

      --
      "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    17. Re:nope, he wasn't part of Philips by Hazel+Bergeron · · Score: 1

      The thread has addressed this narrowminded view already. You may want to read it.

    18. Re:nope, he wasn't part of Philips by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      I am nitpicking, but since each session has a 'lead in' area (part of which can be used for CD Text)/TOC, isn't that essentially a file system?

  33. How about the inner diameter? by henkvanderlaak · · Score: 2

    FYI, the inner diameter was chosen by Philips to match the Dutch 10 cent coin at the time.

    1. Re:How about the inner diameter? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That's pure speculation until you check the diameter of ohga's willy.

    2. Re:How about the inner diameter? by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1

      It's a cute myth, and the coin does fit in the center hole very nicely, but most likely both hole and coin sizes were picked for practical reasons, using a round number: 15mm.

      The better myth is that the platter size was picked to be the same as a Heineken coaster. Perhaps the engineers foresaw the whole AOL CD spam thing, knowing how most of these CDs would end up being used...

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    3. Re:How about the inner diameter? by henkvanderlaak · · Score: 1
    4. Re:How about the inner diameter? by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      That doesn't prove anything. If you can find a citation *from the time of the CD design process*, then that will give more credibility to that idea.

      eBay was for a long time passing off the "it was started to trade PEZ dispensers" myth until they finally admitted it was a myth.

    5. Re:How about the inner diameter? by henkvanderlaak · · Score: 1

      Ok, how about this: I was personally present at the IEEE ceremony from the link and Joop Sinjou was telling stories about the early days of the CD development, which he was the project leader of. One of his anecdotes was how the engineers couldn't decide on a size for the hole and how he personally had picked the dime from his pocket and how that had settled the case. So I heard it from the man's own mouth, during an official IEEE event. It doesn't get much more reliable than that....

    6. Re:How about the inner diameter? by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      That's still just an anecdote. People's memory becomes hazy, and they may start to believe the myths. That's why a citation *from the original time* is useful.

    7. Re:How about the inner diameter? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah but I was also personally present at the IEEE ceremony from the link and Joop Sinjou was telling stories about the early days of the CD development, which he was the project leader of. One of his anecdotes was how the engineers couldn't decide on a size for the hole and how he personally said "I don't give the slightest fuck" and scribbled a crude circle which was later found to be EXACTLY the same size as a Dutch "dime", a coin name they don't even have! How we all laughed. It doesn't get much more reliable than that....

  34. RIP... by ExKoopaTroopa · · Score: 1

    burning done

    --
    Don't Tell Me What I Can't Do!
  35. Re:Missing a moderation option by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But does it blend?

  36. Re:Missing a moderation option by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    Try adding soy sauce.

    Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa-sabi!

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  37. Get some perspective and show some respect. by jensend · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Lots of people grumbling about how they think CDs are inferior etc. I don't get why.

    Sony plucked this guy from an operatic career, and his passion for sound quality made a big difference. The CD standard is pretty darn nice, especially compared to cassettes, and this guy was responsible for a lot of the push to make it a market reality. He also provided a lot of good leadership for Sony in other ways (getting them into gaming, for instance) and was an important supporter of the arts.

    After his retirement Sony has had a lot more trouble both avoiding being evil (rootkit saga!) and finding vision. Furthermore, while Philips and Sony designed the CD standard around engineering constraints and human perception, media formats since that time have instead been designed around marketing (OMG this says 192 kHz! it must be 4 1/3 times as good as CDs!) and content protection/DRM. I certainly wish more companies would find executives like Mr. Ohga.

    1. Re:Get some perspective and show some respect. by UnknowingFool · · Score: 2

      In my mind Sony started to lose its way then it bought out CBS Records becoming Sony Music and Columbia Pictures becoming Sony Pictures. Before the vision of the company was to make consumer electronics. By owning media companies, there was now an internal conflict of interest. Sony electronics now had to make products that didn't conflict with the goal of protecting content sales. While everyone else jumped on the MP3 bandwagon, Sony had to make ATRAC players.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    2. Re:Get some perspective and show some respect. by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1

      And that's why I try to avoid buying hardware from companies that also do business in content production (Sony) or distribution (Apple, Amazon).

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    3. Re:Get some perspective and show some respect. by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 1

      Lots of people grumbling about how they think CDs are inferior etc. I don't get why.

      There's nothing to get. We're talking about audiophiles here; the kind of people who claim that they can tell the difference between gold and copper cabling in headphones. To them, of course CD players are inferior when compared with whatever obscure technology they use to make themselves feel superior to the common man.

