sony "deletes" sacd [Text View]

oblio98

12-16-06, 07:05 PM

ematcion

12-17-06, 12:03 AM

If Sony were still supporting SACD, there would be new releases on their website. Take a peek, it has not been updated for two years.

http://www.sonymusic.com/sacd/

I think that website has been abandoned years ago.

While certainly not as prolific in terms of releases as Telarc or some other smaller labels, Sony did release a couple of titles just 3 months ago....Jay Goldberg and Danny Elfman. These are single inventory hybrid SACDs. The music may not be to your taste, but the SACDs are out there.

As for Genesis SACDs not being released here in the States....the band is signed to a DVD-A supporting label here. No way of getting around that fact.

bionicjay

12-17-06, 01:08 AM

look like my local best buy that had sacds last week no longer has them as well.

i got a similar answer from a best buy manager - "that format was recalled we had to send our discs back"

[SS]Shooter

12-17-06, 02:02 AM

Sony is still supporting this format and basically all of their products support it.

Recent Announcement:
SACD Software Production Enhanced - Good news for Sony is that a major new cutting master format has simplified and sped up the production of SACDs around the world, while significantly decreasing costs in the mastering process. Sony and Philips engineers have developed the new Unified Cutting Master Format (UCMF) as a file-based cutting master format which is similar to DDP used for CDs. Previously, SACD production has been a tape-based process, but the new system is not media-dependent, so cutting masters can be created, stored and transported as digital files over a network and archived to optical disc.

Sony disc replication factories in Austria, Japan, and Terra Haute, Indiana are now UCMF-ready, as well as production studios in New York and Hong Kong. Sony has worked with a number of specialist SACD production studios in the development of UCMF, including BK Audio in the Netherlands. Its owner Bastiaan Kuijt explained: "Burning a SACD cutting master to a DVD is much quicker and more convenient than with tape. With UCMF, managing and archiving the master becomes simple and cheap." The introduction of UCMF indicates that Sony still has an ongoing commitment to Super Audio CD, even though it has not recently been releasing many SACDs on its own labels, except for the Living Stereo 3-channel series. Several recent Sony SACD players have been introduced at a wide range of price levels, targeting the large CD player market.

http://www.audaud.com/article.php?ArticleID=2219

ematcion

12-17-06, 06:04 AM

Oh, Sony announced last week that it has a new series of RCA Living Stereo SACDs ready for January 2007 release.

Kal Rubinson

12-17-06, 10:46 AM

look like my local best buy that had sacds last week no longer has them as well.

i got a similar answer from a best buy manager - "that format was recalled we had to send our discs back"Recalled by BB, not Sony.

Eric_Connelly

12-17-06, 02:01 PM

Is this of all BB's?

The one in Farmington Hills Michigan and Novi Michigan both had multiple rows of SACD's and DVD-A's in the past few months. All the others gave me the "huh" look when I asked for them.

I went back last night to pick up Aerosmith's O'Yeah on SACD and the multiple rows had shrunk to 2 small vertical rows with most everything missing. There were almost all DVD-A's and I did have to search for that copy of Aerosmith but thankfully it was still there and we bought it.

This is all within a weeks time. We saw it there last Tuesday and decided last night to pick it up after checking out some reviews.

Steve Job's is the devil :D

Chris Gerhard

12-17-06, 05:07 PM

Sony created a wonderful format, brought it up to speed, then pulled the legs out from under it. Many of us who invested in SACDs and SACD playback are frustrated at Sony's lack of support for those of us who love the format.

The fact that people think a game console is going to "save" SACD is too funny. I would venture to say that the majority of people who actually get an PS3 will never put an SACD into their units...............ever.

If Sony were still supporting SACD, there would be new releases on their website. Take a peek, it has not been updated for two years.

http://www.sonymusic.com/sacd/

Their new BluRay players do not support SACD.

If anyone responds about the "4000+ SACDs" listed at SA-CD.net, I am going to puke, as many are duplicates, out of print, not sold in the USA, and titles that would not even sell if they were in a cutout bin, at least in the USA.

Yes, there are the upcoming Genesis SACDs, and that is great. However, in the USA, they won't be SACDs. UMG was set to release 150 titles in 2005, and released maybe 5. (They did import the Moody Blues titles from Europe, but find them in a store)

At the total height of SACD's public awareness (the release of DSOTM, the freebie SACD disc in Rolling Stone Magazine), internal Sony decisions curtailed the production of Sony labeled SACDs to a trickle.

I feel no remorse for having ill-will towards Sony with regards to SACD......

:-jon

Sony lost staggering sums on SACD and gave up, it isn't complicated. Would you expect Sony to continue to lose enormous sums every year supporting a format the public doesn't want and the artists want duplicate or triplicate royalties if used? Sony hopes to make money on Blu-ray and is working on that format. As much as I love SACD, it bombed big time. The RIAA sales summary from 2005 indicates half million sold total.

I have no ill will and will continue to play the nearly 200 I own, mostly titles I love and most were made very well. I sure wished everybody else agreed and bought as many. Other companies continue to release titles and some are available for import. I don't expect to purchase many more but I hope to find a few.

Chris

oblio98

12-17-06, 06:11 PM

Sony lost staggering sums on SACD and gave up, it isn't complicated. Would you expect Sony to continue to lose enormous sums every year supporting a format the public doesn't want and the artists want duplicate or triplicate royalties if used? Sony hopes to make money on Blu-ray and is working on that format. As much as I love SACD, it bombed big time. The RIAA sales summary from 2005 indicates half million sold total.

I have no ill will and will continue to play the nearly 200 I own, mostly titles I love and most were made very well. I sure wished everybody else agreed and bought as many. Other companies continue to release titles and some are available for import. I don't expect to purchase many more but I hope to find a few.

Chris

Chris,

Your tireless defense of Sony with regards to SACD is admirable, but misplaced. You cannot have people, on one hand, claim that "SACD is still alive and well, check out the 4000+ titles available on SA-CD.net", while at the same time give the creator a "mulligan" for virtually giving up on the format because "nobody wants it" and "they lost staggering sums of money" on it.

If a company creates a product, puts it out to market, gets people to buy it, buy hardware, pays other companies to create product in their format, uses it's infulence to cause a major label to change a high profile release (DSOTM) from a competiting format to their format, pays to have a sample product inserted free in a major publication, then, a month later virually withdraws from producing that product, cancelling titles that they previously were promoting - to me that is nothing more than abuse of the buying public.

If they had used the money they spent on "Enchanced Stereo" DualDiscs or Redbook CD rootkits to instead further release DESIRABLE HIGH PROFILE titles that generated the average music lover to seek out SACD, then I would feel less animocity towards them.

The SACD is a perfect delivery package that should have become more popular. There should have been players in cars out of Detroit, Japan & Europe, there should have been big titles released as Hybrid SACD only. You should not be able to FIND a redbook DSOTM in a store today, the SACD should be the only disc version available.

Putting product in peoples hands will sell hardware. Putting decks in peoples cars will sell software. (Where would XM and SIRIUS be today without the radios coming installed in cars?) There are correct ways to do things, and there are wrong ways. If you come out with a product, you have to follow through. The examples are too many to list.

If you feel bad that Sony "lost staggering sums of money" on SACD, well, it's their own fault really. You and I did our part, we bought the stuff. We searched hard for it. We love it.

"Sony - No Baloney?"

I think the "no" does not apply in the case of SACD.

lchiu7

12-17-06, 09:59 PM

..

The SACD is a perfect delivery package that should have become more popular. There should have been players in cars out of Detroit, Japan & Europe, there should have been big titles released as Hybrid SACD only. You should not be able to FIND a redbook DSOTM in a store today, the SACD should be the only disc version available.
...

That is a comment worth discussing. If we look at SACD and DVD-A, they both offered a high resolution audio format together with (optional) 5.1 sound. The SACD was universally playable - as 5.1 in a SACD player and as a CD in a CD player. The DVD-A was almost as universal except that it could be played on DVD-V and DVD-A players, both with 5.1 sound. As we all know, you cannot get 5.1 sound off a SACD without a SACD player.

So considering ubiquity, one could argue that DVD players are almost as common in homes as CD players. For portable players and in cars, I think CD players far outnumber DVD players and anyway, these days portable music has pretty much been taken over my MP3 etc.

This leads to the next point when we think of Sony and their attempts to stop copying. Their root kit adventure signals just how much they were concerned about illegal copying of their music.

I haven't tried but I suspect it would be relatively easy to rip the CD layer of a SACD to MP3 and put onto your iPod or whatever. However it's not so easy to rip the DD or DTS track off a DVD-A and move to that to a portable player. While the tools are free, the process is not straightforward.

So you would think Sony would have had more to gain supporting DVD-A than come up with DSD format which is in fact easier to rip.

I can play and purchase both formats but like most folks, believe that the formats are dying, alas.

My views anyway

Larry

KMO

12-18-06, 02:43 AM

I don't believe they'll die quite yet. Doesn't make any sense - there's no replacement. Quadraphonic LPs died because they were an exposed technology, that involved extra speakers that would be used for no other formats. That's not the case any more.

The number of homes with surround speaker set-ups is increasing, because of film DVDs, and cheap home-theatre-in-a-box systems. And even those cheap systems can play the video zone of DVD-As, and a number of Sony's HTIBs can play SACD. Multichannel music, especially through DVD-Audio, is something accessible to more and more people. It's increasingly worthwhile to offer surround versions.

My view may be a little warped, of course, because I've only just really discovered the formats this year :) It's just taking off, you see... Consumer equipment's much more capable now than it was last time I upgraded in 2000.

Chris Gerhard

12-18-06, 06:55 AM

Chris,

Your tireless defense of Sony with regards to SACD is admirable, but misplaced. You cannot have people, on one hand, claim that "SACD is still alive and well, check out the 4000+ titles available on SA-CD.net", while at the same time give the creator a "mulligan" for virtually giving up on the format because "nobody wants it" and "they lost staggering sums of money" on it.

If a company creates a product, puts it out to market, gets people to buy it, buy hardware, pays other companies to create product in their format, uses it's infulence to cause a major label to change a high profile release (DSOTM) from a competiting format to their format, pays to have a sample product inserted free in a major publication, then, a month later virually withdraws from producing that product, cancelling titles that they previously were promoting - to me that is nothing more than abuse of the buying public.

If they had used the money they spent on "Enchanced Stereo" DualDiscs or Redbook CD rootkits to instead further release DESIRABLE HIGH PROFILE titles that generated the average music lover to seek out SACD, then I would feel less animocity towards them.

The SACD is a perfect delivery package that should have become more popular. There should have been players in cars out of Detroit, Japan & Europe, there should have been big titles released as Hybrid SACD only. You should not be able to FIND a redbook DSOTM in a store today, the SACD should be the only disc version available.

Putting product in peoples hands will sell hardware. Putting decks in peoples cars will sell software. (Where would XM and SIRIUS be today without the radios coming installed in cars?) There are correct ways to do things, and there are wrong ways. If you come out with a product, you have to follow through. The examples are too many to list.

If you feel bad that Sony "lost staggering sums of money" on SACD, well, it's their own fault really. You and I did our part, we bought the stuff. We searched hard for it. We love it.

"Sony - No Baloney?"

I think the "no" does not apply in the case of SACD.

There are over 4,000 SACD releases and Sony did lose a lot of money developing, promoting and trying to sell SACD. I don't guess I understand your points. If you think Sony should have tried longer and continued to lose money, of course you are entitled to your opinion. The decision had to be that there was no end in sight to the losses and other opportunities looked better. I don't know what would have happened if Sony had continued with attempts to reach the mass market. I believe it would have failed miserably and Sony would have looked even more foolish than with the course they chose.

