Now that the movie studios have gotten behind the concept of High Definition Video, does anyone think that the HD Video audio formats will eventually replace our beloved SACD and DVD-Audio.

Thanks for reading,

Probably not. It is much easier to support SACD than to create a whole new high-resolution disc format.

Sony should push SACD fully now that the PS3 is out. It seems that there are more SACD releases than DVD-A anyways nowadays.


fuad

Having already seen a music video in HD with a Dolby True HD soundtrack (on Blu-ray), that IMO, was simply stunning. If it means that we end up with a greater supply of titles and studio support, then yes I am happy to see the end of both DVD-A and SACD...

Mark

I think what you will see happening in the next 3 years is that what are now music dvd's with video, will turn into music HD DVD /Blu-ray's with TrueHD /DTS HD MA or uncompressed PCM, but we'll see more for DD Plus tracks I bet.

If I recall, the Blu-ray camp claimed back in May that about 18 labels that made up 50% of music sales last year had signed on to release titles on the Blu-ray format and hardware was being shipped. When I asked some Dolby folks whether they are going to use Dolby TrueHD or uncompressed PCM, they wouldn't comment.

There is no doubt that these uncompressed formats for audio will be welcomed by audiophiles, but like DVD-A and SACD, it is unlikley to become a portable, interchangable, mass market media format like the CD.

Having already seen a music video in HD with a Dolby True HD soundtrack (on Blu-ray), that IMO, was simply stunning. If it means that we end up with a greater supply of titles and studio support, then yes I am happy to see the end of both DVD-A and SACD...

Mark

But is there any increase in fidelity for Dolby True HD over MLP or SACD? From reading the Dolby white paper the main difference is Dolby TrueHD can support 7.1 while MLP is limited to 5.1.

I have a DVD-A/SACD player. I would much prefer that content in those formats continue rather than have to think about a new medium. I don't necessarily need to view a video to enjoy music but if I do, then I would agree, the best audio format on the video would be desirable.

Larry

does anyone think that the HD Video audio formats will eventually replace our beloved SACD and DVD-Audio.
No, they won't. They don't offer any sonic advantage over SACD or DVD-Audio. Two extra channels is the only benefit. Or much more content - but that's not going to be any use commercially - they're not going to want to sell 10+ hours of music on 1 disc.

And why on earth would anyone release a music disc on BD or HD DVD instead of SACD or DVD-Audio? They'd be going from a small potential user base to an even smaller one. There aren't even any audio-only specifications for those formats. And don't forget that SACD and DVD-Audio are backwards compatible with CD and DVD-Video respectively; can BD or HD DVD offer this?

Personally, I expect to see SACD and DVD-Audio begin to become more widespread now, simply because the advent of HDMI means we now getting boxes with easy digital interconnects for them. Indeed, I've personally just started collecting SACD and DVD-Audio because of this - I was waiting until connection was more elegant.

I don't see either format being superceded for the forseeable future (>10 years). Maybe some backward-compatible extensions for extra channels, I suppose (like DTS-ES discrete being added to DVD video).

I'm sure that music video releases will start to come out on BD and HD DVD, but not audio-only discs.

Call me a cynic, but I believe BD & HD DVD have already flopped.

The one thing no one is saying here is that HD and Blue Ray are NOT backward compatable so that they can play DVD-Audio and SACD discs. Can you believe that? They are, thereby, intentionally or not, driving a nail in the coffins of the great DVD-Audio and SACD formats. GEEZ! You might think they would be able to play these formats so as to increase their own sales appeal. No, they set us up for yet two more entirely new audio formats, HD and Blue Ray Audio. This is just getting sickening. Ironic that such brilliant people on the tech side can be so stunningly stupid on the marketing side, isn't it? HD and Blue Ray deserve to fail because 1) Who wants to pay twice as much to see 1944's "Double Indemnity" in 1080i or 1080p than we pay now to see it in SD? How much better can that old 35 mm film look in HD? and 2) this bone-head move in making the players not able to play DVD-A and SACD discs.
I think the true potential for HD and Blue Ray lies in making movies recording direct to hard drives, editing them in the digital domain, and then putting the movie out on high Def DVD. No film at all anywhere in the process. I saw a "movie" so made about a bicycle race in England on a Pioneer Plasma at Best Buy. Just stunning! You could count the bricks in the walls of villages a mile away. Why would the worlds' movie makers not be picking up on this. Skip the film, record directly to a hard-drive, then edit and release on high def DVD for use in HD and Blue Ray machines. Most people have never seen what that looks like, and it is stunning. You see Jay Leno in high def, but how often have you seen something shot in hi-def, recorded on a hard drive, and put out on HD or Blue Ray disc. Think of a whole movie made that way. When they do that, sales of 1080p sets and the hi def players will surge. Now make the players able to play DVD-A and SACD discs, and you'll see sales explode.

QUOTE=KMO]No, they won't. They don't offer any sonic advantage over SACD or DVD-Audio. Two extra channels is the only benefit. Or much more content - but that's not going to be any use commercially - they're not going to want to sell 10+ hours of music on 1 disc.

And why on earth would anyone release a music disc on BD or HD DVD instead of SACD or DVD-Audio? They'd be going from a small potential user base to an even smaller one. There aren't even any audio-only specifications for those formats. And don't forget that SACD and DVD-Audio are backwards compatible with CD and DVD-Video respectively; can BD or HD DVD offer this?

Personally, I expect to see SACD and DVD-Audio begin to become more widespread now, simply because the advent of HDMI means we now getting boxes with easy digital interconnects for them. Indeed, I've personally just started collecting SACD and DVD-Audio because of this - I was waiting until connection was more elegant.

I don't see either format being superceded for the forseeable future (>10 years). Maybe some backward-compatible extensions for extra channels, I suppose (like DTS-ES discrete being added to DVD video).

I'm sure that music video releases will start to come out on BD and HD DVD, but not audio-only discs.[/QUOTE]

The one thing no one is pointing out here is that HD and Blue Ray are NOT backward compatable so that they can play DVD-Audio and SACD discs. Can you believe that? They are, thereby, intentionally or not, driving a nail in the coffins of the great DVD-Audio and SACD formats. GEEZ! You might think they would be able to play these formats so as to increase their own sales appeal. No, they set us up for yet two more entirely new audio formats, HD and Blue Ray Audio. This is just getting sickening. Ironic that such brilliant people on the tech side can be so stunningly stupid on the marketing side, isn't it? HD and Blue Ray deserve to fail because 1) Who wants to pay twice as much to see 1944's "Double Indemnity" in 1080i or 1080p than we pay now to see it in SD? How much better can that old 35 mm film look in HD? and 2) this bone-head move in making the players not able to play DVD-A and SACD discs.
I think the true potential for HD and Blue Ray lies in making movies recording direct to hard drives, editing them in the digital domain, and then putting the movie out on high Def DVD. No film at all anywhere in the process. I saw a "movie" so made about a bicycle race in England on a Pioneer Plasma at Best Buy. Just stunning! You could count the bricks in the walls of villages a mile away. Why would the worlds' movie makers not be picking up on this. Skip the film, record directly to a hard-drive, then edit and release on high def DVD for use in HD and Blue Ray machines. Most people have never seen what that looks like, and it is stunning. You see Jay Leno in high def, but how often have you seen something shot in hi-def, recorded on a hard drive, and put out on HD or Blue Ray disc. Think of a whole movie made that way. When they do that, sales of 1080p sets and the hi def players will surge. Now make the players able to play DVD-A and SACD discs, and you'll see sales explode.

QUOTE=KMO]No, they won't. They don't offer any sonic advantage over SACD or DVD-Audio. Two extra channels is the only benefit. Or much more content - but that's not going to be any use commercially - they're not going to want to sell 10+ hours of music on 1 disc.

And why on earth would anyone release a music disc on BD or HD DVD instead of SACD or DVD-Audio? They'd be going from a small potential user base to an even smaller one. There aren't even any audio-only specifications for those formats. And don't forget that SACD and DVD-Audio are backwards compatible with CD and DVD-Video respectively; can BD or HD DVD offer this?

Personally, I expect to see SACD and DVD-Audio begin to become more widespread now, simply because the advent of HDMI means we now getting boxes with easy digital interconnects for them. Indeed, I've personally just started collecting SACD and DVD-Audio because of this - I was waiting until connection was more elegant.

I don't see either format being superceded for the forseeable future (>10 years). Maybe some backward-compatible extensions for extra channels, I suppose (like DTS-ES discrete being added to DVD video).

