AVS Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 24 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,385 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
 DVD-Audio and SACD fail to impress electronics consumers - well sooner or later one or both may or should still eventually catch on.


"When Sony re-released the Rolling Stones catalog as hybrid SACDs, it left out the word "SACD" on the packaging material -- folks at the label feared the albums would be relegated to some "high definition" bin in the far corner of record stores. The reissues sold about 2 million copies."


Since there are now so many DVD-A players, maybe those folks can do something similar...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,330 Posts
Not suprising, the quality is no better on your average consumer system. Sure, its multichannel but there's still very little music released as such. I think as more and more people get quality multichannel for movies they'll start to buy more and more SACD and DVD-A.


I have both and love them for multichannel, yet I find there to only be subtle differences on my low-fi system in 2 channel mode.


Wes
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
254 Posts
Sorry, but I don't see either format ever being a significant force in the audio world, unless its the only choice consumers have.


There just is no compelling reason to buy these disks unless you have a multi- thousand dollar audio system to hear the slight differences.

Yes, there are purists that will buy them, but the general public could care less if these disks or players are available.


jammarjim
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,261 Posts
I do not have a multi-million dollar system and the difference to CD is abysmal. I do agree the general public does not give importance to audio quality nor video quality. There are millions of people buying the cheapest DVD player there is and CD player and think the image and the sound is great. Personally I think MP3 is garbage (I cannot listen to one music through it for more than 5 minutes) so I'm against the current:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
727 Posts
"DVD-Audio and SACD fail to impress electronics consumers"


This is the best news about SACD/DVD-Audio. Any media product that to such degree reduces the consumer's fair use rights as to make him/her a criminal for trying to make a backup copy, a compilation for in-car use, and that is completely PC unfriendly, deserves to be ignored by consumers.


The advertised improvements in the audio quality are far too small to offset the loss fair use rights.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,229 Posts
Well, I have a decent stereo system in one room and a decent home theater system in a different room. The higher resolution formats are a good idea, although it much depends on how the original material sounds and the differences seem apparent. A well done CD can sound pretty good:)


The biggest problem this push for multi-channel music has is that to my ears at least, stereo is the only way to go for music. You sit, you listen, and it sounds right.


The multichannel stuff is a must for movies. For music, after few rounds it gets tiring. Too gimmicky and too fake for serious music. I know the audio industry (and magazines) would love to sell more high end speakers and amps, but stereo just sounds natural. Quadro anyone?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
329 Posts
I seem to be in the minority....but I have both DVD-Audio AND SACD discs in my invenotry, and frequently play them in my home theater.


They are both great, and improve standard CD sound - virtually "HD Sound".


The local Best Buy seems to be selling more and more of both in the past few months, as I've seen their inventories reduced quicker. I asked,a nd they said their sales on both are up since Xmas as well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,441 Posts
I have both also and love them. In the beginning I was firmly in the DVD-A camp and thought Sony was 'Batamaxing" the market. Now it looks like SACD may have a coup with the hybrid disc. In the future all CD's could be SACD's. People who want Multi channel HD sound would be happy and CD owners could be blissfully ignorant.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
602 Posts
I have had both formats and enjoyed the benefits of both but the piss poor catalog of each media leaves much to be desired. The lack of titles is what is hurting the format. I think I can live without the Police and Rolling Stones for the next few decades. How much of my life must I be subjected to the same damn music over and over and over and over again? Isn't listening to same 6 songs on every radio station enough?


I sold my Panasonic RP-91 in favor of HTPC and I currently have a Pioneer DV-563A that's been sitting in a box for months. I have no interest in the released catalog of titles so as a consumer I suppose I can admit to being unimpressed. :) Fair use has some part to play but overall what's there to backup?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
306 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by pradike
I seem to be in the minority....but I have both DVD-Audio AND SACD discs in my invenotry, and frequently play them in my home theater.


They are both great, and improve standard CD sound - virtually "HD Sound".


The local Best Buy seems to be selling more and more of both in the past few months, as I've seen their inventories reduced quicker. I asked,a nd they said their sales on both are up since Xmas as well.
The popularity of flatscreen TVs and home-theatre-in-a-box systems are undoubtedly contributing to the interest in these formats.