Chris

jeffrey r

12-18-06, 10:17 AM

The SACD was universally playable - as 5.1 in a SACD player and as a CD in a CD player. Larry

Well, not 100% correct. Let's not forget that Sony, in their infinite wisdom, produced single-layer SACD's at first, playable only in SACD players. Toys In the Attic, The Stranger, Tapestry, Boston, James Taylor, Jeff Beck, lots of classical, etc.--all single-layer. It was not until later that hybrids were released.

Now, of course, many of these early single-layer Sony SACD's stand as some of the finer ones released, but it was typical Sony short-sightedness that caused them to be released as single-layer in the first place.

zacster

12-18-06, 02:52 PM

lchiu7

12-18-06, 04:14 PM

Well, not 100% correct. Let's not forget that Sony, in their infinite wisdom, produced single-layer SACD's at first, playable only in SACD players. Toys In the Attic, The Stranger, Tapestry, Boston, James Taylor, Jeff Beck, lots of classical, etc.--all single-layer. It was not until later that hybrids were released.

Now, of course, many of these early single-layer Sony SACD's stand as some of the finer ones released, but it was typical Sony short-sightedness that caused them to be released as single-layer in the first place.

I didn't know that since I got into MCH relatively late. That only serves to reinforce how stupid Sony can be at times. I like Sony gear but what they do to the marketplace in the goal of dominance is often quite naive and stupid.

lchiu7

12-18-06, 04:17 PM

FWIW, I was in J&R in NYC the other day and I only could find DVD-A, there were no SACDs in sight. I was surprised that the clerk even knew what I was talking about when I asked. The remaining selection of DVD-A was also pitiful.

I did pick up the "Enhanced" Love disk, but I haven't popped it into the player yet as I haven't hooked up my rear speakers.

In any case, I'm not surprised hi-rez died. Even though I was interested in it a few years back, it never caught on with me. If they didn't get me, they're not going to get your average Joe.

I would second that. As a hifi enthusiast I was aware of SACD and DVD-A when they were released but never bothered to venture into it since I thought I would have to upgrade my HT system (which was basically a DD5.1 setup).

Had I done the research and realised then that I could enjoy the multichannel aspect of the format (at least on DVD-A) with existing equipment I might have upgraded a bit earlier so I could listen to even the DD5.1 tracks.

I can imagine how the average consumer would look at MCH audio and not really understand it all and the typical salesperson in a store would probably not be that helpful either

Larry

tiggers

12-19-06, 01:56 AM

I've been following HT (and recently Hi-res music) for about 2 years now. Not as long as otherse here. But from my perspective it seems to me that Sony:

1. Tried to make SACD a high-end, audiophile product first.
2. Made the technology to play SACD propriety. A Sony 'exclusive'.
3. Charged high license fees for anyone else who wanted it in their hardware.

Not until this last year have I seen more lower priced DVD players that also support DVDA and/or SACD. I'm thinking that Sony has really lowered the price on the licensing for the hardware. It may not have all the marketing pizazz as when it was first introduced, but at least now it is making it's way more into the mainstream where it is more visible.

My 2cents.

hotguy8289

12-19-06, 02:31 AM

Oblio98, Of course you are absolutely right on....again. I find it amazing that the music division of Sony was finished with SACD 2 years ago, yet the electronics division really began pushing their SACD players (including several budget models), in the last 18 months. I personally boycott this brand.

ematcion

12-19-06, 04:07 AM

I find it amazing that the music division of Sony was finished with SACD 2 years ago, yet the electronics division really began pushing their SACD players (including several budget models), in the last 18 months.

Don't know where this notion came from....the last Sony SACD release was 2 months (Danny Elfman). Not to mention the just announced Living Stereo SACDs being released next month.

jayna_95

12-19-06, 11:00 AM

2. Made the technology to play SACD propriety. A Sony 'exclusive'.

This has always been the problem with Sony - they have delusions of grandeur that belie their position as a purveyor of mass-market goods. I refuse to buy their products as well.

dotheDVDeed

12-19-06, 02:11 PM

I thought Sony had bought Columbia Records, Epic, etc. How come these artists haven't been reissued on SACD Hybrids. Springsteen, Simon and Garfunkel, Santana, etc. If not in Surround, at the very least they could be released in Enhanced Stereo.

NBC Nightly News had a story last night that claimed the Baby Boomers were still the largest consumers of recorded music. Granted it's an ever dwindling pie, but at least it something. Today's youth has much more choices than the kids of the 70's have to spend their limited entertainment dollars. It's a different world and Sony needs to realize this and quit focusing on piracy. Besides anything I can hear, I can copy, maybe with small dip in quality, but it's still sufficient for MP3s. How was this any different 25 years ago when I made tapes for my Sony Walkman. iPods are the 21st century's Walkman. Yeah too bad Sony didn't invent it. You missed the boat this time, get over it.

Trying to save some bucks? Raid the vaults for those old quadrophonic mixes. I think any sales would just result in "found money" with little investment.

Meanwhile give away the technology to play SACDs. All DVD players should be capable of playing the enhanced sound of SACDs, as umbiquitous as DTS compatibility now is on today's players.

BlueRay? Forget it--Sony will drop this as well. In a few years they'll realize that the billions in profits aren't coming and Joe Six-Pack is happy with his $40 DVD player.

oblio98

12-19-06, 02:19 PM

Don't know where this notion came from....the last Sony SACD release was 2 months (Danny Elfman). Not to mention the just announced Living Stereo SACDs being released next month.

ematcion,

I respect your love for SACD very highly. I too am a strong supporter of SACD, and frankly wish I could run down and buy SACDs every week. I think the format is great, and when it comes down to pure audio, I even feel that an SACD will out perform a DVD-Audio.

However, I cannot feel "sorry" for Sony, or feel bad that they lost a ton of money on the format, because they themselves are to blame for their lack of support, and let me, again, describe why.

Go back to 2003. The HiRez formats were about 3 years old. They were getting some press, but not a lot of press. Sony had released a lot of titles in 2000-2001-2002-2003. Good stuff, popular stuff, classics, jazz, a very nice assortment of titles. Good coverage of surround as well as stereo. Sony had gotten other lables to create SACDs, most notibly UMG.

When DSOTM was rumored to being prepared for surround HiRez release on Capitol/EMI, a label which was in the DVD-A camp, they used their leverage to convince Capitol/EMI & the artist to release the title on SACD. (This was the ONLY Capitol SACD ever released! Past and future Capitol titles would be and were DVD-A). When DSOTM SACD was released, there was a lot of press. There were articles in magazines, newspapers, etc,. all pointing to the fact that to hear it in surround, you needed to have an SACD player, and THAT was the way it should be heard! SACD was prominent in the press releases and notes on the title.

This was a very high profile release, and got SACD a lot of good, positive press. Then, shortly after that, in November 2003, Rolling Stone created a special issue that highlighted the GREATEST ALBUMS OF ALL TIME. In that issue was included a "free" promotional SACD with great tracks on it:

1. Bob Dylan - "Simple Twist of Fate" - from Blood on the Tracks (Columbia CH 90323)
2. Pink Floyd - "Money" - from The Dark Side of the Moon (Capitol Records CDP 7243-5-82136-2-1)
3. The Who - "Pinball Wizard" - from The Who's Tommy (Geffen Records B0001386-36)
4. Herbie Hancock - "Watermelon Man" - from Headhunters (Columbia CS 65123)
5. Norah Jones - "Come Away With Me" - from Come Away With Me (Blue Note Records 7243-5-41747-2-8)
6. Elton John - "Goodbye Yellow Brick Road" - from Goodbye Yellow Brick Road (Island Records B0001478-40)
7. Billy Joel - "Movin' Out" - from The Stranger (Columbia CS 69384)
8. Miles Davis "Blue In Green" - from Kind of Blue (Columbia CS 64935)
9. Aerosmith "Sweet Emotion" - from Toys In The Attic (Columbia CS 57362)

There was also a promotion for the readers to take their free SACD into a store and playback to see if they had won a prize. On that sampler SACD was the first track from the upcoming Elton John SACD releases that would be out early in the next year.

Universal had already announced SACDs from Elton John, Eric Clapton, Derek & the Dominoes, Michael McDonald, and many other high profile artists including Steely Dan. SACD was at the very height of it's popularity and this could have been the point where it broke out into the mainstream.

However, it was at this exact point that Sony, somewhere in it's boardrooms, dropped the ball and virtually withdrew from releasing SACDs, instead giving us "enhanced stereo" DualDiscs. :eek: Here was a time when they could have come through with SACDs from their most popular artists and back catalog artists. Bruce Springsteen, Billy Joel, Bob Dylan, current chart topping artists, and they only let out a trickle of pop/rock/folk titles.

In Decemeber 2003 they released an SACD by the Thorns.
In August 2004 they released an SACD by Incubus
In August 2004 they released an SACD by the Indigo Girls
In August 2004 they released an SACD by David Sanchez
In August 2004 they released an SACD by John Mayer (Heavier Things)
In June 2005 Sony UK released an SACD by Rory Gallagher
In June 2005 Sony UK released an SACD of Jeff Wayne's War of the Worlds
In December 2005 they released an SACD by Duran Duran
In December 2005 they released an SACD by John Legend
In December 2005 they released an SACD by John Mayer (Room for Squares)
In December 2005 they released an SACD by Switchfoot
In January 2006 they released an SACD by Yo-Yo Ma (Not quite pop/rock/folk)

That's it! In THREE YEARS, these are the SACDs released by Sony. In 2004, UMG carried the SACD flag quite admirably, but soon left it flapping in the breeze, along with many SACD fans.

There are certainly labels like Telarc and Chesky that are doing a great job, but the bottom line is, the SACD market was at it's peak, and it's creator bailed out.

I'm sorry, but those are the facts. It really irritates me no end, because I love SACD and want more. The worst part is that there was a lot left on the table, and I truely believe that if it were handled better, the format would be doing so much better than it is.

dotheDVDeed

12-19-06, 02:39 PM

Thanks Oblio--

Doesn't exactly inspire faith in Sony sticking with BlueRay--does it?

Flexx

12-19-06, 04:25 PM

I just rec'd news that future UMG surround titles will not be on SACD, so pick up those Elton John (http://www.cduniverse.com/sresult.asp?style=music&HT_SEARCH=XARTIST&cart=448662586&HT_SEARCH_INFO=John%2C+Elton&HT_Search_Name=John%2C+Elton&altsearch=yes&frm=lk_allspin), Moody Blues (http://www.cduniverse.com/sresult.asp?style=music&HT_SEARCH=XARTIST&HT_SEARCH_INFO=Moody+Blues&cart=448662586&altsearch=yes&frm=lk_allspin), etc. discs while they last.

ematcion

12-19-06, 04:40 PM

oblio98,

Excellent analysis....you have no arguments from me regarding Sony for retreating from its own creation. However, I just don't think Sony has "abandoned" the format just yet.

BTW, Universal Music, one of SACD's biggest supporters, also "abandoned" the format after its SACD release of "The Carpenters: The Singles 169-1981"....until the recent importation of the 5 Moody Blues SACD titles.

Clearly, the current target audience for SACD is in the classical and jazz genres. Early on, Sony released a good deal of pop/rock titles on (single-layer) SACD, but I think it was disappointed at the sales of these titles. Perhaps the company saw better sales with its classical and jazz SACD titles? Who knows?

Don't forget there was also the issue of multiple royalties on multi-channel hybrid SACD when Sony announced the pending release of Beyonce's "Danerously in Love". This title was subsequently released....just not in the US.