I'm sure that music video releases will start to come out on BD and HD DVD, but not audio-only discs.[/QUOTE]

The one thing no one is saying here is that HD and Blue Ray are NOT backward compatable so that they can play DVD-Audio and SACD discs. Can you believe that? They are, thereby, intentionally or not, driving a nail in the coffins of the great DVD-Audio and SACD formats. GEEZ! You might think they would be able to play these formats so as to increase their own sales appeal.
Er, you're confusing the formats with the players. DVD isn't backwards compatible with CD, but DVD players usually play CDs. There's nothing stopping HD DVD and Blu-ray players playing DVD-Audio and/or SACD.

The PlayStation 3, a Blu-ray player, plays SACD. The fact the other players released so far aren't playing DVDA and SACD is just a black mark against those players; nothing to do with the HD DVD and Blu-ray formats.

But there is a point, which I mentioned, in that the new discs aren't backwards compatible, unlike DVD-Audio and SACD, which can be played on DVD-Video and CD players respectively.

The one thing no one is pointing out here is that HD and Blue Ray are NOT backward compatable so that they can play DVD-Audio and SACD discs. Can you believe that? They are, thereby, intentionally or not, driving a nail in the coffins of the great DVD-Audio and SACD formats. Nothing from a technological perspective is keeping BD or HD DVD from playing SACD and DVD-A it is mostly just licensing. The DD TrueHD codec is actually very similar to the MLP used on DVD-A, and the PS3 is doing Blu-ray and SACD. Blu-ray and HD DVD did little if anything to nail the coffin shut, it was MP3 players and cheap "free" downloads that killed high resolution multichannel audio. I have to disagree with KMO but the formats are not going anywhere and have all but been dead for over a year now unless you are into classical music on SACD.
1) Who wants to pay twice as much to see 1944's "Double Indemnity" in 1080i or 1080p than we pay now to see it in SD? How much better can that old 35 mm film look in HD?
That would be me. :D Have you actually seen the HD DVDs of Cassablanca, Forbidden Planet or The Searchers? These old films look light years better then their SDVD counterparts. You would have to have a pretty meager display if you think SDVDs are capturing the full resolution of film. Trust me you don't need digital video to take advantage of the HD optical formats.

For the record I own around 150 SACDs and DVD-As and am sad to see them withering.

Nothing from a technological perspective is keeping BD or HD DVD from playing SACD and DVD-A it is mostly just licensing. The DD TrueHD codec is actually very similar to the MLP used on DVD-A, and the PS3 is doing Blu-ray and SACD.
For the record I own around 150 SACDs and DVD-As and am sad to see them withering.

I am guessing the PS3 doesn't do DVD-Audio because Sony doesn't do DVD-A - their SACD players are DVD and SACD only so why change it with the PS3? In fact it would be easy with a firmware upgrade to do DVD-A since DVD-A has the same physical format as a DVD - just needs some different codecs to unscramble the data



..
That would be me. :D Have you actually seen the HD DVDs of Cassablanca, Forbidden Planet or The Searchers? These old films look light years better then their SDVD counterparts. You would have to have a pretty meager display if you think SDVDs are capturing the full resolution of film. Trust me you don't need digital video to take advantage of the HD optical formats.

withering.

From what I understand while film stock has been getting better over the years (finer grain, less prone to fade. etc.) even film stock in the 40's and 50's, espcially B&W have more resolution in them than the standard HDTV resolutions. So there is room for improvement

it was MP3 players and cheap "free" downloads that killed high resolution multichannel audio.
That's not really logical. If you want to keep shifting physical discs, what better way to do it than to offer much better multichannel quality? You've got a selling point. If the studios are too dense to figure that out, that's their problem. If they can start pushing more high-profile stuff like Love, then people will start to pay attention.

I've only just started collecting SACD+DVDA - I was turned on to multichannel audio this summer by stumbling across Pink's I'm Not Dead DualDisc (hadn't even heard of DualDisc). When I bought my last DVD player in 1999/2000, it was clear that SACD/DVD interconnects were too primitive (lack of bass management etc), so I didn't bother with them - I was happy to wait until the equipment caught up with the format. But now I'm upgrading my kit, and we've got decent receivers with 96kHz+ processing capable of digital interconnect. I'm ready to go. As are lots of other people hooking up with HDMI.

If the format's are withering, it's no-one's fault but the studios for not bothering to release stuff. If they had a decent catalogue, people would buy it. 2005 was a pretty good year for new releases, but 2006 hasn't seen much apart from Love. They need to pull their finger out next year.

The installed base of surround sound systems and DVD-A/SACD-capable players is ever-increasing. The potential market is getting larger and larger. If they just release decent stuff, it will sell by the bucketload. Like Love is.

Maybe I've gotten cynical because I've been collecting SACDs and DVD-As for several years. I'm going to go on record and say the formats are not only withering but are basically already dead. I believe DualDisc has already been abandoned and a lot of those discs were not even high resolution. I don't believe there have been many if any pop releases on SACD in the US for quite some time. Other then the Love DVD-A and the Doors collection were there any other DVD-A releases here in the US recently? While the studios definitely made some mistakes with the dual formats the truth is the vast percentage of the music listening public could care less about M/C or quality. They are perfectly content to listen to the highly compressed MP3s on their IPods. The general public is not well represented in this forum. :)

I wish I could say the formats are making a come back but I have not seen any evidence to convince me of that, if fact it is quite the opposite.

Maybe I've gotten cynical because I've been collecting SACDs and DVD-As for several years. I'm going to go on record and say the formats are not only withering but are basically already dead. I believe DualDisc has already been abandoned and a lot of those discs were not even high resolution. I don't believe there have been many if any pop releases on SACD in the US for quite some time. Other then the Love DVD-A and the Doors collection were there any other DVD-A releases here in the US recently? While the studios definitely made some mistakes with the dual formats the truth is the vast percentage of the music listening public could care less about M/C or quality. They are perfectly content to listen to the highly compressed MP3s on their IPods. The general public is not well represented in this forum. :)

I wish I could say the formats are making a come back but I have not seen any evidence to convince me of that, if fact it is quite the opposite.


If that is the case then it's pretty sad.

I got into MCH audio relatively recently, somewhat serendipitously. Although I had a HT system (DD only) and knew about DVD-A and SACD I was never motivated to upgrade. Then I saw the Eagles Hotel California DVD-A in a bargain bin and purchased it. Even listening to the DVD-D tracks I could hear the potential of MCH audio and so decided to upgrade. For me this meant a new DVD player that could play DVD-A and SACD and a new AVR with 6 channel analogue inputs.

It took a while but now I have all the gear and am enjoying my modest collection of MCH discs. I also managed to procure a copy of DSOTM which is outstanding in this format.

From my experiences I would say the barriers have been

1. knowledge of the formats - once again two competing formats have fragmented the marketplace although dual format players are a reality

2. Entry cost - for many of us we needed both new DVD players and AVR's - not insignificant costs

3. Catalogue - but this is a chicken and egg sort of thing. I would imagine it's easier to create a MCH release for a new recording when you are already producing the content, then go back to existing recordings and redo them. Yet for many of us who can afford the gear, our more mature age group wants to hear the music we grew up in MCH rather than some of the new content :-). But how many copies of a re-release can a studio sell?

4. Agreed that mobile music has placed portablity over quality.

So in the meantime I am grabbing all the content I can that I like

Call me a cynic, but I believe BD & HD DVD have already flopped.

No, no, no - far too early to draw any sensible conclusions - most of the major manufacturers have not even launched their hardware yet. 2006 for HD is a bit like 1997 was for DVD - and you might have been justified in a similar sentiment on DVD back then :)

As a huge fan and proponent of Hi Rez audio for several years I agree that all of the formats are dead. I think HD-DVD and blu ray will also not be successful as an audio format. I'm sure the manufacturers will blame consumers but really it is greed and incompetence that killed the formats. Manufacturers worried that the formats would lead to widespread copying of original material at unprecedented quality so they limited the output to analog outpus requiring six cables, special receivers and players and considerable technical know how just to set it up. Then they didn't bother marketing it. At all. Priced the discs unreasonably, limited the distribution and made it nearly impossible to get new releases in the new formats. Now they want early adopters for their new HD-DVD and Blu Ray technologies. Screw that. They have shown how they treat their early adopters. They leave you hanging in the breeze with no software to play on the expensive technologies they introduced and asked you to buy into with good faith. No wonder the industry is a mess.

