or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › blu ray audio cd's?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

blu ray audio cd's? - Page 2

post #31 of 55
Probably for a niche audience only, but Lou Reed's Metal Machine Music is coming out on Blu Ray:


http://www.loureed.com/metalmachinemusic/
post #32 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by AmishFury View Post

lets face the facts.. even the golden eared audiophiles would at best notice only a very subtle difference between 24/96 and 16/44.1

I agree with the subtle. But you don't need to be a golden eared audiophile. I've got a few of the new King Crimson DVD-As, which have the same stereo mix on the CD in 16/44.1 and 24/96. The difference is absolutely a subtle one, but anyone can hear it. Or at least the 6 or so people I have A/Bed the tracks for can. Most of whom don't have any interest in audio quality.

It's also variable from album to album. THe difference is near negligible on the Beatles Love DVD-A
post #33 of 55
I still can't get over the guys who chose DVDA as their acronym.
post #34 of 55
Thread Starter 
Quote:
rdgrimes wrote

Offerings from 2L and AIX signal that BD audio discs are not impossible, but they will always be expensive and limited releases.

Is it possible for you to pm me on the information for these blu ray audio discs?
post #35 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by hlwl View Post

Limited to lowly 16 bit PCM encoding and a 44.1 kHz sampling rate...

There was a reason newer, superior audio formats such as SACD and DVD-A was released.

Where is Amir?

You realize that SACD was 1 bit?
post #36 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwi2000 View Post

Is it possible for you to pm me on the information for these blu ray audio discs?

Google is your friend:

http://www.2l.no/

http://www.aixrecords.com/
post #37 of 55
I came across this listing of video as well as some audio only blurays.

http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/movies.php?genre=Music
post #38 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by AmishFury View Post

lets face the facts.. even the golden eared audiophiles would at best notice only a very subtle difference between 24/96 and 16/44.1

Thanks for the compliment. I can tell a huge difference.
Quote:


SD vs HD video is much less subtle... it's more comparable to stereo vs surround sound

Not really a valid analogy. It's about resolution, not more channels.
post #39 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwi2000 View Post

Hey chill space

These titiles we are speaking of are readily available on e*ay for less.

Yes, they are.
post #40 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrCrawn View Post

Where is Amir?

You realize that SACD was 1 bit?

1 bit with oversampling

Quote:
Originally Posted by Milt99 View Post

Thanks for the compliment. I can tell a huge difference.

are you sure it's not just because of a different master?
post #41 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by AmishFury View Post

1 bit with oversampling



are you sure it's not just because of a different master?

The albums I mentioned come with a 16/44.1 CD version from the same master. So it is a pretty direct comparison.
post #42 of 55
again it could still be a different master

that CD master could be the overcompressed clipping nightmare that most CDs are while the high res could be very different best example of the kind of thing i'm talking about is the CD vs Guitar Hero 3 versions of Death Magnetic while not a DVD-A/SACD/BD vs CD comparison it's still a valid point

the only way to know is to compare the waveforms
post #43 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by moothemagiccow View Post

I still can't get over the guys who chose DVDA as their acronym.

This coming from someone w/:
Moo
&
Cow
&
Magic
in their's!
post #44 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by AmishFury View Post

again it could still be a different master

that CD master could be the overcompressed clipping nightmare that most CDs are while the high res could be very different best example of the kind of thing i'm talking about is the CD vs Guitar Hero 3 versions of Death Magnetic while not a DVD-A/SACD/BD vs CD comparison it's still a valid point

the only way to know is to compare the waveforms

While I will certainly acknowledge the possibility, in the case of the Crimson albums, that is highly unlikely. Both were created at the same time under supervision of the same two people (one being Fripp). Additionally, when I play them back, they are at the same volume level on my preamp, about 12-15dB higher than the overcompressed clipping nightmares in my collection.

The only discernible differences are slightly improved detail and such on the 24/96 versions.
post #45 of 55
High-Quality Blu-ray Audio Format Incoming


http://news.softpedia.com/news/High-Quality-Blu-ray-Audio-Format-Incoming-295653.shtml


Can anyone explain what is different about this when compared to the few Blu-ray audio format discs I already have. I currently have...