You're perhaps in the minority but you're not alone. I will say that multichannel audio requires a higher degree of attention when listening - it can't really be background music. But I'm one of those people who like to take time out and forget my crappy day by getting lost in a good album. The audio quality is excellent on the albums I've invested in. I've got a few on both CD and DVD-A formats, and the DVD-A formats have an arguably clearer bottom end and warmer sound regardless of the number of speakers used.


Having said that, I have no issue with the Redbook CD format for what it is; however I worry that its years are numbered due to the increasing popularity of sub-CD quality digital music. If I had a choice between a DRM-protected "CD or better" quality format or $.99/track sub-CD quality music, I'd opt for the former any day.


-Doug
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
232 Posts
William, I believe Sony is pushing an inferior product, but hey, they have a stake in it. The music on SACDs is just not as encoded as well, and in response to SACDs winning because of being hybrid, check this out. At first we'll have flippers, but in the end real hybrids, but I hope to do away with CD's entirely (unless we can never figure out how to rip DVD-A).


DVD-A is simply better, but it lacks titles. I think it will win though because the consumer hears DVD in DVD-A and CD in SACD and thinks DVD is better (which it is).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
306 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by Shawn Pilichis
I have had both formats and enjoyed the benefits of both but the piss poor catalog of each media leaves much to be desired. The lack of titles is what is hurting the format. I think I can live without the Police and Rolling Stones for the next few decades. How much of my life must I be subjected to the same damn music over and over and over and over again? Isn't listening to same 6 songs on every radio station enough?


I sold my Panasonic RP-91 in favor of HTPC and I currently have a Pioneer DV-563A that's been sitting in a box for months. I have no interest in the released catalog of titles so as a consumer I suppose I can admit to being unimpressed. :) Fair use has some part to play but overall what's there to backup?
I've been realtively happy with the released content, particularly on the DVD-A side. Deep Purple and Yes both have two albums released and I certainly hope more on the way (they were both early adopters of DVD for concerts). R.E.M.'s latest came to DVD-A at the same time as CD. I've got some Queen in there too. I think the biggest hurdle is that in order to do it _right_, it actually takes a lot of time and effort to remix in 5.1. As production houses get more skilled at doing what "works" and avoiding what's considered over-the-top, releases will be faster.


FWIW I've got an HTPC and 563A as you, but mine are both in constant use. My CD collection is ripped lossless onto the HTPC but "discs" are played in the Pioneer. It's an easy deliniation for my wife and kid. :)


-Doug
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
602 Posts
Doug,


You confirmed my point. Deep Purple, Yes, Queen... I am 32 years old and have lived that generation of music since the earliest days I can remember. I doubt I will ever buy another Deep Purple album or Queen album. Some people prefer evolution over stagnancy. I like the music, but not enough to worship it till the end of my days. Some times I can't stomach hearing it anymore.


I bought my first Yamaha 8x oversampling CD player in 1984 as a teenager. Been there, done that with all that music. I would love some Crystal Method or Rob Zombie in multi channel. I have all the Wings, Police, Steve Miller Band, Santana yadda yadda DTS CD's since they came out but I am so tired of the old rehashed material. Give me new modern and exciting music worthy of multi channel mixes.


Yes, Dark Side of the Moon is maybe the best release but I have Pink Floyd etched into my psychi since birth. It's all too tired to me. I'm not saying any of the music or the talent is bad, it's just simply tired and old. Funny how the latest technologies always sort of go back in time when it come to media. The first DVD's were laughable too.


I knew a guy a few years back that always listened to Journey, Air Supply, Kiss. Triumph... I suppose if he weren't a janitor at age 40 he might be encouraged buy the newer formats.


The only true benefit to SACD and DVD-A to mass consumers right now is the high quality sound which ironically, is not spoken in the same sentence with mass consumers. I don't know anyone that puts quality first, meaning they invest in the proper equipment that can play back the media at proper resolutions. Simply owning it doesn't mean you are experiencing it. Which is why many people don't hear much difference, in turn are the mass consumers the studios are targeting and thus are the people that should not even be wasting their time with it.


These formats are far superior to any normal audio CD without D/A processing, this I know from my own experience. But it is worth investing the money to hear the same music that is going on 30 years old already? Not to me.