As a huge fan and proponent of Hi Rez audio for several years I agree that all of the formats are dead. I think HD-DVD and blu ray will also not be successful as an audio format.

But they have made no claim as an audio format - both, or either, will suceed or fail as a video format - SACD/DVDA showed pretty clearly that there is no mass market appetite to sustain a new format for hirez audio.

Now, if either Bluray or HDDVD becomes mass market established, I think there is every reason to think that there will be another attempt to sell hirez music.

I don't think Sony is "banking" on the PS3 as a saviour for SACD. Only the radical SACD fans can claim that. As far as DVD-A goes, if the release of "Love" does not stimulate the surround sound music market, I fear that it will stay a "low priority" for the studios and labels. Merely an afterthough for a narrow market.

The fact that the new high end Toshiba HD-DVD player does not do SACD or DVD-A is a sad fact, IMHO. I can't imagine it would have taken much to include at LEAST the DVD-A capability in that box.

:-jon

I wonder what percentage of Love buyers bought the version with the DVD?
Now break it down further of those that did buy the DVD.
- Percentage that actually have the gear properly setup and know how to listen to DVD-A.
- Percentage who are listening to M/C but the lossy Dolby or DTS tracks.
- Percentage who are pissed because there is no real video on the DVD.

I'm guessing the DVD-A listeners is the smallest percentage.

At least Blu-ray and HD DVD will make it easy enough to release something similar. Just throw a high resolution PCM 7.1 track on it with minimal video and still have room on the disc.

I wonder what percentage of Love buyers bought the version with the DVD?
Now break it down further of those that did buy the DVD.
- Percentage that actually have the gear properly setup and know how to listen to DVD-A.
- Percentage who are listening to M/C but the lossy Dolby or DTS tracks.
- Percentage who are pissed because there is no real video on the DVD.

I'm guessing the DVD-A listeners is the smallest percentage.

At least Blu-ray and HD DVD will make it easy enough to release something similar. Just throw a high resolution PCM 7.1 track on it with minimal video and still have room on the disc.

To fully appreciate "Love", you have to hear it in 5.1. It really doesn't matter if a large percentage of home theater folks with DD/DTS systems hear it that way as opposed to those of us who get to hear it at 24/96, the important thing is that people HEAR the surround version.

Had this come out 3 years ago, Sony would have probably muscled Capitol/EMI into making this a Hybrid SACD, as they did with DSOTM. If that had happened, far less homes would get to experience the surround sound track, which would be a shame. (Not that SACD is "bad", it's just not as good for surround "market penetration" as DVD/DVD-A is)

The important issue to me is not the format, but more so the SURROUND music aspect of the release. When people hear "Love" in 5.1, they are generally floored, be they casual music fans or hard core HiRez people. Only the "I only have 2 ears, and surround sucks" people can complain, and that they do. I have learned to leave them to their misery.

You have to figure that even if you get a "fair" amount of people to buy into HD-DVD or BlueRay, how many of those will go the next step and get a receiver with the newer HD audio formats? Limiting surround music to these is a death knell.

As much as I love HiRez, it won't be us that keeps surround music going, it will be the J6P's with the Dolby Digital and DTS systems.

The point is, CD+DVD-A packages are a good thing, because having the disc in your hands gives you more impetus to go out and get the player that lets you hear the disc the way it should be heard.

:-jon
quadraphonicquad

Jon - I don't disagree I really feel one of the biggest hurdles to overcome is how do you get five decent speakers in JSP's living room? Most people just can't overcome the WAF in her living room. :)

Jon - I don't disagree I really feel one of the biggest hurdles to overcome is how do you get five decent speakers in JSP's living room? Most people just can't overcome the WAF in her living room. :)

That's easy! You get them to start with 5 "crappy" speakers in their living room. :D
(Usually little "wife approved" size) The "upgrades" come naturally! ;)

:-jon

Maybe I've gotten cynical because I've been collecting SACDs and DVD-As for several years. I'm going to go on record and say the formats are not only withering but are basically already dead. I believe DualDisc has already been abandoned and a lot of those discs were not even high resolution. I don't believe there have been many if any pop releases on SACD in the US for quite some time. Other then the Love DVD-A and the Doors collection were there any other DVD-A releases here in the US recently? While the studios definitely made some mistakes with the dual formats the truth is the vast percentage of the music listening public could care less about M/C or quality. They are perfectly content to listen to the highly compressed MP3s on their IPods. The general public is not well represented in this forum. :)

I wish I could say the formats are making a come back but I have not seen any evidence to convince me of that, if fact it is quite the opposite.

Debut album of Cowboy Junkies coming to Mobile Fidelity SACD on December 5th (http://www.highfidelityreview.com/news/news.asp?newsnumber=18848565)

Don't forget there was SACDs from Little Richard (on MoFi) and the Moody Blues SACDs (on Universal Music) ?

The issue is whether the record companies can make enough money from releasing a hi-rez version of a certain title. Will there be enough interest? And that's from a worldwide perspective. The record companies certainly don't want dual inventory of anything and if you look beyond our borders, you'll find that the world (in general) prefers SACD. Last month (November) alone, sa-cd.net added 81 new SACD titles (http://www.sa-cd.net/additions.php). So, the format is hardly dead.

Debut album of Cowboy Junkies coming to Mobile Fidelity SACD on December 5th (http://www.highfidelityreview.com/news/news.asp?newsnumber=18848565)

Don't forget there was SACDs from Little Richard (on MoFi) and the Moody Blues SACDs (on Universal Music) ?

The issue is whether the record companies can make enough money from releasing a hi-rez version of a certain title. Will there be enough interest? And that's from a worldwide perspective. The record companies certainly don't want dual inventory of anything and if you look beyond our borders, you'll find that the world (in general) prefers SACD. Last month (November) alone, sa-cd.net added 81 new SACD titles (http://www.sa-cd.net/additions.php). So, the format is hardly dead.

Since this is the "Surround Music" section, I was speaking in terms of surround. All of the stereo SACDs have no bearing on surround music. SACD is fine for that, and great for surround. However, to rely on SACD to move surround music forward is foolish.

As for the 4000+ SACDs listed on sacd.net is concerned.................well, I'm not going to get started on THAT. SACD is a great format that, IMHO, was screwed up and abandoned by its creator, and in doing so, they managed to take down the surround music movement as well.

Hear, Hear!!! Right you are!! NO one ever says that but me. I can't believe it. But it is dead on. I don't read audio magazines, but as a typical, fairly sharp consumer, I don't remember ever seeing one single ad on TV or in print for DVD-A or SACD. Not one. What are they thinking? A Toyota commercial every 5 minutes and not one ad ever for hi-res souind. And they have had players for one of the two hi-res audio formats in vehicles. I've met salespeople at Best Buy who have never heard of hi rez. I once asked a salesperson at The Good Guys (now gone) if SACD was something good- it was mentioned in a print ad for a DVD player. He said it was nothing- it doesn't do anything. I don't think anybody I've ever mentioned hi-rez to has ever heard of it. God. Yes, then charge a lot for the discs and don't put much out on it. I find about 300 titles on the net for DVD-A, my format since I own the Panny S-97 DVD and DVD-A player. I guess HD-DVD and Blue Ray players might still appear that play the two hi res audio discs. Only the Sony game console plays HD-DVD AND SACDs. Big hint to you manufacturers: If you want HD-DVD and Blue Ray to fly, make them capable of playing DVD-A and SACD discs. (and maybe see my post above re movies done all in hi-rez with no film involved). That they don't is a real good indication of their mentality, and we should not support that mentality with our money. I agree- screw them six ways to Sunday!
Home audio was huge in the 70's. I honestly believe the interests of American consumers have shifted to other areas. Maybe it's all the divorced or otw single parents with no time to give to audio, maybe it's the increased number of avg. hours worked per week, surely its the IPOD, etc, it's hours per week on the internet (which did not exist in the 70s) , AND the lousy marketing job by the industry. People spend so much money on vehicles, they are just strapped financially. Then every receiver is obsolete in 12 months, and so is every $2,500 big screen- 1080i, then 1080p, etc. In five years it will be 5,000p and all the current displays and receivers and discs will be obsolete. Home electronics has become a rich man's game with the rapid, deliberate obsolescence. The industry for sure is a mess and it's costing them countless billions. Good! What a bunch of greedy morons. But then the Japanese have made some huge mistakes before, so why are we surprised?