For the record, Sony also released John Mayer's "Room For Square" and Switchfoot's "The Beautiful Letdown" on multi-channel hybrid SACD in December 2005. For January 2006, the company added Yo-Yo Ma's "Yo-Yo Ma plays Ennio Morricone", the soundtracks to the movie "The Phantom of the Opera" and "Zorro".

Flexx

12-19-06, 04:50 PM

BTW, Universal Music, one of SACD's biggest supporters, also "abandoned" the format after its SACD release of "The Carpenters: The Singles 169-1981"....until the recent importation of the 5 Moody Blues SACD titles.

re Moody Blues - the Fontana label was responsible for bringing those titles over to the U.S. UMG was not involved.

ematcion

12-19-06, 04:51 PM

oblio98

12-19-06, 04:57 PM

Flexx

12-19-06, 05:04 PM

Hi Felix,

So what's going on? Any more details?
Don't hold your breath for any future SACD titles from Universal. But is this really news at this point...?

ematcion

12-19-06, 05:15 PM

Bottom line is I wanted more.

Same here.

I think Sony blew it big time by not releasing some of its potential blockbuster albums on single-inventory multi-channel hybrid SACD, such as the latest album (whatever it's called) by The Dixie Chicks. Any additional production cost would've easily been offset by the sale of this title, even at its current relatively depressed rate.

Felix, isn't Fontana a label of Universal Music? To be honest, I've yet to see the Moody Blues SACDs in person :( :mad:

Flexx

12-19-06, 05:25 PM

Felix, isn't Fontana a label of Universal Music? To be honest, I've yet to see the Moody Blues SACDs in person
I guess the way to say it is UMG's New Formats division had nothing to do with it.

Deepsky4565

12-19-06, 10:16 PM

Early on, Sony released a good deal of pop/rock titles on (single-layer) SACD, but I think it was disappointed at the sales of these titles. Perhaps the company saw better sales with its classical and jazz SACD titles? Who knows?

The early pop/rock titles were mostly stereo only, and not hybrids. So no playing in the car, etc. What were they thinking??? Raid the vaults of CBS's incredible storehouse of quad recordings, and issue on hybrids, or don't do it at all. The Boston disc was a prime example where there was a quad master, but stereo only disc released. You don't jump start a format by putting out stereo only single layer discs, when the promise was well beyond that with multichannel and CD compatibility! As much as I like SACD, I'm glad Sony is accepting defeat. I hope they do the same with BluRay, and stop shoving incompatible formats on us. ;)

SoonerCaniac

12-19-06, 10:34 PM

Don't hold your breath for any future SACD titles from Universal. But is this really news at this point...?

I wonder if this explains the delay in the release of the last two of the "classic seven" Moody Blues titles on SACD. Justin Hayward reported that he was working with engineers on the remixes last June. Who knows. It would be a shame if they never saw the light of day.

My two cents on this whole "death" thing since that gets thrown out there nearly everywhere: as long as SACDs continue to come out, even if only once a year, the format isn't "dead". Oh yes, I'm holding on for dear life with a technicality, but it is what it is, and that's NOT death. ;)

Merry Christmas,
Josh

PS - Ironically. . .the spell checker wants to substitute SACD with "Sacked"! How hilariously sad it that!? :D

ematcion

12-20-06, 04:08 AM

For those hoping for a domestic (US) release of Genesis' catalog on DVD-A, here's the latest directly from Nick Davis, as posted on stevehoffman.tv....

just to clarify:
in the usa it will be a dvd-v 5.1 (dts and dd) and stereo cd release.
in europe the it will be dvd-v (as above) and sacd (stereo and 5.1) release.
yes, for this current batch (trick-abacab) it will be new stereo mixes.
there will be an extra disk set of 2 disks-formats as above- with the extra titles from this period.

So, no high-res version at all for the US. No DVD-A.

TS45

12-20-06, 04:43 AM

I really love to read equipment reviews from several diff. magazines.

What preferred "Hi-Rez" source material is used for evaluation of amps, speakers, receivers, preamps... ... ... SACD and DVD Audio.

Yeah, we don't need that SACD or DVD Audio any more, lets just stay with Redbook CD and LP's.

Hi Rez formats just sound better and provide an additional 3.1 discrete channels of information, who needs that in their 5.1 systems.

Chris Gerhard

12-20-06, 06:08 AM

These discussions always have several people that know what the record companies did wrong. I read Sony should have done this and Universal should have done this, and it is a shame Sony didn't do something. I have yet to read even one tangible option. I have actually discussed SACD with people I know in the real world. It isn't anything they are interested in, and this is a widespread condition. Over 4,000 releases and nothing sold well. It had its chance and it flopped. These discs were done well, mixed well, marketed well, but there was no market, period. It just isn't complicated. Not every good product finds a market, SACD wasn't the first and won't be the last. Small labels can make the format work and it works for classical music so hang on to your machines and play the discs, that is what I am doing and I continue to look for the odd release that I might like. Universal and Sony can't make this format profitable and I don't think Concord could either. Telarc and Chessky think it makes sense for their small number of releases and I hope to find something from them. I haven't been following it closely but I think Telarc and Concord have some kind of arrangement so it may be possible these small labels can joint venture with big ones and sneak a few gems out of the catalogs.

I don't know what anybody was thinking with DualDiscs having a DVD-V side with the album in 48kHz/16-Bit, LPCM stereo. That was hardly worth a premium, I agree with the conclusion that Sony abandoning SACD for that shouldn't work and didn't. I don't understand the attraction to MP3, AAC, and iPods so I try not to put things in a perspective of how I think and what I want. Hybrid SACD is my all-time favorite audio format. I like DVD-A/CD sets and DualDisc with worthwhile DVD side also and would have been happy with any of them, including DualDisc with 96kHz/24-Bit DTS. I am in the minority obviously.

I think the prices are going to be high and the volumes low when we do see something going forward. In the meantime, I know I am getting "Honky Chateau" for Christmas, the last Elton John SACD I want since I don't want "Peachtree Road" and have all the others. It is a shame Universal can't see to release more Moody Blues, I do like the three I have, but it is no surprise.

Chris

Flexx

12-20-06, 10:20 AM

Chris, some great comments, but I disagree that either hi-res format was marketed well. Compare the SACD/DVD-A rollout marketing in the past 5 years to the blitzkrieg of Blu-ray/HD-DVD in just 6 months.

locomo

12-20-06, 10:56 AM

Once these became cheap:
http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=361109
Sony Entertainment, locked up Sony the manufacturer in an old folks home.

jayna_95

12-20-06, 11:00 AM

Kal Rubinson

12-20-06, 11:20 AM

I believe the biggest reason that these wonderful formats have "failed" is that they require the average listener to buy additional equipment due to the piracy paranoia of the labels. If DVD-A and SACD multichannel recordings could be played via existing digital outputs rather than forcing the 6-channel analog connection, market penetration would have been much deeper.I believe the biggest reason that these wonderful formats have "failed" is that they require the average listener to give a damn about sound quality without the doo-dads. So, there was no motivation to surmount any technical impediments. Music on HD-DVD/BlueRay will give him the doo-dads of video and other add-ons.

KMO

12-20-06, 11:23 AM

They now can, of course. HDMI, i.Link and Denon Link all support DVD-A and SACD...

That's why I'm getting into SACD and DVD-Audio for the first time now. The connections are finally ready - I'd been holding off.

Ovation

12-20-06, 11:29 AM

For those hoping for a domestic (US) release of Genesis' catalog on DVD-A, here's the latest directly from Nick Davis, as posted on stevehoffman.tv....

So, no high-res version at all for the US. No DVD-A.Thank goodness for internet shopping, then.

jayna_95

12-20-06, 11:38 AM

petergaryr

12-20-06, 11:43 AM

Chris Gerhard

12-20-06, 04:17 PM

I believe the biggest reason that these wonderful formats have "failed" is that they require the average listener to give a damn about sound quality without the doo-dads. So, there was no motivation to surmount any technical impediments. Music on HD-DVD/BlueRay will give him the doo-dads of video and other add-ons.

I think both HD DVD and Blu-ray are great but both are likely niche products and maybe that is all they should be. If DVD-A and or SACD can survive as niche products, maybe that should have been expected as well. If high quality audio on the new formats gets airborn, we could have a winner for the small market that wants to pay for it. Meanwhile, MP3, AAC and iPods will continue to soar. DVD and CD may have a lot more life than expected as well.

Chris

petergaryr

12-20-06, 05:51 PM

I think both HD DVD and Blu-ray are great but both are likely niche products and maybe that is all they should be. If DVD-A and or SACD can survive as niche products, maybe that should have been expected as well. If high quality audio on the new formats gets airborn, we could have a winner for the small market that wants to pay for it. Meanwhile, MP3, AAC and iPods will continue to soar. DVD and CD may have a lot more life than expected as well.

Chris

I sometimes wonder what type of market analysis actually goes on when a new format is proposed.

I have read a number of articles which claim that many people who buy HD TVs don't put up an antenna for OTA, or don't subscribe to either HD cable or satellite.

I have a friend who wasn't even aware he wasn't getting an HD signal to his TV (he had D* locals, but they aren't available in HD here in Jacksonville). He thought things looked "just great".

I never expected SACD or DVD-A to ever be "mass market". I also don't expect either HD DVD or BR to ever be that either. There will be those of us on forums like these who deeply care both about maximum SQ and PQ....but the average person?

zacster

12-20-06, 09:39 PM

I'll take back what I said about J&R not having SACD anymore. I was in the store today and was looking again at the DVD-A which are against a glass wall, and I turned around and saw the racks of SACD behind me. They also had a section in the classical area with both formats mixed together in an "audiophile" section. I didn't see any in the jazz room, but I didn't ask. The DVD-A shelf was being restocked when I got there, but there was nothing new, of course.

zacster

12-20-06, 09:41 PM

And one more thing. In the classical top ten display, the number 2 disk was an SACD hybrid. I couldn't tell you what it was.

gigaguy

12-20-06, 10:30 PM

I'm a newbie and I am buying up discs on ebay (many $8-$10) without even having a system yet. I always knew about hi-res audio but it seemed expensive and another ploy by the manufacturers to get me to buy yet another format. After LPs, I then moved to making my own cassettes. I stopped collecting prerecorded software after LPs, collecting only a few dozen CDs, and have used mp3 the last decade. I haven't even had a stereo for a while. I use my PC, car, and mp3 players.

But since I've upgraded to HDTV, getting some components that will play hi-res audio and also serve home theater is a no brainer for me.

I can't wait to hear hi-res 2.1 and 5.1 of my favorite classic pop/rock albums from the 60s to today. My first will be Gaucho, Avalon, Elton, PFloyd, Beatles (Love), Yes, others. I'll be happy with maybe a few dozen hires discs of my favorites.
My next car (another Acura) will play DVDA too.

WriteSimple

12-21-06, 04:53 AM

I haven't tried but I suspect it would be relatively easy to rip the CD layer of a SACD to MP3 and put onto your iPod or whatever. However it's not so easy to rip the DD or DTS track off a DVD-A and move to that to a portable player. While the tools are free, the process is not straightforward. The CD layer of SACD falls precisely within the Redbook CD spec (unlike DualDisc) so ripping it is not a problem.

As for ripping DD or DTS track off DVD-Video portion of a DVD-A, it's not a problem either. There are programs you can use to rip the tracks in either native DD or DTS bitstream (5.1), MP3 and other lossy codecs, and stereo or multichannel WAV files. Note that these are transcoded from the DD or DTS bitstream.