      Apparently, a scratchy vinyl analogue copy on a turntable will sound superior to a digitised recording made under studio conditions, and copied perfectly to the disc. Since I'm someone who can't really tell the difference between FM radio and FLAC, I suppose I'll just have to take their word for it.

      --
      May the Maths Be with you!
  38. 75 minutes by petteyg359 · · Score: 1

    So who ripped us off with all those 74 minute discs?

  39. Good enough. by DrYak · · Score: 2

    ...and that's good enough.

    The kids just want some background noise. 64kbps MP3 on Smartphone speaker is more than enough.
    No need for them at all to be forced to use some theoretically superior format, which anyway requires a living room with 5000$-worth audio equipment to be enjoyed at it fullest.

    Stop bitching about the fact people only take the cheapest solution that fills their needs, and that 99.999% people out there have needs at only a fraction of what you personally need.
    If you're really, really such a big music fan, stop complain, log of audiophile forums, shut down your computer, get out of your living room, buy a nice ticket in the opera of your city and have a nice evening listening to live music.
    You're going to enjoy the experience much better than thinking about people without your tastes listening music on sub-5000$ equipment.

    Or is the actual complaining about audio quality what you really enjoy in music ?!?

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
    1. Re:Good enough. by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      Or is the actual complaining about audio quality what you really enjoy in music ?!?

      Is there anything wrong with that though? It's pretty cathartic to get off on a rant about something you're passionate about....

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    2. Re:Good enough. by The+End+Of+Days · · Score: 1

      There's a lot wrong with spouting it off on every tangentially related article... particularly when it's 99% bullshit and 1% unmeasurable personal experience.

    3. Re:Good enough. by icebraining · · Score: 1

      Stop bitching about the fact people only take the cheapest solution that fills their needs, and that 99.999% people out there have needs at only a fraction of what you personally need.
      If you're really, really such a big music fan, stop complain, log of audiophile forums, shut down your computer, get out of your living room, buy a nice ticket in the opera of your city and have a nice evening listening to live music.
      You're going to enjoy the experience much better than thinking about people without your tastes listening music on sub-5000$ equipment.

      Or is the actual complaining about audio quality what you really enjoy in music ?!?

      Uh, I'm not the who was complaining, I just replied to the "320kbps is low bitrate?" comment. Personally, I use el-cheapo headphones and have no problem listening to 128kbps files if I have nothing better.

      I do have a problem with cellphone speakers, but that's because asshats use them to force their music on everyone else in public transports and similar.

  40. True respects by downmagic · · Score: 1

    digitize him and compress him to an ISO file

  41. Indeed, RIP.... by alostpacket · · Score: 1

    mix and burn..... (sorry)

    --
    PocketPermissions Android Permission Guide
  42. Don't worry, everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He worked for Sony -- that means he's in hell now.

  43. Re:Missing a moderation option by Anonymous+Cow+Nerd · · Score: 1

    "After a private ceremony, Mr. Ohga will be microwaved."

    -1, tasteless

    Try adding soy sauce.

    You made my day. :D

  44. 74 min not 75 min by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    subject says it all

  45. PSN Down ANNND this guy dies??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anyone else find this to be an eerie coincidence?

    It's like he was actually killed by the hack...

  46. Re:Missing a moderation option by julesh · · Score: 1

    The "significance" of the initial M. is that he writes mainstream fiction as Iain Banks and scifi as Iain M. Banks.

    AIUI, this came about by accident. He always intended to use the "M" for both, but his mainstream publisher decided that the name sounded better without it, so left it out. When he eventually found a publisher for his SF work (he wrote the earliest SF stuff first, but didn't get it published until after his first non-SF[1] novel) that publisher agreed with him that the initial sounded good, so included it.

    [1] - I hesitate to call The Wasp Factory mainstream -- it is significantly farther detached from the real world than most SF, IMO.

  47. Re:I don't see what's "compact" about those discs by julesh · · Score: 1

    Unfortunately, the theatrical is only in Dolby 2.0 and the video hasn't been remastered like the re-release, but it's certainly better than VHS.

    AIUI, the theatrical version on these DVDs is a direct copy of the content of the laserdisc.

  48. Re:I don't see what's "compact" about those discs by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 1

    Yes because a 8GB microSDHC existed in 1982, you tit.

  49. Obligatory snopes link by Inf0phreak · · Score: 1

    http://www.snopes.com/music/media/cdlength.asp — apparently it is unknown whether the audio CD was designed specifically to fit Beethoven's 9th Symphony.