As a huge fan and proponent of Hi Rez audio for several years I agree that all of the formats are dead. I think HD-DVD and blu ray will also not be successful as an audio format. I'm sure the manufacturers will blame consumers but really it is greed and incompetence that killed the formats. Manufacturers worried that the formats would lead to widespread copying of original material at unprecedented quality so they limited the output to analog outpus requiring six cables, special receivers and players and considerable technical know how just to set it up. Then they didn't bother marketing it. At all. Priced the discs unreasonably, limited the distribution and made it nearly impossible to get new releases in the new formats. Now they want early adopters for their new HD-DVD and Blu Ray technologies. Screw that. They have shown how they treat their early adopters. They leave you hanging in the breeze with no software to play on the expensive technologies they introduced and asked you to buy into with good faith. No wonder the industry is a mess.

But then the Japanese have made some huge mistakes before, so why are we surprised?i worked in Toshiba(Brasil) for 6 years(round 1984),i knew the Toshiba vice-president in this time,lots of technicians,few "developers".
mistakes,corrections and ...too much people full of proud but reasonables aparators.
i worked in Sony(Brasil) too...just the same(or worse)
Sony always build "strange things" like el-cassete,beta-max,sacds....all faded to dead.

no surprises!

Last month (November) alone, sa-cd.net added 81 new SACD titles (http://www.sa-cd.net/additions.php). So, the format is hardly dead.
Note I said "pop" releases. I counted approximately 20 pop releases this year and a lot of those barely qualify as pop. Even the notable Moody Blues and Depeche Mode releases weren't widely available dosmetically here in the US, I know I imported them. Add to that a hand full of MFSL classic releases and I still contend that for pop/rock the SACD format is all but dead. I'm all over that Cowboy Junkies SACD...Here's hoping The Trinity Sessions gets the same treatment.

I don't care. :) I've only just started collecting, so it's all new to me :D I've got 2 SACDs and 3 DVD-As, so that leaves me about 4396 to go...

I don't care. :) I've only just started collecting, so it's all new to me :D I've got 2 SACDs and 3 DVD-As, so that leaves me about 4396 to go...


If we're counting then I have 9 DVD-A's and 5 SACD's and I guess a few to go. My challenge is, as somebody is slightly more mature and therefore not so in tune with current contemporary music (the stuff my daughter likes!) I am looking for reissues of music of my own generation. Not so easy! But Love has been a relevation to me the Beatles music is something I did grow up with!

Really? It struck me as the opposite - very little contemporary stuff, but loads of 60/70s/80s reissues for baby-boomers... Probably a bit more 70s than 60s, so maybe still a bit too contemporary for you, if you only go as far as the Beatles :)

I guess I haven't been looking hard enough. I scanned through all the SACD releases on CDUniverse and only found a few I would purchase - similarly for DVD-A. Hence I guess my modest collection. But having tasted the MCH fruit, I would be unlikely to purchase any regular music now.

My most contemporary disc is Britney Spears (Toxic!) and I got that primarily for my daughter :-)

Ooh, Britney on DVD-Audio! Didn't know that. Cool, that's going on my list.

Some great writing by Cathy Dennis there.

Hmph, not released here, got to find an import.

Also DualDisc, I see. Is that the same DVD-Audio content?

No, it isn't. The DualDisc has been downgraded to Dolby Digital. :eek:

Are these people insane? :(

I put up a chronological list of pop/rock DVD-A's released by MAJOR lables on my website. You can check it out here if you like: http://www.quadraphonicquad.com/dvdalist.htm

:-jon

No, it isn't. The DualDisc has been downgraded to Dolby Digital. :eek:

Are these people insane? :(

My mistake. The Britney Spears album is called In the Zone and features the track Toxic. It is available on DVD-A

http://www.cduniverse.com/productinfo.asp?pid=6445452&BAB=E

And when I did play it, it was 5.1 (well it was DD 5.1 - I haven't played it since I upgraded to DVD-A and SACD but the comments on the disc indicate it is MLP 5.1 also)

Yeah, I've found it. It was rereleased in 2005 on DualDisc, DD 5.1 only. Muppets. I'll find the DVD-Audio.

I started collecting hi-res with Hotel California, Fragile, Rumours and Brain Salad Surgery on DVD-A and the Elton John releases on SACD. However, I quickly realized that if I wasn't going with classical, then my collection of hi-res would be rather small. I was a casual listener of classical music but then I delved into a number of RCA Living Stereo SACDs and some Naxos DVD-As and discovered I loved it, especially in MCH (even a solo instrumental in MCH is a cut above the two channel, to me at any rate). I now have close to 200 hi-res discs, of which about 160 are classical. If classical (or jazz) are not your thing, though, I can see where hi-res has been disappointing. But I urge people to try a few classical titles before giving up on hi-res (a good place to find some ideas is Kal Rubinson's column "Music in the Round" over at Stereophile.com They are all archived and reasonably easy to find. While I've not purchased every disc he's recommended, I've never been disappointed by any recommendations that I have purchased).

I would have to agree with that. Of the about 15 MCH releases I own, only one is classical. I have about 100 classical CD's but I guess I am loathe to replace them with MCH releases, even if I could find the same title in MCH. For my popular discs only 2 are copies of what I have already on CD - Brain Salad Surgery and Linda Ronstadt's What's New.

81 new SACD titles[/url]. So, the format is hardly dead.

Agreed! Not dead, but rapidly becoming a niche format. DVD-A, on the other hand appears dead.

Interesting isn't how the new Beatles Love album was released in DVD-A. I wonder who made that call?

Agreed! Not dead, but rapidly becoming a niche format. DVD-A, on the other hand appears dead.

I wouldn't say that. This month we got the Beatles Love, David Crosby If I Could Only Remember My Name, and the 6 Doors albums released on DVD-A.

To me, this is a whole lot more "useful" than 100 "Far East" middle of the road and classical SACDs...................

........ But I urge people to try a few classical titles before giving up on hi-res (a good place to find some ideas is Kal Rubinson's column "Music in the Round" over at Stereophile.com They are all archived and reasonably easy to find. While I've not purchased every disc he's recommended, I've never been disappointed by any recommendations that I have purchased).

I too can highly recommend Kal Rubinsons Music In the Round. You can find it here:

http://www.stereophile.com/musicintheround/

:-jon

DVD-Audio makes far more sense than SACD as a mainstream release format for something where surround sound is a key part of the intent, as it gives you surround sound on any DVD-Video player. Far more use to your average Joe Bloggs with a home-theatre-in-a-box.

Of course, with the PlayStation 3 offering SACD...

Just recently I picked up The Beatles Love DVD-A and The Flaming Lips At War with the Mystics DVD-A. The Doors DVD-A's just came out too, so DVD-A isn't dead either.

For SACD I got Depeche Mode's Violator and Goldfrapp's Supernatural from the UK. Haven't seen much mainstream music releases from SACD here in the states for awhile. I was hoping that the new Diana Krall and Elton John releases would be SACD, but no luck.

I would appreciate it if you could list the 5 classical DVD-As you like the best. I can't play SACDs, only DVD-As. Thanks.

I started collecting hi-res with Hotel California, Fragile, Rumours and Brain Salad Surgery on DVD-A and the Elton John releases on SACD. However, I quickly realized that if I wasn't going with classical, then my collection of hi-res would be rather small. I was a casual listener of classical music but then I delved into a number of RCA Living Stereo SACDs and some Naxos DVD-As and discovered I loved it, especially in MCH (even a solo instrumental in MCH is a cut above the two channel, to me at any rate). I now have close to 200 hi-res discs, of which about 160 are classical. If classical (or jazz) are not your thing, though, I can see where hi-res has been disappointing. But I urge people to try a few classical titles before giving up on hi-res (a good place to find some ideas is Kal Rubinson's column "Music in the Round" over at Stereophile.com They are all archived and reasonably easy to find. While I've not purchased every disc he's recommended, I've never been disappointed by any recommendations that I have purchased).

Yeah, I've found it. It was rereleased in 2005 on DualDisc, DD 5.1 only. Muppets. I'll find the DVD-Audio.

After reading this list, I went back to the Britney Spears DVD-A. It is indeed MLP 5.1 and while the merits of the music could be up for debate, the mix certainly spreads itself across all the channels - there is no inhibition in using all channels for the sound mix!