The consumer electronics of Sony still support SACD. The fact that the Sony BD player does not support SACD is not a big surprise; it can't even read CDs! It's been widely reported on AVS many many months ago. They used the same BD drive that Pioneer's BD player uses, which also can't play CDs and SACDs.

However, the PS3 is almost a universal player - the only formats it can't play are DVD-Audio and HD-DVD. And with the recent update, the PCM conversion via HDMI is of high quality.

As far as Sony Music/BMG, their support in the US is lackluster because of fluctuating consumer demand. Listening to music anywhere is a more popular activity than sitting down to a comfy chair at the sweet spot.

What SCE (the console maker of PS3) can do in cooperation with Sony CE (the consumer electronics part) is convince Sony Music/BMG to release more titles on hybrid SACDs for the PS3. Just like the "Plays on PS2!" stickers that they had pasted on DVDs during DVD's format launch years, they should create "Plays on PS3!" stickers so that consumers know what they are getting. This is a great opportunity that Sony Music should not waste.

Those "Plays On PS3!" stickers can also be used on BDs, just to drive home the message.

fuad

savaytse66

12-21-06, 08:25 AM

I believe the biggest reason that these wonderful formats have "failed" is that they require the average listener to give a damn about sound quality without the doo-dads.

I couldn't agree more. This is really what it comes down to, especially in this age of IPods and portable music. I've had an MP3 player for 2 years now (Creative Nomad Zen Xtra, 40GB), and I couldn't live without it. I listen to it at work all day, and in the vehicle all the time. But even though everything is encoded at a high bitrate, the sound is just ok when listening through computer speakers and in the truck. But it serves its purpose. And this is what most people are looking for. Convenience.

When it comes time to really listening to my music, I sit at home and listen through my home theater system. I have a DVD-A player, not SACD, but same idea. Even though I only have a handful of titles, I'll listen to them over and over again because they sound that good. But it's hard to find that kind of time to just sit there and listen. Most people don't have that kind of time, or more importantly, the desire. I look at the music industry the same way as I do fast/prepared food. It's quick, convenient, cheap, and serves it's purpose. But to really live, you need to take the time and eat "real" food once in a while. DVD-A and SACD are the fillets and cabernets. MP3s are Big Macs and diet Coke. To each his own. I'm willing to fork out a few extra bucks for the steak. I'm in the minority.

I'll continue to buy DVD-As as long as they're available. Eventually, I'll own an SACD player as well, and I'll pick up the titles that are still available. I'll continue to tweak and go the extra mile to make my music and video sound/look as good as I can for the money I can afford to spend. I'm ok being in the minority. I'm used to it. And I understand the consequences. I wish it were different and it's frustrating sometimes, but what are you going to do?

Sorry for the ramble.

Chris

Upgrade

12-21-06, 01:03 PM

So I guess I can assume that the other half of Dylan's catalog that was not released on hybrid SACDs will never get released that way?

I'll admit I freaked a bit when I started reading through the posts in this thread and checked out Amazon, Best Buy, and SonyMusicStore. Sure enough, all three places either had none of the Dylan SACD hybrids anymore (Best Buy indicated they were unavailable at all local stores), very few remaining in stock (Amazon), or simply did not carry all the titles in SACD hybrid anymore (SonyMusicStore). So I panicked and bought the ones I did not own yet.

For Sony to give up on re-issuing his catalog in this format half-way through the job is pretty bush league.

ematcion

12-21-06, 04:16 PM

ematcion

12-21-06, 04:22 PM

The consumer electronics of Sony still support SACD. The fact that the Sony BD player does not support SACD is not a big surprise; it can't even read CDs! It's been widely reported on AVS many many months ago. They used the same BD drive that Pioneer's BD player uses, which also can't play CDs and SACDs.

As far as Sony Music/BMG, their support in the US is lackluster because of fluctuating consumer demand. Listening to music anywhere is a more popular activity than sitting down to a comfy chair at the sweet spot.

Could the lack of support be limited to the US? I notice Sony Electronics recently announced a new single-disc SACD/CD player (no DVD in this player) for the ES series. However, looks like this player is available everywhere but the US. Similarly, Sony Music in Japan (which is a not a part of Sony BMG) continues to release SACDs....over 10 titles within the 2-3 months. So, what gives?

Chris Gerhard

12-21-06, 05:36 PM

Is the Dylan SACD boxset still available at yourmusic.com @ $5.99/per disc (plus sales tax, but no shipping charge)?

For those who don't know, yourmusic.com is a music service run by Sony BMG. They are raising the price to $6.99/per disc as of 01/01/2007.

I bought two complete sets of those 16 discs. Sony did a great job with those in my opinion and at that price it is a great deal. I like all 15 albums, with "Blood on the Tracks" and "Highway 61" my favorites. Why those didn't sell better is hard to understand.

Chris

tiggers

12-21-06, 07:10 PM

Saw this old 'news flash (http://www.sa-cd.net/shownews/41) news flash' on sa-cd.net.

Perhaps the rumor about Sony cutting funding SACD is that they have finished development on improvements and feel it is a mature technology. Cheaper/faster just means it will be more appealing to more bands. Which, as long as the quality is maintained, is a good thing for getting the format out to the masses.

I liked someone else's idea in another SACD thread about putting 'Plays on PS3' stickers on SACD disks to raise consumer interest.

ematcion

12-21-06, 07:39 PM

The following was mentioned in sa-cd.net's forum.

Did you hear about the premiere European recording in DXD? (http://www.lindberg.no/english/collection/007.htm)

Chris Gerhard

12-23-06, 04:35 AM

I just imported and have received 3 of the Depeche Mode SACD/DVD-V sets using CD-WOW. With free shipping and a promotion from the site I used, it worked out to $31.85 or $10.28 each on average, one was actually $9.95. For foreign SACD releases it may be worth trying to find a way to obtain titles you want. I found he site at Quadraphonicquad forum posted the site to use at Steve Hoffman forums under the deals forum but can find it again and mention it here if needed.

Chris

dvda-sacd

12-23-06, 08:47 PM

Could the lack of support be limited to the US? I notice Sony Electronics recently announced a new single-disc SACD/CD player (no DVD in this player) for the ES series.The new Sony SCD-XA1200ES is available in Europe since October 2006.

http://img147.imageshack.us/img147/4502/sonyscdxa1200esyh0.jpg

ematcion

12-23-06, 09:02 PM

The new Sony SCD-XA1200ES is available in Europe since October 2006.

That's it! I believe Sony's press announcement mention something about re-dedicating its effort into SACD. However, I am not sure whether it was talking about Sony Music in Japan, which technically is a separate company from Sony BMG in the US.

kelvin96gsr

01-07-07, 02:15 AM

not sure if this was said but Sony's Playstation 3 plays SACD's

nickpoz

01-07-07, 08:28 AM

look like my local best buy that had sacds last week no longer has them as well.

i got a similar answer from a best buy manager - "that format was recalled we had to send our discs back"
I just bought a Norah Jones SACD from BB 2 days ago.

Chris Gerhard

01-10-07, 06:50 AM

I just purchased the SACD "Up" by Peter Gabriel at the Best Buy on Bowman in Little Rock. Elton John "Honky Chateau" was recently purchased there for me for Christmas and I noticed a couple more copies yesterday. There were a few Chessky and at least one Telarc SACD and maybe 20 other SACD titles, but obviously not much comparatively.

Chris

schticker

01-10-07, 02:24 PM

Retailers in any business tend to associate their decisions with that of the industry if they've been around long enough. At some point, you would think the 50-something record guy behind the counter would realize that his personal decision to send back the SACDs he wasn't selling is not the same as Sony recalling them, simply because HE thinks the format's dead.

He probably has himself convinced; don't be too hard on him.

dvda-sacd

01-17-07, 08:53 PM

http://img392.imageshack.us/img392/7688/sonysacdbiltv0.jpg

MEX-DV1000: 2-channel SACD
MEX-DV2000: Multi-channel SACD

It's in norwegian.

http://www.lydogbilde.no/verdens-foerste-bilstereo-med-sa-cd.422833-45376.html

:rolleyes: I cannot believe it! Is it really true?

:) Cheers!

Sonic icons

01-17-07, 09:51 PM

^
they should tie in with a travel company or airline to run a promotion in audio magazines, "tour the fjords in your rented car while listening to a fine SACD player [disks not included]" :)

dvda-sacd

01-18-07, 02:00 PM

MEX-DV1000: 2-channel SACD
MEX-DV2000: Multi-channel SACD

It's in norwegian.

http://www.lydogbilde.no/verdens-foerste-bilstereo-med-sa-cd.422833-45376.html

:rolleyes: I cannot believe it! Is it really true?
Yes, it is.

Sony Announces Three Super Audio CD Car Players (http://www.highfidelityreview.com/news/news.asp?newsnumber=10972765)

· MEX-DV1000: 1-DIN size / 2-channel SACD/DVD-Video playback
· MEX-DV2000: 1-DIN size / Stereo/Multi-channel SACD/DVD-Video playback
· XAV-W1: 2-DIN size / Stero/Multi-channel SACD/DVD-Video playback

http://www.highfidelityreview.com/news/news.asp?newsnumber=10972765

:cool: Cheers!

Titania

01-23-07, 10:19 AM

ca1ore

01-23-07, 12:10 PM

BZiggyZ

01-23-07, 12:49 PM

Yes, it is.

Sony Announces Three Super Audio CD Car Players (http://www.highfidelityreview.com/news/news.asp?newsnumber=10972765)

· MEX-DV1000: 1-DIN size / 2-channel SACD/DVD-Video playback
· MEX-DV2000: 1-DIN size / Stereo/Multi-channel SACD/DVD-Video playback
· XAV-W1: 2-DIN size / Stero/Multi-channel SACD/DVD-Video playback

http://www.highfidelityreview.com/news/news.asp?newsnumber=10972765

:cool: Cheers!

Interesting. I wonder if they will include DD/DTS decoders for DVD-video playback. This would allow it to sort of be a universal player (though DVD-A would be limited to the DD/DTS tracks if available).

lchiu7

01-23-07, 02:58 PM

..

So, DVD-A may be a superior format (it is also my personal preference as my sound system is better optimized for DVD-A), but without anything to play, that quickly becomes irrelevent!

As usual the best technology doesn't always win out in the end. Most of the technical arguments why SACD is "inferior" to DVD-A don't mean much to the average (or even high end) audiophile since they cannot hear the difference on their consumer gear.

I prefer DVD-A myself only because it's easier to get into the Multichannel side of the audio with DVD-A (via the DD or DTS tracks) than with SACD. But then there are those I am sure who like the fact that a SACD disc can be played on any CD player (though why you would do that eludes me) and there are many more times CD players in homes/cars than DVD players.

As an aside I purchased (under a mistaken impression) the SACD version of Blood Sweat and Tears only to find it's SACD stereo! Now that is certainly an audiophile format since the only advantage over the regular CD is the higher quality sound. The sound field is still stereo.

As an experiment I played this disc and switched back between the SACD and CD layer and really on my modest gear coudn't hear any difference. In fact I preferred the CD layer since with that I was able to apply Dolby Prologic IIX and enhance the sound field of the stereo tracks.

But ultimately it comes down to software availability and I am slowly purchasing more SACD than DVD-A only because I find the music I like is available on SACD.

My thoughts anyway

Larry

Krobar

01-23-07, 05:45 PM

I prefer SACD because:

There are more titles I like on SACD, I have about 60 SACD and 25 DVD-A (Most of the titles I want)
It changes tracks quicker on my Pioneer player
With the dual layer discs I can take copies of CD layer for my mobile MP3 player

I do like the way you sometimes get music vids with DVD-A though.

