Template talk:Audio formats

Physical/grooved/vibration vs magnetic?
does anyone have any opinions on splitting the analog section into groove-based recording vs magnetic recording? It seems like a reasonable distinction to make, given the large number of formats now on the template. I may do this myself. Pro hib it O ni o ns (T) 17:52, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

earlier digital formats
I noticed the list in the infobox for digital formats only starts in 1980 for Mitsubishi's digital formats. There were at least two major ones before that should be added, the Soundstream recorder in 1976, and 3M's digital line in 1979. Neither of these formats have their own articles yet, so that's part of the problem. Theswillman 15:06, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Soundstream has an article now, but 3M doesn't. It links to the page about the company which is Not Helpful on the matter of digital formats. I'd rather see a red link or no link than that misleading link. I don't know what policies might exist though. --Elijah (talk) 23:05, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Article title
"Audio format" doesn't sound quite right to me. The word "recording" ought to be in there somewhere. "Audio recording formats", perhaps. What do others think? (If this was in the article's content, I'd just edit it myself, but changing the name of a page is a more serious matter.) --Keeves 12:53, 10 October 2007 (UTC)


 * It's been nearly a year, but looking at it, I'd say you're right. I've changed it to your suggestion. Pro hib it O ni o ns  (T) 09:10, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

What about hybrid formats?
Like VinylDiscs which would fit in both categories (analog and digital) or a new one (hybrid). --danBLOO (talk) 00:09, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

3M article
The link to 3M has nothing to do with an audio format. That link needs to be changed. 66.245.136.245 (talk) 22:09, 7 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Yeah, that should be something like 3M (format). 85.217.35.155 (talk) 22:35, 4 July 2011 (UTC)


 * And, actually it has something to do with an audio format, albeit a brief mention. The name of the format seems to be 3M Digital Audio Mastering System, according to that 3M article. Maybe it should be changed to the template? 85.217.35.155 (talk) 22:40, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

formats
what happened to DualDisc and Blu-ray audio? 76.66.198.171 (talk) 04:30, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Audiophile CDDA variants
If mastering techniques for RBCD like XRCD and K2 HD are included here, shouldn't DSD-CD be, too? The Seventh Taylor (talk) 23:33, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

I've removed "K2 High Definition" and "Extended Resolution Compact Disc". These are not audio distribution formats at all; they're just trade names for two processes for mastering digital audio to go onto ordinary Red Book CDs. inkling (talk) 17:00, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

The links
Abovementioned 3M link is not the only one somehow odd. In the link 'Gramophone record', the first sentence is: A gramophone record, commonly known as a phonograph record (in American English), vinyl record (in reference to vinyl), or colloquially, a record.

At least 'LP record' and '45 rpm record' is dealt in that article, '45 rpm record' even has that article as a link. As far as I know, the 1894 Gramophone record has nothing to do with 'vinyl record', but when you go to the article from this template you get that impression. 85.217.35.155 (talk) 22:34, 4 July 2011 (UTC)