I would appreciate it if you could list the 5 classical DVD-As you like the best. I can't play SACDs, only DVD-As. Thanks.I have 14 classical DVD-As. My top 5 of those are (in no particular order):

Beethoven--The Cello Sonatas Esther Nyffenegger (cello) Gerard Wyss (piano) on the Divox label

Debussy, Glinka and Others--Music for Solo Harp Ion Ivan Roncea (harp) on the AIX label (I have four of their discs and they have the best SQ of any DVD-A I've heard)

Grieg--Piano Concerto and Symphonic Dances Havard Gimse (piano) Royal Scottish National Orchestra (Bjarte Engeset conductor) on Naxos

Sibelius--Violin Concerto and Sinding Violin Concerto No. 1 Henning Kraggerud (violin) Bournemouth Symphony Orchestra (Bjarte Engeset conductor) on Naxos

Brahms--Symphony No. 1 London Philharmonic Orchestra (Marin Alsop conductor) on Naxos

These may not be the best performances/recordings of these works available (and more knowledgeable classical listeners can provide you with other options, I'm sure) but I enjoy them and, in the case of the Naxos titles, they are reasonably priced (though I've read that Naxos has decided not to continue with DVD-As, so I've been buying up the ones that interest me a bit faster than I can listen to them--I have four more that I've yet to unwrap. But I've always found Naxos titles to be no less than reasonably good, if not great, so I plan to get as many as I can find/afford).

Interesting. I am on the lookout for good (SQ and performance) recordings of

1. Rachmaninoff 2nd and 3rd Piano Concertos
2. Rachmaninoff Second Symphony
3. Debussy Suite Bergamasque and Children Corner's Suite and Arabesque (1 and 2)

Larry

Interesting. I am on the lookout for good (SQ and performance) recordings of

1. Rachmaninoff 2nd and 3rd Piano Concertos
2. Rachmaninoff Second Symphony
3. Debussy Suite Bergamasque and Children Corner's Suite and Arabesque (1 and 2)

LarryIf you have SACD capability, the RCA Living Stereo SACD (three channel) releases of Rachmaninoff's 2nd and 3rd Piano Concertos (with Van Cliburn) are quite good in both sonics (especially given the age of the recording) and performance.

I would guess the Beatles were released on DVD-A due to length?

I assume you can put quite a bit more on DVD-A than on SACD.

Is SACD a standard ~700 meg like regular CD? DVD-A then I'm sure would goto the full 8.5gb like a regular DVD.

I don't care what replaces either format, so long as something does replace it and its embraced by the market.

DVD-A and SACD have the same physical capacity - 8.5GB. SACD actually uses DVD optical technology, although the data format's totally different. They can hold pretty much the same length of music at the same quality. Love isn't a particularly long album; it would have fitted fine on either.

I'm pretty certain DVD-A was chosen for DVD-V compatibility. It can offer surround to a wider audience.

The limiting factor for SACD length appears to be, somewhat ironically, the CD layer of the hybrid discs. Rather than issuing a multi-CD and one SACD disc (as has occurred with the Lord of the Rings EE soundtracks with CD/DVD-A), just about every SACD in the last two or three years is a hybrid and the contents are the same on the CD layer and the SACD layer(s) for convenience. Had SACD successfully replaced CD as the de facto standard, then we'd likely have seen one disc issues on SACD of multi-disc CD/LP releases.

Maybe I've gotten cynical because I've been collecting SACDs and DVD-As for several years. I'm going to go on record and say the formats are not only withering but are basically already dead. I believe DualDisc has already been abandoned and a lot of those discs were not even high resolution. I don't believe there have been many if any pop releases on SACD in the US for quite some time. Other then the Love DVD-A and the Doors collection were there any other DVD-A releases here in the US recently? While the studios definitely made some mistakes with the dual formats the truth is the vast percentage of the music listening public could care less about M/C or quality. They are perfectly content to listen to the highly compressed MP3s on their IPods. The general public is not well represented in this forum. :)

I wish I could say the formats are making a come back but I have not seen any evidence to convince me of that, if fact it is quite the opposite.

Hi Tom,

I agree and I would think that anyone objectively reviewing the statistics would have a difficult time making a serious case that these formats are making a comeback. (Your use of the term "comeback" is being extremely kind, since these formats have never demonstrated any meaningful level of adoption from a mass market point of view.)

Here’s the year-end 2005 production statistics of both high definition audio only discs in comparison with the entire mass music market: (Source RIAA)

DVD audio:--------------------------------- .5 million discs
SACD:--------------------------------------- .5 million discs
All other music media:--------------1,301.8 million units

Perhaps it would be better for all consumers (including audiophiles) if these high definition audio only formats were absorbed by a high definition DVD format. They are currently such a niche market that the pricing is so inflated that their street prices are about the same as the new high definition video DVDs. Personally, with pricing being about the same, and audio quality the same, I'd much rather see and hear the performers.

For those audiophiles that insist that critical listening can't be done with that nasty, distracting video, I suggest that they close their eyes, or turn off their displays. ;)

Larry

Considering how few "mainstream" SACDs and DVD-As were released this year, quite frankly the ".5 million" figure for each format is quite astonishing!

Considering how few "mainstream" SACDs and DVD-As were released this year, quite frankly the ".5 million" figure for each format is quite astonishing!

Maybe RIAA is rounding UP to the nearest 500,000. ;)

Not to get totally off track but this is what bugs me about the RIAA.

They are so worried about catching people trading substandard music instead of focusing on putting out a superior product so no one would want MP3's.

For all their crap I seriously am getting to the point where I am going to try to return a poorly produced CD, opened or not.

Hi Tom,

I agree and I would think that anyone objectively reviewing the statistics would have a difficult time making a serious case that these formats are making a comeback. (Your use of the term "comeback" is being extremely kind, since these formats have never demonstrated any meaningful level of adoption from a mass market point of view.)

Here’s the year-end 2005 production statistics of both high definition audio only discs in comparison with the entire mass music market: (Source RIAA)

DVD audio:--------------------------------- .5 million discs
SACD:--------------------------------------- .5 million discs
All other music media:--------------1,301.8 million units

Perhaps it would be better for all consumers (including audiophiles) if these high definition audio only formats were absorbed by a high definition DVD format. They are currently such a niche market that the pricing is so inflated that their street prices are about the same as the new high definition video DVDs. Personally, with pricing being about the same, and audio quality the same, I'd much rather see and hear the performers.

For those audiophiles that insist that critical listening can't be done with that nasty, distracting video, I suggest that they close their eyes, or turn off their displays. ;)

Larry

The idea that the hirez video formats should replace SACD and DVD-A is interesting but might also go further to kill the formats. Going from one area of technology where there are competitive and non compatible formats to another where the issue is the same isn't going to fix the problem. The jury is still out (and for a long time I would imagine) on which HD Video format is going to win so I would imagine releasing MCH in any of those formats is pretty much of a stab in the dark.

Most audio releases are studio produced so don't have accompanying video. So for those albums, what videos should be shown? Random pictures related to the music, stills of the artist, psychedelic patterns a la WMP?


Just some thoughts.

Larry

DVD-A and SACD have the same physical capacity - 8.5GB. SACD actually uses DVD optical technology, although the data format's totally different. They can hold pretty much the same length of music at the same quality. Love isn't a particularly long album; it would have fitted fine on either.

I'm pretty certain DVD-A was chosen for DVD-V compatibility. It can offer surround to a wider audience.

Was out looking to see what is available in the way of SACD and DVD-A players and the pickings are slim. I have the Samsung HD841 which works fine but I have heard it has reliablity issues. Since mine was purchase refurbished from Samsung I would hope it might even be better than a new one. They then released the 941 but now don't seem to have a current model that plays SACD or DVD-A.

The Oppo has been recommended and I guess there are some Sony units that do SACD but in terms of mainstream players, the choice is slim. That can't help the formats grow. After all how hard can it be to put in one LSI to decode SACD and DVD-A in a unit?

Larry

I was hoping that the new Diana Krall and Elton John releases would be SACD, but no luck.

Do you mean Elton's "Captain & the Kid"? The 5.1 surround mix is being worked on. See below link....

http://www.eltonjohn.com/catk/msinterview.asp

Given Elton's other hi-rez releases, if a hi-rez version of "Captain & the Kid" is to be released, it will most likely be on SACD.

The idea that the hirez video formats should replace SACD and DVD-A is interesting but might also go further to kill the formats.

Hi Larry,

Yes, however the small niche market currently buying high resolution audio might nevertheless benefit by being able to continue to purchase high resolution audio on a new format with much greater mass market acceptance. This in turn could result in a much greater variety in content that is more reasonably priced.


Going from one area of technology where there are competitive and non compatible formats to another where the issue is the same isn't going to fix the problem. The jury is still out (and for a long time I would imagine) on which HD Video format is going to win so I would imagine releasing MCH in any of those formats is pretty much of a stab in the dark.