On a side note this thread reminded me of sa-cd.net, a Pixies SACD is planned. :)

ca1ore

01-23-07, 05:50 PM

But ultimately it comes down to software availability and I am slowly purchasing more SACD than DVD-A only because I find the music I like is available on SACD.

S'truth!

Give me the entire Pink Floyd or Alan Parsons Project back catalogs in DVD-A and I would buy them in a second. Or Yes, Steely Dan, Chicago .... the list goes on!

I get myself all worked up over how unbelivably poorly the record labels supported both DVD-A and SACD. A friend of mine said many years ago that he felt the studios really did not want either format to suceed - didn't agree at the time .....

These days I buy an increasing percentage of my music directly from the Band's websites - a far sight more fan-friendly than the big labels.

Kal Rubinson

01-23-07, 06:07 PM

I prefer DVD-A myself only because it's easier to get into the Multichannel side of the audio with DVD-A (via the DD or DTS tracks) than with SACD. ???? All you do is pop the SACD in the player and, if set up correctly, it defaults to the multichannel SACD program. How can anything be easier?

dvda-sacd

01-23-07, 06:57 PM

To be perfectly honest, I'd be rather happy if SACD did lay down and die. From an industry perspective, DVDa is a far better format for a number of reasons -

* It is possible to produce a commercially acceptable master disc without the need for proprietary Sony processors and encoders and commercial pressing plants. This is a HUGE benefit for artists and engineers (unless you are signed to Sony :rolleyes: )

* DVDa discs can be produced bit for bit with the original master. Most studios now mix and/or record on 24 bit digital systems at sample rates around 96 KHz and sometimes 192 KHz. The files produced by these systems can be transferred directly onto DVDa without any bit reduction and dithering, sample rate conversion, filtering, DSD conversion (for SACD) or other processing. MLP encoding for DVDa is lossless.

* DVDa is technically better than SACD with greater bandwidth and greater dynamic range. It is capable of 144 dB across the entire audio spectrum whereas SACD is capable of 120 dB with that range dropping to 60 dB at around 50 KHz.

* DVDa does not need the aggressive anti aliasing filtering that SACD requires. SACD's create a LOT of HF noise above 50 KHz which must be removed by filtering in the player. This is the same principle as CD only at a higher frequency.
By comparison, DVDa does not add any HF noise and can use a much gentler anti aliasing filter with far less effects on the reproduced signal, especially at 192 KHz.

This is all a bit like the Betamax vs VHS wars. In the end, the inferior product (VHS) won out. It is ironic that the professional broadcast world used (and still uses in some cases) Betacam which is very similar to Betamax. In fact, Betacam is the pro version of Betamax, both Sony products.
Ultimately, Sony were forced to start making VHS video recorders. I can only hope the same thing will happen with these audio formats and they will start making DVDa players once SACD dies.

As far as listening enjoyment goes though, I am more than happy to listen to my favourite albums on either SACD or DVDa. This is fairly typical of the viewpoint of most end users.
It is from an engineering and industry production viewpoint that DVDa is a clear winner for me and my clients.
However, I think DSD is more faithful to the original analog signal than PCM. I don't agree less noise means higher resolution, unless "resolution" is not equivalent to "fidelity". It seems to me that my best sounding recordings are DSD/DXD, and that's why I'm a SACD/DSD fan.

1. In a multi bit (PCM) A/D audio converter all frequencies is mirrored around half sampling rate.

2. As a consequence multi bit (PCM) audio sampling can not reproduce higher frequencies than half the sample rate.

3. The mirrored frequencies will loose their harmonic relationship to the original signal. Therefore and A/D converter has an Anti Aliasing Filter, typically a filter starting at 45 % of the sample rate with full attenuation at 55% of the sample rate.

4. A perfect square pulse has an unlimited frequency band, however with less amplitude of the higher frequencies. (A perfect square sound pulse do not exist in nature however many type of attacks will contain parts which is close to a square pulse when analyzed in the analog domain).

5. Many claims that a sampling rate at 192 kHz/24 bit should be enough (can reproduce frequencies up to 96 kHz), however at 192 kHz sampling rate an Anti Aliasing Filter is still needed.

6. At DXD 352.8 kHz/24 bit (or 384 kHz) an anti aliasing filter is not needed since the frequencies at more than 176.4 kHz are very weak by nature.

7. A downsides of the anti aliasing filter is that some energy is lost in pre/post ringing. A smooth filter will give a better impulse response a less ringing than a stiff filter.

8. When analyzing a 3us perfect pulse we can reproduce 49% of the amplitude at 192 kHz and 88 % of the amplitude at 352.8 kHz (due to the lack of anti aliasing filter and the wider frequency band).

9. The impulse response is very important, since the brain is using the small differences in time from one ear to the other ears in order to re-calculate an image of the room.

Therefore a digital recording at 352.8 kHz (DXD) is sounding real analog. You are able to capture the ambience around the instruments at 352.8 kHz.
192 kHz, 96 kHz and 44.1 kHz/24 bit are all sounding digital. Of course the higher resolution is better that the lower resolution, but these formats are all sounding digital.

10. DSD is a one bit format (SACD format) and do not have an anti aliasing filter. It has a band wide up to 1.3 MHz and can therefore reproduce the amplitude of a perfect pulse 100%.

11. The downsides of DSD is that the format can not be edited since it is a 1 bit format, and the quantizes noise of the format is significant (-80 dBfs without noise shapers)

12. With a noise shaper we have been able to move some of the noise to a higher frequency band; however the energy will always be there. We can keep the noise below -120dBfs up to 24 kHz but then the noise will increase. At 100 kHz we have -22dBfs noise in our DSD implementation.

13. If you need to edit a DSD file you have to convert it to some kind of multibit format.
When you then again want the DSD format you will ad quantizes noise once again.

14. Therefore DSD (SACD) is a consumer format. It is very good if you only ad quantizes noise once, due to the perfect impulse response, but it should not be used for production.

http://www.sa-cd.net/showthread/18108//y?page=first

lchiu7

01-23-07, 07:37 PM

???? All you do is pop the SACD in the player and, if set up correctly, it defaults to the multichannel SACD program. How can anything be easier?

I guess I didn't explain myself properly. What I meant to say was, if you have a home theatre system (not necessarily with DVD-A or SACD capability) you can get multichannel sound from a DVD-A without doing anything. Upgrading to a DVD-A player gives you improved SQ but not more channels.

To get the multichannel sound from SACD, you have to upgrade to a SACD player (and they are not necessarily cheap) plus fuss around with 6 analogue cables, HDMI etc. This is a barrier for many I am sure

Larry

lchiu7

01-23-07, 07:41 PM

S'truth!

Give me the entire Pink Floyd or Alan Parsons Project back catalogs in DVD-A and I would buy them in a second. Or Yes, Steely Dan, Chicago .... the list goes on!

I get myself all worked up over how unbelivably poorly the record labels supported both DVD-A and SACD. A friend of mine said many years ago that he felt the studios really did not want either format to suceed - didn't agree at the time .....

These days I buy an increasing percentage of my music directly from the Band's websites - a far sight more fan-friendly than the big labels.

I would buy AP music on any multichannel format in a heartbeat. But alas their DVD-A releases are stereo only for some reason. We know from the DSOTM bootleg around what he can do in the multichannel area.

Still at the moment it comes down to catalogue and at the moment, when I look at say CD Universe among some sites, there are more SACD releases that I might consider purchasing than DVD-A

Larry

Nil

01-23-07, 07:50 PM

In 2006, I bought 12 SACDs (Al DiMeola, Elton John, and Moody Blues) compared to 1 DVD-A (Porcupine Tree) - pretty pathetic on balance, but really pathetic for DVD-A.

While your personal preferences may have limited your purchases of DVD-As, 2006 was a good year for them:

Talking Heads brick - 8
Doors Perception - 6
David Crosby IICORMN
Porcupine Tree Deadwing, Stupid Dream
Pink Floyd DSOTM, WYWH (OK, these weren't official, but they were DVD-As)
Beatles Love

If I include older releases that I purchased in 2006 (e.g., Grateful Dead (2), Fleetwood Mac, Led Zeppelin, etc), my DVD-A purchases far outnumbered the SACDs that I got over the same period.

Having a universal player, I am just happy to have multichannel recordings, whatever the format they are released in.

Nil

01-23-07, 07:58 PM

Talking Heads brick - 8
Doors Perception - 6
David Crosby IICORMN
Porcupine Tree Deadwing, Stupid Dream
Pink Floyd DSOTM, WYWH (OK, these weren't official, but they were DVD-As)
Beatles Love

And Frank Zappa - 2

It was a good year for DVD-As.

lchiu7

01-23-07, 08:26 PM

While your personal preferences may have limited your purchases of DVD-As, 2006 was a good year for them:

Talking Heads brick - 8
Doors Perception - 6
David Crosby IICORMN
Porcupine Tree Deadwing, Stupid Dream
Pink Floyd DSOTM, WYWH (OK, these weren't official, but they were DVD-As)
Beatles Love

If I include older releases that I purchased in 2006 (e.g., Grateful Dead (2), Fleetwood Mac, Led Zeppelin, etc), my DVD-A purchases far outnumbered the SACDs that I got over the same period.

Having a universal player, I am just happy to have multichannel recordings, whatever the format they are released in.

Well my DVD-A collection is somewhat modest at the moment but I do have amongst others

ELP Brain Salary Surgery
Hotel California
Corrs
Britney Spears (Toxic) :)
Love
Diane Krall (Look of Love)
DSOTM :)
Linda Ronstadt (What's New)

On SACD I do like Moody Blues DOFP, War of the Worlds, Carpenter Greatest Hits, Diane Krall (When I look In Your Eyes). I also have Fragile en route.

As an aside I wonder why Diana Krall has released in both formats but simultaneously in both formats?

Larry

lchiu7

01-23-07, 08:35 PM

I prefer SACD because:

There are more titles I like on SACD, I have about 60 SACD and 25 DVD-A (Most of the titles I want)
It changes tracks quicker on my Pioneer player
With the dual layer discs I can take copies of CD layer for my mobile MP3 player

If a DVD-A contains a DD track then it's relatively easy enough to rip that into MP3 or some portable player format. Not as easy as ripping a CD but doable

Larry

Kal Rubinson

01-23-07, 08:42 PM

I guess I didn't explain myself properly. What I meant to say was, if you have a home theatre system (not necessarily with DVD-A or SACD capability) you can get multichannel sound from a DVD-A without doing anything. Upgrading to a DVD-A player gives you improved SQ but not more channels.

To get the multichannel sound from SACD, you have to upgrade to a SACD player (and they are not necessarily cheap) plus fuss around with 6 analogue cables, HDMI etc. This is a barrier for many I am sure
LarryOK, so you are speaking about a money/hardware issue, not an ergonomic one. However, you can buy a universal (CD/DVD/DVD-A/SACD) player for about $100 these days so I do not see that as much of a barrier. I have 4 universal players and 2 SACD players and there's no comparison in terms of convenient access between SACD and DVD-A on any of them.

Kal Rubinson

01-23-07, 08:45 PM

While your personal preferences may have limited your purchases of DVD-As, 2006 was a good year for them:

Talking Heads brick - 8
Doors Perception - 6
David Crosby IICORMN
Porcupine Tree Deadwing, Stupid Dream
Pink Floyd DSOTM, WYWH (OK, these weren't official, but they were DVD-As)
Beatles Love

If I include older releases that I purchased in 2006 (e.g., Grateful Dead (2), Fleetwood Mac, Led Zeppelin, etc), my DVD-A purchases far outnumbered the SACDs that I got over the same period.

