Interesting demonstrations here. The first video makes the vast difference of high dynamic range versus compression apparent even to the uninitiated. I found
a similar example on YouTube, which just happens to make use of one of the best reference materials that I know of for this discussion, Dire Straits' Brothers In Arms.
Not to rant again like I did in a recent multi-channel discussion, but that particular SACD, Brothers In Arms, is a shining example of the benefits of the format, including the dynamic range.
In the second video, which is a tad long, he does make some good points, but I take issue with his idea of releasing the same work in the "regular" compressed format, and offering a premium priced product for the higher dynamic range. So you want me to pay more for what was effectively the original recording, and pay less for the one that requires more effort and processing to produce. WTF? Again, just sell the best one, and you'll be rewarded by the market.
I'm tempted to load up Adele's Royal Albert Hall CD (part of the wonderful - and fairly priced - Blu-ray/CD package) into Audacity just for kicks, but having just listened to it I suspect that it'll look pretty good, reflecting a high dynamic range.
And I
love his idea about a dynamic range value sticker on the packaging, so long as there's some kind of accountable standard and it's accurate, not just more marketing hype.