Agreed it is certainly unfortunate that we are being subjected to an other format war. However, if by "problem" you are referring to the fact that the current high resolution audio market is an expensive niche market with limited available offerings, it remains to be seen whether the new HD video formats will have greater mass appeal, thereby fixing the problem.

In an other forum I suggested that the new high resolution video formats might take some time to make a dent in the mass market. By way of analogy I sited the high resolution audio statistics posted earlier, pointing out their abysmal acceptance despite being introduced several years ago. A number of forum members responded stating that the analogy was flawed because there is much greater interest on the part of average consumers to view HD video on their new HDTVs. In addition, they pointed out that there is a government mandate to switch to digital television driving the demand for HDTVs, HD players and HD content. There is no similar mandate for high resolution audio driving its mass market acceptance.

So, if they are correct, it might not even matter that the average consumer is virtually oblivious to the high definition audio available on the new video formats. The mass market might be buying a music video for the great picture, but in doing so making the economics much more favorable while increasing variety. The niche audiophile market might be buying the same video just for its sound, but nevertheless benefiting overall. (Sort of a take-off from the beer commercial. Less filling!...Tastes great!)


Most audio releases are studio produced so don't have accompanying video. So for those albums, what videos should be shown? Random pictures related to the music, stills of the artist, psychedelic patterns a la WMP?

Works for me. :D
The point is while the manufacturing costs would be the same, the production costs of an audio only high definition DVD would be much less than a video. Consequently, over time it is not unreasonable to expect a tiered pricing structure between HD music videos and audio only high definition DVDs.

Larry

I can only hope you're right (but if "mainstream" music production continues with its hyper-compressed, no dynamic range path to sonic hell, then I'll continue to enjoy the current SACD and DVD-A offerings in classical music--of which there are more than I can afford to buy or have time to listen to).

Agreed. I hope they keep on churning out hirez audio releases, either on SACD or DVD-A. And if they do, I will keep buying. I guess if the music industry really didn't believe in high quality music, why do they bother investing so much money and time in the original recording, only to produce some inferior final product like red book CD or even worse, 128K AAC.

As usual it's all about marketing and as usual the marketing has failed. It seems the marketing guys never talk to the tech guys or vice versa. The end result is the normal consumer is confused and votes with their wallet while aficionados like people who read these boards are frustrated.

Well then load up now because if neither Blue ray now HD-DVD can play DVD-A, how long will the discs be available? Are they actually still selling DVD players that can also play DVD-A? Are the number of such models dropping off? I don't know, but since they pretty much quit putting out new titles on DVD-A (with Love and a few others as exceptions), what incentive is there to manufacture the players? I have about 12 DVD-A discs which I play on my Panny S-97 DVD/ DVD-A player. If the players are getting rare, then I'll be reluctant to buy more discs from the limited selection that is out there because what do you do if your player blows up? They should make the HD-DVD and Blue Ray players play DVD-A and SACD. That would help sell the players and keep the hi-rez audio formats alive. It's just a matter of including the requisite software in the players I read elsewhere here.
As to what video you would put on a hi-rez audio disc playing on HD-DVD or Blue Ray, my initial thought was that you would put very little video on it- just use the massive storage capacity of the two hi def video formats to put a LOT of hi-res music on. But that would be hard to sell- do you really want 10 Beatles albums on a disc or 10 Ricky Nelson albums or Waylon or Willie albums? It's the copyrighted content you are paying for, not the storage capacity, so 10 albums on one disc would always be $80 or so. Maybe you sell 3 albums to a disc, hi-rez audio- plus a movie in Hi-def. You try to figure out what a buyer of 3 Elvis albums would like to see as a hi-def movie to go with them elsewhere on the disc. Maybe "Bullet" or "Easy Rider"- or even one of his movies (gasp). How is that for a suggestion? You put three Joan Baez albums in hi-rez on a disc and then put a video of a live concert she did elsewhere on the disc in hi-def. The audiophile wants the original audio album, but in hi-rez audio- and then he is willing to see and hear a live concert of Baez too. Three of the original Otis Redding albums- but now in hi-rez, plus a live concert he did as video and audio. Three Mozart "CDs" - but now in hi-rez audio, plus a live concert of the London Philharmonic Orchestra performing some other Mozart material in hi-def video. I think this idea deserves consideration by the "record companies".
I can only hope you're right (but if "mainstream" music production continues with its hyper-compressed, no dynamic range path to sonic hell, then I'll continue to enjoy the current SACD and DVD-A offerings in classical music--of which there are more than I can afford to buy or have time to listen to).

Well, I have two DVD-A capable players and I am "loading up" as fast as finances allow for discs. And there are still a fair number of "universal" players out there (Cambridge Audio, NAD and Arcam each started out by committing to DVD-A and did not back SACD for several years. Now, each of them makes a "universal" player. Denon, Yamaha, Marantz and Pioneer, among others, continue to make them as well, so I'm not worried if my player blows up)

The New Panasonic Blu-Ray player (DMPBD10) does 5.1 DVD-Audio right now.

The Panasonic will also play back discs recorded with MP3 and JPEG files. And it is the only Blu-ray player that currently offers DVD-Audio playback.

http://www.ultimateavmag.com/hddiscplayers/1106panasdmpbd10/

I am sure that when Denon, Marantz, etc, come out with their high end HD players, DVD-A capability (and maybe even SACD) will be in the spec. It can't cost that much to add DVD-Audio capability to a 7.1 HD-DVD player.

Hopefully, other new models will as well. (Except, of course, for those from Sony)

Particularly as a Dolby TrueHD decoder can decode MLP (they're basically the same thing). So no extra decoder licensing cost there...

You are sure they will. Boy, you don't know how venal and ugly these guys can be! You sell new hardware by obsoleting the old hardware. How? You stop producing the software for the old hardware. Surely they have never done such a thing, right? Try this: You sell CD players by stopping the manufacture of LPs. Want to buy recorded music? Buy a CD player and then buy lousy, cold, tinny-sounding CDs at twice the price of an LP to play on it. You cause everyone to toss his Kodak 110 camera by stopping the production of the 110 film it uses. You also stop producing the "K" batteries it needs. (this was long before digital cameras came out). I am not AT ALL confident that the big manufacturers will make their HI-DEF DVD players capable of playing DVD-A and SACD. They will be weighing whether they can make more money by 1) trying to introduce a new, incompatible hi-rez audio standard to play on those players or by 2) selling more HD players faster by making them backward compatable with DVD-A and maybe SACD. The interests of the consumers who in good faith buy their products is the last thing on their minds!- for most of them, anyway. They are technically brilliant and morally defective.
It is great to hear about the Panny Blu-Ray that plays DVD-A now. I bought a Panny S-97 SD DVD/ DVD-A player in late 2005 and have never regretted it at all. Came with an HDMI cable too. So three cheers for Panasonic! They seem to be in the hi-rez lover's corner. If it is great on all the other parameters, I'll bet it will be a big seller. DVD-A may make it after all. I think we can say now that the future of DVD-A may well hinge on how many hi-def players follow Panasonic's lead here.
I hope WWW.audioholics.com does a shoot-out between hi-def players when a few more of them appear. One of their shoot-outs of SD DVD players (they did several- you can find them on their site) is what made me decide on the S-97. A shoot-out is a comparison on MANY technical parameters of some piece of equipment- 15 different DVD players or 12 receivers, e.g. You wind up with a big table with players across the top and parameters down the side. Then you see red or yellow or green all over this table showing how the competing products did. They will no doubt do a shoot-out on 7.1 receivers with HDMI before long as several came out from July to Oct., 2006.
The New Panasonic Blu-Ray player (DMPBD10) does 5.1 DVD-Audio right now.



http://www.ultimateavmag.com/hddiscplayers/1106panasdmpbd10/

I am sure that when Denon, Marantz, etc, come out with their high end HD players, DVD-A capability (and maybe even SACD) will be in the spec. It can't cost that much to add DVD-Audio capability to a 7.1 HD-DVD player.

Hopefully, other new models will as well. (Except, of course, for those from Sony)

No, believe me. I "KNOW" how cut throat they are. However, it's the label guys who really shafted the hardware guys with DVD-A and SACD. Those that made the players came through. I never understood how they could not have put more pressure on the software folks to get more discs out. But that's "last years news".

I am only HOPING that I'm sure that DVD-A will stay in the spec, if only because it's not that big of a deal to add to a DVD player. In this manner, DVD-A has a better chance of "extension" than SACD, since Sony is in the mix with that one.