Having a universal player, I am just happy to have multichannel recordings, whatever the format they are released in.Well, I got the Brick, Perception and DSOTM but my SACD aquisitions still outnumbered DVD-As by 6 to 1. Interesting DVD-As are few and far between and, undoubtedly, getting rarer.

dvda-sacd

01-23-07, 10:13 PM

I haven't purchased any DVD-Audio for one year and I'm not going to buy DVD-As any more. Well, maybe I'm going to buy a couple of DVD-As with 192 kHz/24 bit stereo sound. If only Beatles' Love had 192/24 audio.

:) Cheers!

Titania

01-23-07, 11:03 PM

Personally, I have more DVDa titles at present than I do SACD titles and that has nothing to do with technical choice. It is all about the content and what I can get and enjoy.

Another big problem with SACD is Sony's pig headed protection scheme. That has pretty much ruled out SACD releases for independant artists and bands (and even some well known groups) that are not signed to the Sony monster. Sony's methodologies and marketing for SACD is pretty much trying to monopolise the high res market with Sony artists only. It is a way of attempting to keep them at the top at the expense of everyone else.

The thing that will ultimately decide the fate of these formats is the exclusive release of new and well known artists on either SACD or DVDa. That is a choice that can be made by any record label. Hopefully if enough non-Sony labels decide to do this, we will start to really see DVDa take off.
DVDa's can be manufactured with dual sided technology. One side is DVDa while the other side is red book CD so the issue of universal playability is not really an issue when creating discs like this (Dire Straits - Brothers in Arms is an example).

As far as SACD being more faithful to the original master, I disagree

However, I think DSD is more faithful to the original analog signal than PCM. I don't agree less noise means higher resolution, unless "resolution" is not equivalent to "fidelity". It seems to me that my best sounding recordings are DSD/DXD, and that's why I'm a SACD/DSD fan.
I repect your opinion but I disagree.
Technically, SACD is inferior to DVDa in many ways which I have already stated (the most notable being dynamic range and bandwidth). The other flaw with your statement is that most analog masters have already been transferred to a digital PCM format because that is native to most large studio's. Most of the industry uses either Digidesign Protools or Logic Audio with high end A/D and D/A 24 bit PCM converters. To produce an SACD from that, the PCM master must first undergo a lossy conversion to DSD. Whereas, to create a DVDa title, no lossy conversions are necessary or recommended.

As for going direct to either DSD or PCM, that is possible but the PCM converters in, for example, either a Protools 192 HD rig or an Apogee setup are FAR superior sonically to DSD and this (the PCM) can be transferred directly to DVDa as a bit for bit replica. :)

lchiu7

01-23-07, 11:15 PM

OK, so you are speaking about a money/hardware issue, not an ergonomic one. However, you can buy a universal (CD/DVD/DVD-A/SACD) player for about $100 these days so I do not see that as much of a barrier. I have 4 universal players and 2 SACD players and there's no comparison in terms of convenient access between SACD and DVD-A on any of them.

I guess some of my early adopter proclivities show up here. My first AVR was a Kenwood 990D. I purchased it because it had AC-3 audio and could receive the RF encoded AC-3 input from a laserdisc player. This was before DVDs came out. When DVD's came out I was relieved to find out that the digital DD signal from those players could also be handled by this receiver so there was no urge or need to upgrade. While the AVR only had DD (no DTS) I was pretty happy with DD plus the fact that the AVR also had a phono input and preamp outputs - both of which are now only available in higher end units.

Since it predated DVD (and certainly DVD-A and SACD) it had no 6 channel inputs. So when I decided I wanted to get into MCH audio, not only was there the $100 (in fact I paid less for my Samsung HD841) cost for the player, I had to replace the AVR also. In the end I got one with all the bells whistles (DD, DTS DPLIIx, DTE Neo etc.) but no phono stage and no preamp out. So the cost for me to go to MCH was significantly more than just the cost of a player and some cables.

Other people's experience are probably different and if they had purchased a receiver in the past few years, it would have been MCH ready

Larry

So

dvda-sacd

01-24-07, 12:47 AM

Technically, SACD is inferior to DVDa in many ways which I have already stated (the most notable being dynamic range and bandwidth).
In my opinion, that doesn't mean higher fidelity, since PCM sample always starts its life as a 1-bit stream. The main advantage of DSD over PCM is its perfect impulse response, which allows SACD to sound real analog like.

Nowadays, DXD (32 bit floating point at 352.8 kHz) offers the best standard for digital audio production, hence Pyramix system is being used by many SACD labels.

In short, LPCM 192/24 is not enough for me. I wish DSD 256 fs, with the same bit rate of DXD (11.2896 Mbit per second) and no ultrasonic noise shaping, will be a consumer format in the future. For the moment, the SACD format is my choice.

Anyway, the Blu-ray Disc supports up to 5.1 linear PCM 192 kHz/24 bit.

:) Cheers!

Titania

01-24-07, 02:54 AM

In my opinion, that doesn't mean higher fidelity, since PCM sample always starts its life as a 1-bit stream. The main advantage of DSD over PCM is its perfect impulse response, which allows SACD to sound real analog like.........
That is just the point!! DSD does not have a perfect impulse response in the real world. Far from it with it's inherent steep anti aliasing filtering (to remove the high energy noise above 50 KHz) and significantly limited dynamic range at the top end of its spectrum. 192/24 or even 96/24 PCM has better impulse response than SACD with a resulting far better transient response and analog representation at the audio outs of the D/A stage. That is why the vast majority of professional studios use PCM.
A PCM sample does not start life as a 1 bit stream. It is typically either 16 or 24 bits of serial data loaded into a shift register which then outputs a parallel PCM 'word' to the converters.

Trust me, I have the advantage of knowing what studio masters sound like before they are transferred to any other format and I can tell you that DVDa is an exact copy in most cases (technically and sonically).
Whether or not you prefer the 'sound' of SACD or not does not change the fact that it is NOT an exact copy of the original master.

The same is true for the mislead souls who are under the false illusion that their super high end turntables are more accurate than DVDa. That is absolute nonsense. It is not possible for a mechanical device with limited channel seperation, dynamic range, distortion (both harmonic and intermodulation), noise and wear and tear to reproduce exactly the sound of the original master, especially when that master was recorded digitally at 192/24 or 96/24.
It is very possible and a very real fact that the broadband second harmonic distortion and limited channel seperation of the low end on vinyl (with it's pre processed peak limiting to stop mistracking) can sound very 'musical' and 'pleasing' with such adjectives as 'fat' and 'warm' often used to describe the inaccuracies!!
There is a further major flaw in the recording and reproduction of vinyl and that is the RIAA equalisation. That introduces some pretty significant phase distortion which is often misinterpreted by these 'audiophiles' as the extra 'ambience', 'air', 'space' and 'width' of the image. What they are hearing is a subtle widening of the space around the image caused by the impulse smearing effect of the equalisation phase distortion!!!

There are many similar inherent inaccuracies with tape as well, including tape saturation, biasing filter phase distortion and many other factors. However, we often find bands (particularly rock bands) recording on analog tape inthe studio today. Why? Because they like the warmth and fatness of the distortion. It sounds good even though it is far from accurate!!
AS a sound engineer myself and an artist, there have been many times where I have chosen to use tape and tube processing to achieve a certain 'sound'. That is an artistic choice, not one regarding technical perfection.

However, and it is a BIG however, when I am producing a commercially released master, I do not want the choice of consumer playback format to have any impact on what I chose to do creatively in the studio. I want my audience to hear a closely as possible what I did in the studio.
Obviously, in reality this is rare even with the perfect medium because not many people will have sound systems equal to the quality of the studio monitoring used during the creation of the music.
I still like the fact that I can give anyone a disc with an exact copy of my studio work on it and today, the only format that can do that in a consumer market is DVDa.

Chris Gerhard

01-24-07, 08:22 AM

dvda-sacd

01-24-07, 08:32 AM

Dear Titania,

A picture is worth a thousand words.

http://www.merging.com/2002/images/dsdresponseneon.gif (http://www.merging.com/2002/html/pyradsd.htm)

According to Peter Scheelke (Digital Audio Denmark (http://www.digitalaudio.dk/)), anti aliasing filtering is not required for SACD production.

Let's see more pictures.

http://www.smr-home-theatre.org/surround2002/images/show_images/image_051.jpg (http://www.smr-home-theatre.org/surround2002/technology/image_15.shtml)
http://www.smr-home-theatre.org/surround2002/images/show_images/image_053.jpg (http://www.smr-home-theatre.org/surround2002/technology/image_17.shtml)
http://www.smr-home-theatre.org/surround2002/images/show_images/image_054.jpg (http://www.smr-home-theatre.org/surround2002/technology/image_18.shtml)
http://www.smr-home-theatre.org/surround2002/images/show_images/image_055.jpg (http://www.smr-home-theatre.org/surround2002/technology/image_19.shtml)

If you look at these pictures, you can notice 192 kHz PCM does not approach the analog signal but the 1-bit pulse train of DSD.

http://www.smr-home-theatre.org/surround2002/images/show_images/image_056.jpg (http://www.smr-home-theatre.org/surround2002/technology/image_20.shtml)
An oscilloscope plot from a 10kHz square wave sampled using Direct Stream Digital (green plot) and 192kHz PCM (yellow plot) in Craig Anderson's DSD to PCM comparison detailed at Surround Professional 2002.
http://www.smr-home-theatre.org/surround2002/technology/page_07.shtml

Yes, DSD 64 fs (SACD) is not the the panacea, but it's good enough for me. The main reason why I prefer DSD is that I can hear a "digital taste" in PCM recordings, which isn't found in good DSD/DXD productions.

:) Cheers!

dvda-sacd

01-24-07, 09:20 AM

I hope 2007 is even better, but I expect to have to import SACD's to find much of interest.
Stephen Best (http://www.sa-cd.net/showuser/1), owner of SA-CD.net, notes that "Based on current release activity, 2007 could be a bigger year than the last. There were 800 new releases on the format in 2006, the same in 2005. This year we'll easily pass the 5,000 mark if things continue the same."

Titania

01-24-07, 11:36 AM

dvda-sacd,

Those scope shots are indeed very telling. You can clearly see the huge amounts of HF noise on the DSD waveform which must be filtered out in the player!
The 192 KHz waveform is far more accurate which is exactly what I would've expected.

Anti Aliasing filtering is not required at the production and mastering stages for either SACD or DVDa. It IS required in SACD players to remove the high energy HF noise present on the waveform and to a far lesser degree in DVDa which has no inherent HF noise generation.
You will find that the output waveform AFTER the player filtering of a 10Khz square wave will be slightly WORSE on SACD compared to DVDa at 96 KHz fs and the 192 KHZ fs DVDa representation will be by far the best of all of them.
Try the same waveform test at 20 Khz audio frequency and the difference will be even greater in favour of DVDa. :)

Oh, and I'd like to see the impulse response test at the player output. That would be far more meaningful. ;)

Titania

01-24-07, 11:48 AM

From that same page the waveforms are on -

The DSD trace, Anderson points out, is tainted by DSD’s dirty little secret: the excessive amount of noise created by one-bit sampling. To disguise it, Sony and Philips implemented a noise-shaping system that shifts noise from the lower frequencies into the ultrasonic range, where it is presumably inaudible (a debatable point in itself, Anderson maintains).

