My friend Mark Waldrep and I have an argument going about recording quality and the cutting edge. He makes the FINEST sounding records you can buy on the highest resolution formats on the market with the most expensive recording equipment going. ANYONE who buys one of his discs (check out his website at http://www.aixrecords.com/
) will be pleased yet left wondering why all labels don't make music in this way. Surely, they have the resources.
Our argument is over the technolgy versus the music. My side of the arguement is that assuming you (or anyone) wanted to sell high resolution music - that the technological story of 5.1 surround, DVD-Audio or whatever format, the complicated connections etc... is tough enough to sell thus you should stick with music that people already know and want to buy. Dark Side on SACD was a perfect example. It was backwards compatable to CD, had SACD suround and sold over 1,000,000 units. Queen's Night at the Opera on DTS DVD-Audio also sold well (not as well) based on the hits on the album.
Mark's take (and I am putting words in his mouth now - feel free to chime in Mark) is that the audio quality needs to come first and people should find you that way. And on many levels, people DO find AIX that way.
In the end, what I want is AIX recording quality applied to the best of today's music and worked into back catlog music as best it can. Mark suggests that you can't make a 1968 recording sound like what he does. And he is right but if you could get Electric Ladyland or Sgt. Peppers 6/10's of the way there - would you the reader buy a copy? I would!!!
Chime in on the debate.