I just read a non-technical review of the Panny DMP-BD10 player at www.hometheaterforum.com. Search there for "High-Def player- Blu-Ray owners". and look for the review by Ben Williams. He has lots of good pix of it too. Then you see a forum on it at least 12 pp. long. He likes it!! $1300 is a lot of dough for a format that could be gone in a couple years (Blu-Ray), but this player otw looks good.

No, believe me. I "KNOW" how cut throat they are. However, it's the label guys who really shafted the hardware guys with DVD-A and SACD. Those that made the players came through. I never understood how they could not have put more pressure on the software folks to get more discs out. But that's "last years news".

I am only HOPING that I'm sure that DVD-A will stay in the spec, if only because it's not that big of a deal to add to a DVD player. In this manner, DVD-A has a better chance of "extension" than SACD, since Sony is in the mix with that one.

Hi Tom,

I agree and I would think that anyone objectively reviewing the statistics would have a difficult time making a serious case that these formats are making a comeback. (Your use of the term "comeback" is being extremely kind, since these formats have never demonstrated any meaningful level of adoption from a mass market point of view.)

Here’s the year-end 2005 production statistics of both high definition audio only discs in comparison with the entire mass music market: (Source RIAA)

DVD audio:--------------------------------- .5 million discs
SACD:--------------------------------------- .5 million discs
All other music media:--------------1,301.8 million units

Perhaps it would be better for all consumers (including audiophiles) if these high definition audio only formats were absorbed by a high definition DVD format. They are currently such a niche market that the pricing is so inflated that their street prices are about the same as the new high definition video DVDs. Personally, with pricing being about the same, and audio quality the same, I'd much rather see and hear the performers.

For those audiophiles that insist that critical listening can't be done with that nasty, distracting video, I suggest that they close their eyes, or turn off their displays. ;)

Larry

I agree. SACD and DVD-A are dead formats soon (within 3 years) to be totally eclipsed by Dolby HD and others of the hi-res movie soundtrack formats or perhaps even more likely the same set of formats delivered on-demand over cable or satellite.

I work at a tech company and am one of maybe five of 300 that have either SACD or DVD-A. Others may have it, but don't know it - an even sadder situation. These are pretty well-off, highly educated folks that LOVE their portable music, all have home theaters, and care not a whit for hi-res audio. Some have fully open sourced media streaming networks for audio and video and terrabytes of storage...and no hi-res audio. That's exhibit A.

Exhibit B is that of the dozens of kids that I coach in soccer every fall, one, my daughter, buys albums. ALL of the others have iTunes accounts. Or as a friend asked, "You bought your daughter an album? Why not an iTunes gift card? She'll never listen to an album..."

Exhibit C is that downloadable ringtones is the fastest growing music industry segment and already a multi-billion dollar market. Music from phones through OEM earbuds is arguably the worst form of music playback ever created. Oh, and in a Jan 1, 2007 news story, the $2B home audio equipment (not portable or hybrid) industry shrank 10% in 2006.

So, if the baby boomers don't care about hi-res audio (but have no issue with a $4K flat panel HDTV), and the new power purchasing target market doesn't lesten to albums and is making dowloadable ringtones a multi-billion dollar market, well that means the DVD-A and SACD formats are dead.

Just my .02 cents.

I'm pretty certain DVD-A was chosen for DVD-V compatibility. It can offer surround to a wider audience.

Exactly which is why I am disappointed that DVD - A didn't thrive. Even if someone buying this didn't want, or wasn't ready for the HR MC tracks, the format is backwards compatible with DVD - V, where some SACDs simply do not play unless they are hybrids...

Mark

Didn't bother to read the whole thread... sorry! There is a BIG difference in how the advanced audio is implemented in HD-DVD and Blu-Ray.

DVD-Audio supports only 2 channels of 24 bit/192 kHz audio. HD-DVD and Blu-Ray support 6 (some reports for Blu-Ray say 8, but I cannot confirm this).

DVD-Audio and SA-CD support 6 channels. HD-DVD and Blu-Ray support 8.

Depending on space requirements, the studio can choose raw LPCM, DTS MA lossless, or Dolby TrueHD lossless to encode their audio masters. All three have the same channel and resoluton specs.

The Legends of Jazz Blu-Ray disc sounds phenomenal and it's 6 channel Dolby TrueHD in 24 bit audio. The sampling rate, I don't know yet.

Dan

Hardly a big difference, then... And are you sure the formats support 8-channel 192kHz? Dolby's own TrueHD site says only 96kHz.

I'm not aware of any BD/HD DVD discs that are more than 48kHz yet, by the way. I suspect your disc is 48kHz.

The 24 bits are more important that the sampling rate, but I've not seen anything that indicates that MCH Dolby TrueHD is more than 96khz (it is based on on the MLP process used in DVD-A).

What disappoints me is a release like the Eagles Live in Melbourne. The picture in is in hi-def, but the MCH is plain old DTS. I would "double-dip" concert DVDs in hi-res MCH audio, but NOT for simply hi-res PQ. I don't really need to see the wrinkles on Joe Walsh's face that much more clearly.

I don't have the numbers in front of me, but could a dual layer DVD hold a MLP 5.1 track as well as full DVD-Video? The Love DVD-A has no video to speak of and even that has to go to two layers.

If not then you might be resigned to seeing Joe Walshes' wrinkles as hires still photos :)

ANY concert DVD that is re-released (assuming the master audio is still available) can be released in HD DVD or Blu-Ray with a hi-res audio track, IF the studio wants to do so. I'd held off on buying the Eagles in Melbourne because I'd heard it would be released in hi-def video (and, I presumed, wrongly, hi-res audio MCH). If all I'm going to get from the hi-def version is a better picture, then I'll take the cheaper SD DVD with the identical MCH audio soundtrack.

I don't have the numbers in front of me, but could a dual layer DVD hold a MLP 5.1 track as well as full DVD-Video? The Love DVD-A has no video to speak of and even that has to go to two layers.

You can't have video accompanied with MLP audio, but you can certainly have separate DVD-Video video clips, with DD, DTS or 2-ch PCM. {DVD-V could actually do 5.1-channel 48/16 PCM, but player support is limited}.

The most impressive album I've seen so far in terms of amount of content is Seal's "Best 1991-2004" disc, which has 14 original tracks in 88/24 Mch, 13 acoustic tracks in 44/24 Mch, plus the DVD-V compatible versions of both, plus 10 music videos in DD 5.1, all on one disc. It saves some space by offering DD 2.0 instead of PCM 2.0 in the DVD-Video zone.

A lot of discs seem to waste a lot of space providing the "still" video content for the DVD-V part - the video seems to be taking about 2Mbit/s (more than the audio it's accompanying), even though it's not really doing anything.

A regular DVD-A cannot have an MLP with video, but there is no reason HD DVD and/or Blu-Ray cannot have hi-res audio with hi-def video, and that is what is so disappointing about the Eagles' release. I have a number of concert/music video DVDs (not dozens, but more than 20), along with about 100 movie DVDs and a few TV show DVDs. I plan to spend a bit more on the HD gear (display/player/possibly video processor) to maximize PQ with my current collection to avoid double dipping. On the audio side, though, I'm prepared to double dip for hi-res audio (have already done so with a number of SACDs and DVD-As) BUT concert/music video DVDs are the last thing I want to spend money on double-dipping ONLY for a better PQ. I have a number of films I'd "upgrade" for that reason well before any concert DVDs.

Are there any HD/BD discs that actually have proper hi-res audio yet at all? By which I mean 96kHz/24-bit? Or are they just bog-standard 48/16?

(I ask partly for the clarification of others - lots of people seem to assume Dolby TrueHD implicitly means "high-definition audio", when it could actually just be CD-quality).

As far as I know, TrueHD is at least 24/48 (and can be 96--it's basically MLP with extra channels). DTS-HDMA (or whatever they call it) should be the same.

Also, some BD have been released with uncompressed 5.1 LPCM soundtracks that are said to be bit for bit identical to the masters, so unless the film audio masters are lossy, I'd say that the uncompressed soundtracks represent hi-res audio.

Are there any HD/BD discs that actually have proper hi-res audio yet at all? By which I mean 96kHz/24-bit? Or are they just bog-standard 48/16?Unless there are some concert/music titles at 96/24, movie releases are 48/16 or 48/24. The latter is the highest resolution that movies are mixed in at the studio level. (I ask partly for the clarification of others - lots of people seem to assume Dolby TrueHD implicitly means "high-definition audio", when it could actually just be CD-quality).Not an unreasonable assumption, considering the name of the codec. As you already know, it's just a bit-for-bit copy of the encoding master, irrespective of resolution. Can't expect any more than that.