However, Anderson attributes the primary cause of the DSD “blurring” shown in Figures 5 and 6 to imprecise traces along the vertical and horizontal axes, which are much more significant than any noise superimposed on the traces themselves. He suggests these imperfections in the DSD signal are evidence of imperfections in amplitude and time domain, respectively. “Were one to zoom in on the DSD signal,” he said, “one would actually see amplitude fluctuations of 50% peak amplitude, and time domain errors similar to the 96kHz rise time deviation. The defect, when compared with the PCM photos, illustrates perfectly the reason that DSD is incapable of reproducing the same transient twice.”

What can we draw from these findings? Anderson was quick to point out that a square wave is not the most pleasurable or representative musical experience (as anyone who’s ever heard one can readily attest). However, it does provide a “torture test” yardstick. In testing one of the DSD proponents’ key marketing claims, Anderson concluded, “We can clearly see that with this particular waveform, PCM produces a much more faithful copy of the original with both accuracy and precision. It does help dispel the myth that DSD’s one-bit sampling is the panacea to the world of digital audio.”
:)

Kal Rubinson

01-24-07, 12:48 PM

Personally, I have more DVDa titles at present than I do SACD titles and that has nothing to do with technical choice. It is all about the content and what I can get and enjoy.Agreed. That's why I have nearly 2000 SACDs and about 100 DVD-As.

Sonic Accuracy

01-29-07, 09:50 PM

From the heads of Sony @ CES 2007 - "SACD is not dying and we are proceeding to bolster our support for the medium."

I believe them since it is now apparent with the release of mobile units.

On the other hand.... DVD-A is a fading format. New Tech showed at C.E.S. is going towards uncompressed high definition media (such as SACD). Systems are in place now to have enough bandwidth transmission to carry Video and Audio in it's original format - exactly like the Masters. Blue - Ray and HD - DVD both carry DTS HD audio which is truly THE only format that I have heard that comes close to competing sonically to DSD. As an recording engineer, it is the first time I commited to working in the PCM distribtuion realm to any manufacturer in the last decade. I will likely release both formats for now... but expect DSD/SACD to eventually beat out even that.

Why? Well, what most technical engineers don't explain in there 'bashing' of DSD is the future. What is thrown out is a lot of technical test that have to due with the transmission of DSD from or to PCM. Currently most of the recording process and certainly most of the playback converts somewhere between the two. That is where the issues of noise/filter/etc exist. It is kind of like someone speaking in a second language. Native speakers of that language know this person is not a native speaker.

What is the native speak of DSD? It is the same as the native speak of a transistor. So, if you theoretically apply this to where we will go in the future, DSD allows us to record, mix, design and then playback completely in the DSD format from start to finish at the amplification stages. Yes I know, the infrastructure for this is still for the most part in its infancy, but a couple manufacturers have marketed systems that maintain the DSD throughout. They sound phenomanal.

As we go into the next decade you can rest assured that efficiency of transitor use will become one of the most sought after facets of audio reproduction. It is already so in communications, and with computers setting the pace as well it will carry on throught all electronics.

Titania

01-30-07, 01:50 AM

An interesting post Sonic Accuracy.

I am sure you are aware that DVD-Audio is a totally lossless format working in the native language of the vast majority of large and small studios. I can pretty much guarantee that you will not see a fast changeover by the non Sony studios that have a significant investment in large systems like Protools HD.
Even using MLP encoding for DVD-Audio, you are still producing a master that will provide a data stream to the D/A converters which is IDENTICAL to the original master (if the engineer chooses the same bit depth and sample rate).
I'm sure it will p!ss off many in the industry if they then have to fork out extra to use Sony's proprietary DSD format.
This is Sony attempting monopolisation in their full glory!!

Sonic Accuracy

01-30-07, 06:09 PM

Yes I agree. I have been working with Sony for nigh on a decade to get them off the monopolization of it. Finally, I am seeing the steps toward that this year. I think they also realized that HD recording is coming of age in conjunction with protection of intellectual property rights - if the artists and engineers so desire to include that.

Frankly, for my business model, I am banking on the theory that we will see two levels of media distribution over the next decade or so. One will be HD formats as suggested in my last post and the other will be 'home enthusiast"/small scale production house using tools such as Pro Tools and it's competitors in the myriad of forms. Sort of back to the Vinyl onto cassette mode we had so long ago.

Oh and yes I am aware of the lossless aspect of DVD-audio - at least up to the point when it's standards where published. Again this shows another point of the fast moving pace of tech right now - in the three odd years that has been established new tech (HD DVD and Blu Ray) have extended abilities beyond that. Sadly, DVD-A doesn't support direct transfer of the highest level PCM definitions (192 kHz/24-bit) beyond left and right stereo or mono. Then that raises the point, once artists and engineers start to really understand their ability to 'paint the canvas of sound' in 5.1 + surround audio, L R and mono systems will fade away as well.

Titania

01-30-07, 10:14 PM

Some very good points Sonic. :)

I am not against DSD as a format, just the Sony monopolisation aspect. If they were to introduce software solutions and burners for studio and mastering houses to create the master discs in house, I'd be more than happy for it to co-exist with other formats.

I am about to expand my Protools system to be capable of 7.1 mixing at 192 KHz 24 bit but, as you say, the maximum specification for DVDa at that sample rate is two PCM tracks.

Hopefully blu-ray and HD DVD will not add more confusion to the market. I suspect that because it is capable of hi res audio AND pictures, it may actually help hi res surround music. Perhaps the larger record companies are holding out for that.
Once again though, I would be much more willing to embrace it if I could produce my own masters in house as I do now for other formats. It is much more satisfying to the client (and to me) to be able to play a real master on the format of choice created in house before it goes to pressing. It is much easier to quality control the final product that way.

Protools LE and its competitors are pretty much taking care of the enthusiast / indy band market whilst Protools HD holds a pretty big share of the hi res and professional market.
Skywalker Sound have one of the biggest Protools HD rigs available. It is just amazing how expandable these systems are.
My choice to use PTHD in my studio are twofold. Firstly, compatibility with the vast majority of pro studios and secondly, its usability. I came from a world of 24 track tape and non automated mixing desks and Protools 'feels' like a tape based studio. It is intuitive and logical and I can expand it as much as my budget will allow and workload requires. :)

oblio98

01-30-07, 11:28 PM

When I start seeing new SACD pop/rock releases from Sony, of "good" titles that people want, then I'll believe it. Until then, SACD & DVD-A are still in the same canoe, as far as I can see.

hdmi4ever

02-03-07, 05:26 PM

http://www.sonymusic.com/sacd/I went to that page, and clicked the link for "Titles" ... guess what, 404 not found. Same thing for many of the other links. And they expect to make money?

ematcion

02-04-07, 12:54 AM

I went to that page, and clicked the link for "Titles" ... guess what, 404 not found. Same thing for many of the other links. And they expect to make money?

That Sony site has been abandoned for ages. Same with Sony Europe's superaudio-cd.com (http://www.superaudio-cd.com/), which refers you to sa-cd.net for information on SACDs.

Titania

02-04-07, 07:48 AM

Well, hopefully Blu Ray will enjoy better success. As I have always said, I am not against Sony, just their limiting proprietary methodology behind SACD.
Blu Ray is a much more usable medium and, as a mastering engineer, I can give a client a Blu Ray master that will play in any compatible player. No need for DSD encoding and no need to rely on commercial pressing plants just to produce a playable master.
Considering Blu Ray also supports HD video and digital audio over HDMI, it should eliminate a few hurdles.

The main hurdle though is convincing a public that is more than happy with DVD that yet another 12 cm disc is actually worthwhile. Apart from significantly better audio and video, it doesn't really do anything that DVD doesn't already do (from a general consumer point of view).

Sonic Accuracy

02-13-07, 07:17 PM

Which begs another point about discs... I too wonder wether they will embrace another disc format. I sat in a discussion last NAB convention with the lead engineer from Maxell and IMHO tech like the holographic card which is about 1 more year out will kill 'discs' in whatever form. 300gb on the size of a credit card roughly in its first generation with expected capacity to be over a terrabyte in 5 years!!

Storage space is quickly fading as the obstacle. Benefits of size and less moving parts (spin motors and loading mechs) are a huge desirability function for consumers.

hotguy8289

02-13-07, 09:01 PM

Interesting news regarding automobile SACD playback, one of the things I often see holding people back from SACD was no car player, maybe this will help here if the players are released in the US. I found a lot more to purchase in both SACD and DVD-A the last year than I thought I would, the formats have more life left than predicted. I hope 2007 is even better, but I expect to have to import SACD's to find much of interest.

Chris

:eek:
I went to that page, and clicked the link for "Titles" ... guess what, 404 not found. Same thing for many of the other links. And they expect to make money?

Classic example of "the right hand now knowing what the left hand is doing".
Incredible! And btw, I still hope Sony chokes on BD. :)

fresno1232001

02-14-07, 01:11 AM

Suddenly a long thread discussing DSD, like it's a household word. I have never, ever heard of it. Blue Ray and HD have suddenly brought this format- or whatever it is- into the open, is that it?
It was all over the net about 18 mos ago that Sony had abandoned SACD. Now, it seems not.
I'm just a layman who loves fantastic fidelity, and I want the experts among you to know that there is a huge market for a format that offers stunning fidelity. I think the audiophiles are still around in strength- frustrated totally by the demise of the LP, the replacement of it by the CD, and the tiny catalog of DVD-A and SACD titles. I have never liked CDs because they sound tinney and harsh to me. Give me vinyl any day. I also have ~100 Barclay-Crocker reel to reel classical tapes (and two of Joan Baez- just heavenly) which I listen to on my Pioneer RT 707 deck. Fabulous analog. They had it right from the 1920s to 1983! Then they screwed up big-time with the CD format.
Because CD players cost a lot in 1992 and the typical Mexican consumer had less buying power that the Nortes, you could find lots of LPs in stores in Guadalajara 1992-1995 when I lived there. They had factories still pressing LPs in Mexico at that time. I bought a few, including some Beatles and Fleetwood Mac while I was there.
In 2005 I bought a Panny S-97 DVD/DVD-A player. I own ~15 DVD-As. I am still in stereo mode using a Tandberg 2075 receiver and Allison 1 speakers. I have thought that the DVD-As seemed over-loaded somehow. I finally unhooked the "loudness" control on the Tandberg, and, while the loss of the bass boost seemed sort of a shock, I now see that the overload impression of the format is less that way. I know that in stereo I'm mixing down 5.1 tracks to 2, including the LFE track, so little wonder that stereo playback of a DVD-A with the loudness button engaged does strange things.
I am all hot now for the new Sherwood Newcastle 972 receiver shown at CES 2007 and available in August, 2007. With it, I shall move to 5.1, probably adding Axiom speakers. It will have the codecs for Dolby True HD and DTS HD Master Audio on board. I got Sherwood-Newcastle to make a change in the 972 for the required 10 dB boost in LFE when running (some signal) over HDMI. They had just over-looked it. See the audio theory area of AVSforum to see that 31 page discussion. This new receiver should offer stunning fidelity from Blue Ray and HD discs. Major point: I really, truly think that there would be a market for audio-only discs in these formats. Apparently they could hold 20 albums, but the copyrighted content would make them cost $200 if they did. The blank discs are probably very cheap. So I suggest just putting 2 or 3 albums on a disc and maybe just some video of passenger jets taking off and landing or video of bears catching salmon or something. Just some easy- to- produce, interesting, non-copyrighted video to go with the copyrighted music. That would make them affordable.
The new Panny DMPBD10 Blue Ray player plays 5.1 DVD-A too, they say. BB has them for $1199. All it needed was some software to play DVD-A. If more mfrers of the hi-def players would do that, it would help DVD-A AND the player sales. Since DVD-A is a DTS product, is it possible that the hi-def players that can play DTS-HD Master Audio can all play DVD-A too? If so, they should publicize the fact.
If the Dolby True HD and DTS-HD Master Audio codecs can produce better sound than DVD-A, then I will gladly buy audio-only discs in those formats. Once I hear DVD-A on 5.1 equipment- and I never have- it may be all the fidelity I ever need. But I am hopeful that the new codecs will be exploited fully in an audio-only way. I wish someone who has heard them could compare them to vinyl here.
There is one record company still issuing DVD-As and making them from original performances too- AIX Records in Los Angeles. Would someone who owns some of those please tell us how they compare to DVD-As made from old tapes from the 70s. The owner tells me his sound a lot better than other DVD-As.
One last point- The Beatles Love DVD-A does not produce the oppressive feeling of other DVD-As mentioned above even with the loudness button engaged. I wonder why. AND- will the new Sherwood-Newcastle 972 receiver play signals from the new holographic card, or will the card obsolete all the new receivers coming out next fall? If so, I'm ditching electronic sound, moving to Scotland and listening to the birds sing.
Thanks for reading.