Rush Moving Pictures...

Audio
English: LPCM 2.0 (96kHz, 24-bit)
English: LPCM 5.1 (96kHz, 24-bit)
English: DTS-HD Master Audio 5.1 (96kHz, 24-bit)

Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers

5.1 96kHz/24bit DTS-HD Master Audio
5.1 96kHz/24bit PCM
2.0 96kHz/24bit PCM

According to the article dated 09-30-2012, there is a new high end audio format coming. Though I don't see it offering anything different than what's currently available.
post #46 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thebarnman View Post

High-Quality Blu-ray Audio Format Incoming
http://news.softpedia.com/news/High-Quality-Blu-ray-Audio-Format-Incoming-295653.shtml
Can anyone explain what is different about this when compared to the few Blu-ray audio format discs I already have. I currently have...
Rush Moving Pictures...
Audio
English: LPCM 2.0 (96kHz, 24-bit)
English: LPCM 5.1 (96kHz, 24-bit)
English: DTS-HD Master Audio 5.1 (96kHz, 24-bit)
Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers
5.1 96kHz/24bit DTS-HD Master Audio
5.1 96kHz/24bit PCM
2.0 96kHz/24bit PCM
According to the article dated 09-30-2012, there is a new high end audio format coming. Though I don't see it offering anything different than what's currently available.

Very limited info but it sounds like it may be something similar to Dolby's TrueHD Upsampaling "trick". One thing is certain, it can't be higher quality that the 96/24 bit master and BD already covers this.

It could be a way of avoiding costly remasters by using legacy CD Masters by Upsampaling. Also could be for "other" markets like Japan so they can rerelease "HD audio" from "old" CD Masters since they don't have access to 96/24 masters.
post #47 of 55
From a 9/25/2012 CDRinf article Companies To Promote New High-quality Blu-ray Audio Discs (link):

Quote:
"The companies formed the "Promotion Group of Blu-ray Disc for High Resolution Audio" to accelerate the adoption oversampled, high bit-rate audio stored in Blu-ray discs. The new Blu-ray discs for high resolution audio will store 96kHz/24bit (2 CH) or 192kHz/24bit (7.1 CH) Linear PCM audio (uncompressed.) The main benefit is that Linear PCM is simpler and maintains the quality of the master without any degradation that may occur from using a compression technique. The chief disadvantage is that it takes a lot of disc space.

The discs are compatible with BD players and BD recorders. However, the BD Video standard supports up to 96kHz and optionally 192kHz 192kHz/24bit, so both 192kHz and 96kHz versions of the audio will be included in the new Blu-ray discs. "
post #48 of 55
Neil Young also has a new Hi-Rez audio format coming out called Pono. I am perfectly happy with my SACDs, but I realize the music labels have let that ship sail away already.
post #49 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phantom Stranger View Post

Neil Young also has a new Hi-Rez audio format coming out called Pono. I am perfectly happy with my SACDs, but I realize the music labels have let that ship sail away already.
SACD wasn't the music label's fault. Sony is solely responsible for the failure of SACD because they kept SACD locked in their basement on a short chain by limiting the format to only two replication lines which they controlled and making it inaccessible to the recording industry. Do you know why SACD had success in Japan? Because one of the two replication lines was in that country. The other was in Europe somewhere, which is why SACD also had some measurable success in Europe with classical labels as well as rock while it floundered here in America.
post #50 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by William View Post


Very limited info but it sounds like it may be something similar to Dolby's TrueHD Upsampaling "trick". One thing is certain, it can't be higher quality that the 96/24 bit master and BD already covers this.

It could be a way of avoiding costly remasters by using legacy CD Masters by Upsampaling. Also could be for "other" markets like Japan so they can rerelease "HD audio" from "old" CD Masters since they don't have access to 96/24 masters.

Exactly what I was thinking when I saw "oversampled". Not that fake upsampling crap again for goodness sake, we already have oversampling CD players, DAC, BDP and receivers for all that. EMI has been remastering old tapes (classical) to 2CH 96/24 for SACD so not everyone is going down that route.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundChex View Post

Quote:
oversampled, high bit-rate audio stored in Blu-ray discs. The new Blu-ray discs for high resolution audio will store 96kHz/24bit (2 CH) or 192kHz/24bit (7.1 CH) Linear PCM audio (uncompressed.)