Man without mullet...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,639 Posts
If I could get music I listen to on either format, I would be all over it. However, I have yet to see a single title I would purchase. Kinda makes it hard to justify a purchase when there is no software I'm interested in. Like Shawn said, I really don't need another version of some dinosaur rock album. I already have them on vinyl and CD. I want new music on these formats.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
306 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by Shawn Pilichis
Doug,


You confirmed my point. Deep Purple, Yes, Queen... I am 32 years old and have lived that generation of music since the earliest days I can remember. I doubt I will ever buy another Deep Purple album or Queen album. Some people prefer evolution over stagnancy. I like the music, but not enough to worship it till the end of my days. Some times I can't stomach hearing it anymore.


These formats are far superior to any normal audio CD without D/A processing, this I know from my own experience. But it is worth investing the money to hear the same music that is going on 30 years old already? Not to me.


Man without mullet...
Sorry for the loooong post everyone, but this stuff really interests me so I'm going to spill my guts! Then I'll shut up.


First, I truly believe the DVD-A format is following, give or take, the same path to acceptance that DVD did. Perhaps a little slower. Multiple standards, DRM paranoia, the need for costly new hardware, long lags between VHS and DVD releases, expensive media, public confusion over the beneifts (I can't record onto it?!), legacy system integration (what, I can't plug it into the RF input on my 19" Zenith?!). Blah blah blah. Feel free to rip me apart on this one, I'm just stating what I believe is true: that history will repeat in a similar fashion.


Anyway, howdy Shawn - points noted.


We're about the same age actually, a year apart. But I've become more jaded with new bands of the last five years than I can ever imagine being with my all-time faves like DP and Yes. However my saving grace is that these bands, while fading out of the mainstream, have never stopped producing solid music right to the present (some noteable exceptions aside...). FWIW, of the two Yes albums I own on DVD-A, one (Fragile) is, what, 31 years old or so? The other, Magnification (performed with an orchestra in place of synths), is 2 years old. Inasmuch as DP is concerned, I'm eagerly awaiting Warner to announce something new from the Morse era, like the venerable Purpendicular (1996) or Bananas (2003) on DVD-A.


So I guess if I had to make a point, it's that I'm definitely looking forward to more contemporary titles being released, as you are, but perhaps just more optimistically. Simply because what is there has only wet my appetite for more, rather than dishearten me.


Here is my attempt at understanding what's been chosen as the flagship titles on DVD-A or SACD:


1) It's very natural for the labels to re-release the "classics" of various eras and genres first, in an attempt to hook people like me who can (just) afford gear good enough to appreciate the difference, and also appreciate those classics. I suppose I fall squarely into their target market, eh? (Listening to Billy Joel's "The Stranger" right now). Is this theory basically flawed, and the reason for the lackluster adoption? That article at the top of this thread strongly suggests it.


2) Many artists who have been in the industry since the advent of 8-tracks have been least happy with their CD releases, not necessarily for technological reasons but also because at the time nobody understood the complexities of remastering for the digital domain - stuff sounded generally like crap for the first three years. I remember Roger Glover relating in an interview how he bought one of the first CD players on the market when In Rock was released on disc, and how utterly disappointed he was in how it sounded. So he took it upon himself to remaster the entire DP library for CD over the next ten years. So many others are eager to try again, which is one reason for their unusually high presence on the shelves. For instance, Neil Young has embraced DVD-Audio because he feels it offers the closest possible approximation of his analogue masters. Contemporary bands may not remember what analogue music sounds like.


3) Progressively-minded bands of the era that pioneered advances such as quadraphonic sound (and mind-altering drugs...) have been looking for an avenue to re-express the original visions for their recordings freed from the "limitation" of stereo. Yes, Floyd, ELP, Zep, Peter Gabriel, Queen, the list goes on. Pretentious? Of course! They wouldn't be prog rock otherwise.


If my theory about history repeating itself is at all accurate, this phase of the format's adoption will pass soon enough and you'll get the bands you want.


On that note, I'm surprised that certain contemporary bands who may fit the above descriptions (or their labels) aren't yet releasing on DVD-A or SACD:

- Dream Theater (pretentious prog-metal for a new generation)

- Faith No More

- Pearl Jam

- Extreme

- Type O Negative (if you haven't heard them, think of a vampyric amalgam of Beatles+Gwar+Gregorian Monks+Flock of Seagulls)


They're all on my wish-list.


I'm equally surprised by some contemporary bands that _are_ releasing new stuff on the format, whom I wouldn't have expected, like Motorhead, Ministry, Insane Clown Posse and Biohazard.


And finally, some contemprary artists that I'm thankful have adopted the format, though I'd have expected no less:

- Disturbed

- Queensryche (Tribe is extremely good!)