Which begs another point about discs... I too wonder wether they will embrace another disc format. I sat in a discussion last NAB convention with the lead engineer from Maxell and IMHO tech like the holographic card which is about 1 more year out will kill 'discs' in whatever form. 300gb on the size of a credit card roughly in its first generation with expected capacity to be over a terrabyte in 5 years!!

Storage space is quickly fading as the obstacle. Benefits of size and less moving parts (spin motors and loading mechs) are a huge desirability function for consumers.

Titania

02-14-07, 04:20 AM

........I sat in a discussion last NAB convention with the lead engineer from Maxell and IMHO tech like the holographic card which is about 1 more year out will kill 'discs' in whatever form. 300gb on the size of a credit card roughly in its first generation with expected capacity to be over a terrabyte in 5 years!!

Storage space is quickly fading as the obstacle. Benefits of size and less moving parts (spin motors and loading mechs) are a huge desirability function for consumers.
I had no idea that this sort of technology was so close!! Actually, I see optical (holographic, crystal, whatever) as the answer to replacement of other storage meduims such as PC hard drives. Removing the moving mechanical parts is definitely the way forward. :)

........There is one record company still issuing DVD-As and making them from original performances too- AIX Records in Los Angeles. Would someone who owns some of those please tell us how they compare to DVD-As made from old tapes from the 70s. The owner tells me his sound a lot better than other DVD-As.......
As a professional matering engineer, I can answer that question directly for you. :)
In stereo only mode, DVDa's are capable of exact bit for bit reproduction of 192KHz / 24 bit PCM audio. In 5.1 mode, they are capable of 96KHz / 24 bit. Most recent recordings are made at 96 KHz / 24 bit which means, in it's native form, DVDa in stereo can outperform the original master and in 5.1 can match a 96 K recording exactly. Some high end and classical recordings are being done at 192K / 24 bit stereo and even these can be reproduced exactly on DVDa.
In fact, I am using DVDa in my studio as a bit for bit archival format for masters. They are reliable, cost effective and space efficient AND they can reproduce exactly what practically ANY high end digital studio can create.
If you had a perfect player and a set of monitors and room the same as the studio that mastered the original album, you would hear exactly what they did from the studio master.

Blu Ray, HD DVD and any future optical format can reproduce full 192KHz / 24 bit mutichannel audio exactly.

The ultimate quality of a DVDa (or other HD format) ultimately depends on the time and care taken to transfer and restore the original masters (assuming older recordings) and the quality and condition of such masters. More often than not, budgets and record company accountants limit the end result.
I agree with you completely about the Beatles - Love. That is a superb engineering and mastering job. But, then again, we are talking about the influence of one Sir George Martin and his son. :)

Chris Gerhard

02-14-07, 06:56 AM

There is one record company still issuing DVD-As and making them from original performances too- AIX Records in Los Angeles. Would someone who owns some of those please tell us how they compare to DVD-As made from old tapes from the 70s. The owner tells me his sound a lot better than other DVD-As.

I have only one AIX title, Bad Haggis - "Span featuring Ruben Blades". I haven't been able to get into the music although I like Ruben but his contribution is minimal. I had never heard of Bad Haggis, nor many of the other artists on the label. Fidelity and production is first rate with this label, commercial artists are nowhere to be found. I do hope the label continues to prosper and releases more DVD-A titles and I plan to determine if some of them are of interest when I get a chance, but it is difficult to have a feel for any of the releases without having them in the house for a while. My guess on one I would like appears to be a miss. I agree with the owner, the sound quality is first rate.

Chris

Ovation

02-14-07, 11:06 AM

I have several classical AIX discs and the sound quality is phenomenal. I also love the fact they offer a stage surround mix (albeit in lossy DTS) in addition to the audience/ambience mix.

jayna_95

02-14-07, 01:34 PM

Laurence Juber's "Guitar Noir" is a great example of an AIX disc. The instrumental Strawberry Fields is awesome.

oztech

02-14-07, 06:18 PM

my curiousity got the best of me i ordered the sampler of aix.

Chris Gerhard

02-14-07, 06:19 PM

Sendmemovies.com is discounting some AIX titles now, still not cheap, but may be of interest to some here. I am not sure how this SACD thread has veered off into AIX DVD-A discussion, but here we are.

http://www.sendmemovies.com/searchadv.aspx?IsSubmit=true&SearchTerm=aix&submit.x=9&submit.y=18

Chris

Sonic Accuracy

02-14-07, 06:40 PM

While at CES this year I noticed a distinct lack of backward support for DVD-A in HD DVD units, not to mention I am certain you would never see it in a Blur-ray. Can't say for certain why this is, I did not pursue it since as I mentioned I felt it is a fading format for certain. One important note is that currently DTS HD audio is realeased in "core" format on most players. This is still a slightly compressed format. DTS HD Master is the full uncompressed version which I heard and mentioned previously.

Suffice it to say, it will be interesting to see where the DVD side of the fence washes out as a video format, let alone audio.

Ovation

02-14-07, 09:54 PM

I think a number of us are format "omnivores". I know we're a minority, but I, for one, plan to get into both HD DVD and Blu-Ray when I have a display capable of reaping the benefits of those formats. I have a universal audio player and I buy both DVD-As and SACDs (my choices are content-driven, not format driven). In my system I also have cassettes, VHS tapes, Mini-Disc and I will be putting my vinyl collection back in play sometime this year. I've thought about getting into laserdisc and reel to reel as well, though only if I have left over disposable money.

My primary purchases for music, though, have been hi-res MCH DVD-A and SACD. I'm buying a bit faster than I can listen (especially DVD-A) as I don't want to miss out on stuff that may go out of print. It is my fervent wish that hi-res MCH audio/video will be the norm for concert hi-def discs (it is disappointing that the Eagles Live in Melbourne does NOT contain a hi-res audio track--I'm not all that interested in seeing Joe Walsh's wrinkles in hi-def if the audio is not any better than the regular DVD).

One standard would be great, but, as long as I can afford it, I will have as many formats as I can get.

himey

02-15-07, 12:19 AM

While at CES this year I noticed a distinct lack of backward support for DVD-A in HD DVD units, not to mention I am certain you would never see it in a Blur-ray.

Actually the Panny Blu-ray player supports DVD-Audio (but not SACD). Go figure...

Chris Gerhard

02-15-07, 04:37 AM

Actually the Panny Blu-ray player supports DVD-Audio (but not SACD). Go figure...

Not hard to figure since I haven't ever seen a Panasonic or other Matsushita brand player support SACD. The best Panasonic DVD players did not.

Chris

fresno1232001

02-17-07, 04:04 PM

I've called both 800 numbers for Sendmemovies the past two days and you get a machine saying "leave a message". That does not inspire great confidence in me. Can anyone vouch for them?
Now that I have put several of you onto Aix Records' DVD-As, please let me bend the rules slightly here. I am in stereo mode, as I said above, and I will go 5.1 when the new receivers come out in fall, 2007. I'll keep my Allison One mains and add a center channel and left and right rear speakers. Many of you have done that no doubt, so would you please just post here the name and price of what speakers you added that you think are wonderful, and the same for ones you feel you got burned on. If you just give the brand, model numbers perhaps, price, and love them or hate them, it would be very helpful. Thanks.
Sendmemovies.com is discounting some AIX titles now, still not cheap, but may be of interest to some here. I am not sure how this SACD thread has veered off into AIX DVD-A discussion, but here we are.

http://www.sendmemovies.com/searchadv.aspx?IsSubmit=true&SearchTerm=aix&submit.x=9&submit.y=18

Chris

buc18

02-17-07, 04:20 PM

I've called both 800 numbers for Sendmemovies the past two days and you get a machine saying "leave a message". That does not inspire great confidence in me. Can anyone vouch for them?
Now that I have put several of you onto Aix Records' DVD-As, please let me bend the rules slightly here. I am in stereo mode, as I said above, and I will go 5.1 when the new receivers come out in fall, 2007. I'll keep my Allison One mains and add a center channel and left and right rear speakers. Many of you have done that no doubt, so would you please just post here the name and price of what speakers you added that you think are wonderful, and the same for ones you feel you got burned on. If you just give the brand, model numbers perhaps, price, and love them or hate them, it would be very helpful. Thanks.

I have bought from them in the past and I would again. The only problem I encountered was placing an order and assuming they had what I wanted in stock (silly me). But I was able to reach someone on the toll free # and he was very helpful. Hope this helps.

hdmi4ever

02-18-07, 06:41 AM

kevin j

02-18-07, 11:27 AM

DSD stands for Direct Stream Digital btw.

hdmi4ever

02-18-07, 12:17 PM

DSD stands for Direct Stream Digital btw.OOPS! Fixed that. Somehow the "sigma delta" aspect of SACD got into my head when I was typing.

fresno1232001

02-20-07, 05:27 PM

I just ordered "Guitar Noir" and "Latin Jazz Trio" on Aix from www.sendmemovies.com, along with Neil Young "On the Beach" and "Elvis 30 #1 Hits", all DVD-As. Only $82.68 with Calif. sales tax and shipping for the four. Who needs great-sounding LPs at $4.95 each? I'll post when I hear them and let you know if Aix DVD-As really are better than other DVD-As.
I found by looking at www.gradolabs.com and www.needledoctor.com where to get a new stylus for my Grado G1+ cartridge. It's $90. I listened to some LPs last couple days and you forget just how fantastic they are. Warm, rich, nuanced, full, melodic, musical and pleasing. BTW, Grado is a booming business and sells magnetic cartridges in the thousands of dollars for people who love warm, rich, nuanced, etc sound. If the new Dolby HD and DTS HD Master Audio discs in 7.1 don't outdo most of the DVD-As, I'll give up on digital sound altogether, and just spend my money on used LPs. Maybe if enough people do that, we'll get a re-birth of the LP, a format that should never have died. The CD was forced onto the market by the strong-arm tatic of ceasing LP production so they could charge three times the price and sell new players. Now that the CD is dying, and DVD-A and SACD seem to be dying too due to a total absence of marketing, maybe we can get back to the greatest format for music yet devised.
I find that the music in some standard def movies sounds better to me than DVD-As do. For example, music in "From Hell". Says THX at the opening. Anyone else feel that way?
I have bought from them in the past and I would again. The only problem I encountered was placing an order and assuming they had what I wanted in stock (silly me). But I was able to reach someone on the toll free # and he was very helpful. Hope this helps.