    --
    ________
    Entranced by anime since late summer 2001 and loving it ^_^
  50. Here's an idea... by starshinecruzer · · Score: 1

    "If you can put music on a compact disk, why can't you put a persons consciousness?"
    -Cave Johnson

  51. Really to catch up to Phillips by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I had a professor in a grad level instrumentation class use the CD as an illustrative example of sampling, filtering, etc. In the course of this he said that the "advertised" reason was fitting the symphony on the disk. The real reason was that Phillips was way ahead of Sony and could bring to market sooner, so Sony brought this up to slow things down until Sony could be ready. Not sure if true, but makes sense from what I have seen of corporate tactics.

  52. Banks by any name... by BrokenHalo · · Score: 1

    [1] - I hesitate to call The Wasp Factory mainstream -- it is significantly farther detached from the real world than most SF, IMO.

    Agreed. Many ascribe the term "literary fiction" to this genre of his work, and if one must pigeonhole it, the term probably serves better than most. Banks' work is never mainstream, which is pretty much what makes it worth reading.

    I happen to be an unashamedly huge fan of his non-SF work (my personal favourites: The Crow Road and Complicity), but his writing is stupendous no matter where he turns his attention.

  53. Re:I don't see what's "compact" about those discs by BrokenHalo · · Score: 1

    Hey, I (for one) like tits.

  54. they're not playing a "scratchy vinyl analog copy" by Chirs · · Score: 1

    They're not comparing to your dad's turntable. They're using fancy turntables with cartridges that cost more than your computer. Under ideal conditions, vinyl can sound really good.

  55. Reality check from a former pro... by BrokenHalo · · Score: 1

    I absolutely hate the wank that gets peddled about "trained" ears and whatnot.

    I have three diplomas from the Royal College of Music, so I have at least a general idea of what my music is supposed to sound like.

    However, age has not been entirely kind to me, and I have a formally diagnosed hearing loss in higher frequencies in both ears (enough for me to wear hearing aids to help with sibilant sounds in conversation less evident in the music I listen to). I get grumpy with the sound reproduction from my Rega Planar turntable, since the so-called "warm" characteristics favoured by many so-called "audiophiles" tend to round off the frequencies in which my hearing is deficient.

    However, I need no training to recognise the difference between a recording of (my choice of) music at CD quality and an MP3 rendering of the same at 320 Kb/s VBR.

    That doesn't mean I refuse to use compression: for my iPod, which is almost exclusively used where there is more than enough ambient noise for detail to become irrelevant, 192 Kb/s VBR is just fine. What saddens me, though, is the number of kids^Wpeople who have never actually heard proper recordings of their music, who go through life with a limited palette of audio experience.

  56. Snopes says.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    First of all, it's actually 74 minutes.

    Secondly, Snopes says that the whole Beethoven's Symphony thing is "Undetermined."
    http://www.snopes.com/music/media/cdlength.asp

  57. Re:they're not playing a "scratchy vinyl analog co by demonbug · · Score: 1

    They're not comparing to your dad's turntable. They're using fancy turntables with cartridges that cost more than your computer. Under ideal conditions, vinyl can sound really good.

    Plus, vinyl's got the electrolytes that your ears crave!

  58. Larger disc size to oust Phillips production by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    (from https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Compact_disc ):

    The partners aimed at a playing time of 60 minutes with a disc diameter of 100 mm (Sony) or 115 mm (Philips).[9] Sony vice-president Norio Ohga suggested extending the capacity to 74 minutes to accommodate Wilhelm Furtwängler's recording of Ludwig van Beethoven's Symphony Number Nine from the 1951 Bayreuth Festival.[23][24]

    The additional 14-minute playing time subsequently required changing to a 120 mm disc. Kees Immink, Philips' chief engineer, however, denies this, claiming that the increase was motivated by technical considerations, and that even after the increase in size, the Furtwängler recording would not have fit on one of the earliest CDs.[8][9] According to a Sunday Tribune interview,[25] the story is slightly more involved. In 1979, Philips owned PolyGram, one of the world's largest distributors of music. PolyGram had set up a large experimental CD plant in Hannover, Germany, which could produce huge numbers of CDs having, of course, a diameter of 115 mm. Sony did not yet have such a facility. If Sony had agreed on the 115-mm disc, Philips would have had a significant competitive edge in the market. Sony decided that something had to be done. The long playing time of Beethoven's Ninth Symphony imposed by Ohga was used to push Philips to accept 120 mm, so that Philips' PolyGram lost its edge on disc fabrication.[25]