- Metallica

- Allannis Morisette

- R.E.M.

- Santana

- Beck

- Barenaked Ladies

- Joe Satriani

- Bon Jovi


Alright, I'm done. :) Shawn, Greg, I'd be interested to read some of the artists you guys would like to see adopt the format. And if you want to peruse a fairly comprehensive list of what's currently available (must better than Best Buy, at least) try dvd-plus.com.


Take care,


-Doug
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,385 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
Thanks for all the great replies! :D Looks like all us HTPC'ers might be in for a treat starting March 29th when Intel releases its new motherboards with High Definition Audio .


Finally, after all that time with AC'97. I know they include support for DVD-A and even new DD formats, I wonder if DTS is included. Or if SACD will be relegated to the stand alone players. Sound card makers like M-Audio... are already on the bandwagon.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
306 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by RayL Jr.
Thanks for all the great replies! :D Looks like all us HTPC'ers might be in for a treat starting March 29th when Intel releases its new motherboards with High Definition Audio .


Finally, after all that time with AC'97. I know they include support for DVD-A and even new DD formats, I wonder if DTS is included. Or if SACD will be relegated to the stand alone players. Sound card makers like M-Audio... are already on the bandwagon.
From what I understand the DACs are DSD capable, and with the hardware rights management built into these things I don't doubt Sony is considering a PC debut of SACD. Though I'm pretty sure it'd mean a slight overhaul of current DVD-Rom drive technology. Time will tell.


Again, on a slower timescale, I'm seeing a repeat of the DVD evolution, where there was a lag between STB and computer adoption. The time inbetween was much less. However I believe this is, for the most part, attributable to the fact that the industry realized how inadequate their copy protection schemes were before endorsing the DVD format on computer hardware, and aren't going to make the same mistake twice. I'm not saying it's the right mindset - DVDs have flourished thanks to computer support - but the big machine can't seem to think in terms of the glass being half-full...they only see lost revenue.

-Doug
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
316 Posts
Some people may disagree with me but,

I think SACD and DVD-A are great.

I have SACD in the bedroom (only 3.0 surround), and love it even though I don't have the full 5.1. Beck's "Sea Change" in SACD sounds incredible. Easily audible differences between the CD and SACD (this is on a relatively modest Sony AVD-S50ES receiver w/ NHT SuperOne speakers). I have also purchased the Flaming Lips "Yoshimi Battles The Pink Robots 5.1" DVD-A package and the difference with this DVD-A and CD are equally impressive (listened to in my HT with full 5.1). What attracts me the most is that artists are releasing material in 5.1 to better match what they intended. The artist is "breaking free" of stereo. Less impressive is the high-resolution stereo releases. I love the Stones and their SACD releases do sound better but, it's not a monumental leap, IMO. Same thing with the John Coltrane re-releases. And the anti-piracy features don't bother me. I am willing to pay for higher-quality releases.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
358 Posts
I use and audigy2 connected to a Pioneer Eliete amp. Playing miles davis dvd-audio disc. The difference between AC3/SPDIF output and 6 channel analog is minimal. Not enough to warrant the high cost of dvd-audio. To be honest the best audio disc i've heard thusfar was Sanata recorded in DTS not dvd-audio.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
306 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by Genocide1
I use and audigy2 connected to a Pioneer Eliete amp. Playing miles davis dvd-audio disc. The difference between AC3/SPDIF output and 6 channel analog is minimal. Not enough to warrant the high cost of dvd-audio. To be honest the best audio disc i've heard thusfar was Sanata recorded in DTS not dvd-audio.
I've got a few DTS-CDs and I'm very impressed with them as well. It goes to show that the technological aspects of a format ultimately define your constraints; what you do within those constraints separates bad from good. I recall the transfer quality and audio remixes of some of the first DVD videos I ever purchased - horrible by today's standards.


Given their experience, it's not surprising that DTS has also produced some of the best sounding DVD-A titles. Queen's A Night At The Opera, particularly The Prophet's Song, is phenominal, whether played in MLP or just the DTS version included on the disc - if I had to name my favourite "better than CD" song, that'd be it. As more production houses gain experience in multichannel audio, overall production value will only get better.


Ultimately, if multichannel audio does take hold, we may witness mainstream bands recording with multichannel in mind and doing a stereo remix as an afterthought.


-Doug
 
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top