The Blu-ray spec only supports 96/24 7.1 or 192/24 5.1, so dunno how they manage 192/24 7.1.
post #51 of 55
I feel I should share a recent experience with audio that has flavored my opinion on things like lossless formats, 24-bit samples, high sample rates, etc. Unless you're just wanting to spend money on new things for the sake of it, you owe it to yourself to do a similar experiment.

Download the free foobar2000 audio player and the ABX Comparator plug-in. The plug-in allows you do to double-blind testing between any two audio tracks.

I recently re-ripped several CD's to FLAC format that I had originally ripped to MP3, as I'd been curious about that for some time. The MP3's were encoded with LAME at the highest setting, so they are high quality MP3's (if you believe in such a thing!). The FLAC albums sounded richer to me. More dimensional. Cleaner somehow.

So to prove to myself I wasn't biased toward the FLAC files when I knew that's what was playing, I A/B'd portions of a track to compare the MP3 and FLAC versions. The track I chose has clean female vocals, violin, acoustic guitar, and crisp snare drums and cymbals. I used a high quality DAC and headphone amp with what I understand to be decent headphones (AKG Q701's). It was a lot harder to tell the difference than I thought it was going to be, but I was confident in my choices.

I got 4 out of 10 right.

That was sobering and a massive reality check. Now I realize there's a small portion of the population that have super-duper golden ears and maybe it's possible that you are one of those one in a million or whatever. But I don't think it's likely. Before you get too deep into 24-bit audio or really anything beyond CD quality, do a double-blind test between a CD quality track and the 24-bit version of the same track (or whatever). You might be surprised at the results.
post #52 of 55
As a recent convert to sacd and dvd-a, I hope blu-ray audio takes off and replaces those two dying (and slightly expensive) formats. Especially if BR-audio discs are more affordable, better availability and offer more content. I've heard SACD's that sound marvelous and others that sound like the audio was run through a cheap reverb DSP to mimick the multi-channel experience. The best rock SACD Multi-Channel I've heard yet is Dire Straits Brothers in Arms.

If record companies want to get consumers interested in MC audio, they should really work with stores to set up and show off what MC is capable of. I guarantee they will get converts who have the dough to put down for a MC speaker rig.
post #53 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phantom Stranger View Post

Neil Young also has a new Hi-Rez audio format coming out called Pono.
GREAT....another format to deal with.rolleyes.gif

Quote:
Originally Posted by LexInVA View Post

SACD wasn't the music label's fault. Sony is solely responsible for the failure of SACD because they kept SACD locked in their basement on a short chain by limiting the format to only two replication lines which they controlled and making it inaccessible to the recording industry.
The whole SACD/DVD-A fiasco leaves a bitter taste in my mouth.
I love the sound quality, but somewhere along the line it didn't take off.
IMO, Sony shoulders most of the blame here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gloco View Post

As a recent convert to sacd and dvd-a, I hope blu-ray audio takes off and replaces those two dying (and slightly expensive) formats. Especially if BR-audio discs are more affordable, better availability and offer more content.
AND if they have a CD track.
I listen to CDs in my cars a great deal.
post #54 of 55
It would appear that technologies like Pure Audio Blu-ray from www.msm-studios.com already deliver a similar audio-only BD product, e.g. the BD version of "SOUVENIR" by TrondheimSolistene (link) from Norwegian music label 2L.
post #55 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kilian.ca View Post

Exactly what I was thinking when I saw "oversampled". Not that fake upsampling crap again for goodness sake, we already have oversampling CD players, DAC, BDP and receivers for all that. EMI has been remastering old tapes (classical) to 2CH 96/24 for SACD so not everyone is going down that route.
The Blu-ray spec only supports 96/24 7.1 or 192/24 5.1, so dunno how they manage 192/24 7.1.

They wrote it backward. It's 7.1 at 24/96.

Lee
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray Software
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › blu ray audio cd's?