Sanjay

As far as I know, TrueHD is at least 24/48 (and can be 96--it's basically MLP with extra channels). DTS-HDMA (or whatever they call it) should be the same.

Also, some BD have been released with uncompressed 5.1 LPCM soundtracks that are said to be bit for bit identical to the masters, so unless the film audio masters are lossy, I'd say that the uncompressed soundtracks represent hi-res audio.

Is that necessarily true? CD's are uncompressed but it would be hard to say CD quality is Hires audio. I think it depends on the bit rate and sampling rate of the LPCM tracks. I think it would have to be 96 kHz/24-bit to be considered hi-res.

Larry

Is that necessarily true? CD's are uncompressed but it would be hard to say CD quality is Hires audio. I think it depends on the bit rate and sampling rate of the LPCM tracks. I think it would have to be 96 kHz/24-bit to be considered hi-res.

LarryI would consider uncompressed, lossless, CD-quality audio as an improvement over lossy DD or DTS, though I would not consider it hi-res audio. However, as long as it is 24 bit, I consider it hi-res (and, I believe, so does the DVD-Audio forum--I believe 20 bit was the initial DVD-A standard). The sample rate is less important than bit depth for PCM hi-res audio.

I would consider uncompressed, lossless, CD-quality audio as an improvement over lossy DD or DTS, though I would not consider it hi-res audio. However, as long as it is 24 bit, I consider it hi-res (and, I believe, so does the DVD-Audio forum--I believe 20 bit was the initial DVD-A standard). The sample rate is less important than bit depth for PCM hi-res audio.

Isn't there something in the Nyquist-Shannon sampling theory paper that you need to sample at least 2x the highest frequency in order to obtain reasonable representation of a waveform. So for CD it was 44.1Kz, which means they expected the frequency of music to top out at about 22.05Khz. So I would agree - keep the sampling rate at least that but in order not to flatten out the peaks, increase the depth to allow for more discrete value of each sample.

As an "outsider" who has never tried SACD or DVD-A, I think one thing that does not help these formats is that they are not "plug and play". By that I mean you have to know how to set your system up to listen to the darned thing. Nobody wants to hook up 6 analog cables, or get into doing bass management on the player instead of the receiver, or get into the issue of how bass level bias changes depending on how you are doing what. It is a pain in the butt. People just want to stick in a disc and listen. Just my 2 cents.

That's one reason that maybe the new HD audio formats could do better: if you are set up for HT, you are set up to listen to this new audio format. I would wager that the most people who have multichannel systems have it because of HT. Multi-channel audio would then be an effortless icing on the cake.

The hook-up isn't a problem of the format - it was that encrypted digital links didn't exist 7 years ago.

Now they do, you can use them. You can use Denon Link, i.Link or HDMI for a single-wire hook-up for both SACD and DVD-Audio. No need to use multiple analogue cables any more, or perform bass management in the player.

Get with the times. ;)

That's why DVD-Audio and SACD are likely to catch on a bit more now; they are much more plug-and-play than they were a few years ago.

As an "outsider" who has never tried SACD or DVD-A, I think one thing that does not help these formats is that they are not "plug and play". By that I mean you have to know how to set your system up to listen to the darned thing. Nobody wants to hook up 6 analog cables, or get into doing bass management on the player instead of the receiver, or get into the issue of how bass level bias changes depending on how you are doing what. It is a pain in the butt. People just want to stick in a disc and listen. Just my 2 cents.

That's one reason that maybe the new HD audio formats could do better: if you are set up for HT, you are set up to listen to this new audio format. I would wager that the most people who have multichannel systems have it because of HT. Multi-channel audio would then be an effortless icing on the cake.

Hmmm....never understood that attitude. It's only a few more cables afterall.

The hook-up isn't a problem of the format - it was that encrypted digital links didn't exist 7 years ago.

Now they do, you can use them. You can use Denon Link, i.Link or HDMI for a single-wire hook-up for both SACD and DVD-Audio. No need to use multiple analogue cables any more, or perform bass management in the player.

Get with the times. ;)

That's why DVD-Audio and SACD are likely to catch on a bit more now; they are much more plug-and-play than they were a few years ago.

Alas there might not be any content to purchase though :( Plus the digital connection options are somewhat expensive

The hook-up isn't a problem of the format - it was that encrypted digital links didn't exist 7 years ago.

Now they do, you can use them. You can use Denon Link, i.Link or HDMI for a single-wire hook-up for both SACD and DVD-Audio. No need to use multiple analogue cables any more, or perform bass management in the player.

Get with the times. ;)

That's why DVD-Audio and SACD are likely to catch on a bit more now; they are much more plug-and-play than they were a few years ago.

I'm not so sure. If the F'n companies had allowed this from the start, hi-res audio would probably have taken off much better from the get-go. I fear it's almost too late for significant acceptance now, especially with Sony carding only about BD and the PS3.

Greg

Hmmm....never understood that attitude. It's only a few more cables afterall.

That's because we're enthusiats.

Consumers feel (and not without justification) that they've already hooked up plenty of cables. Even with HDMI you still have to know what you're doing (i.e adjusting video resolution to enable enough audio BW, being aware of the LFE bias issues, etc. etc.) Consumers feel that an entertainment technology should serve THEM, not make them jump through hoops.

Consumers feel (and not without justification) that they've already hooked up plenty of cables. Even with HDMI you still have to know what you're doing (i.e adjusting video resolution to enable enough audio BW, being aware of the LFE bias issues, etc. etc.) Consumers feel that an entertainment technology should serve THEM, not make them jump through hoops.

Excellent point! I think that's a significant reason why many people who have a surround sound system, and a player with DVD-Audio and/or SACD capability, haven't tried these formats. Most players, especially entry level, require a 5.1 analog connection for DVD-Audio or SACD. If the "newbie" decides to pick up the required cables at his local BB or CC, the helpful salesman will likely direct him to the most expensive possible Monster product :eek: Then (to get everything right) he must go into the speaker setup menu on the player, and set the functions that he struggled with on the receiver (or maybe someone else did for him), except the speaker setup functions on the player aren't as complete or well-designed as the corresponding ones on the receiver. Then he must set up the player to find the actual SACD or DVD-audio area of the disk, rather than the CD or DVD-video area, and also (in many cases) find the multi-channel rather than the two-channel high-res area. As much fun as root canal work to the average user.

Maybe, the story will be different some years in the future (+5? +10?), because most surround-sound home theater setups will include a high-def (blue-ray, HD-DVD or both) player, that will play discs with TrueHD audio content without any fuss. And there will be a large selection of music-only or music-oriented TrueHD discs. Well, we can hope. For those of us with collections of "legacy" DVD-A and SACD disks, we will still be able to hook up our old "universal" player to our shiny new receiver. Umm, probably :eek:

That's because we're enthusiats.

Consumers feel (and not without justification) that they've already hooked up plenty of cables. Even with HDMI you still have to know what you're doing (i.e adjusting video resolution to enable enough audio BW, being aware of the LFE bias issues, etc. etc.) Consumers feel that an entertainment technology should serve THEM, not make them jump through hoops.

I just went through this recently. And also connected up a sub. So I had to patch in 6 cables for the DVD-A player and another for the sub. Plus I also patched in another video device with component video out so that meant instead of the DVD player being connected directly to the projector, it now had to go into the AVR and the projector connected to the AVR.

While the wiring wasn't complex, it was just a pain getting in behind all this gear and working in confined spaces.

My first DVD-A to play was Love and I discovered I was missing the centre channel. Doing channel checks on the AVR were okay so the speakers were all connected. But doing channel checks on the DVD-A player showed the center channel was silent. What had happened during all this wiring was the connection from the DVD player eo the AVR has worked loose.

It all works fine now but I can imagine how an average home user might find all of this somewhat daunting, just to get the benefits of MLP or DSD (SACD) sound over DD or DTS 5.1.

But I am glad I did it :)


Larry

I do have a Denon AVR-4306 and a Denon DVD-3930.

SACD and DVD-Audio works fine for me.

All conected with one cable.

Denen Link 3th genaration.

Both formats do sound mutch better than cd.

i do hope the will release more music soon on both formats.
Blueray and HD-DVD will not sound better than above formats.

only 2 channels can be added extra on those new formats.
not that much value for me.