DualDisc advisory....first Sony, then Pioneer. Now Onkyo.... (1 Viewer)

[Brian L]

Hey Kris, I misspoke re: no mention of DD in the Sunday circulars.

I re-read my BB flyer, and the NIN title is listed as a Hybrid SACD, but under the picture, its says DD is available. Not much, but its something.

BGL

 

[Rachael B]

Yo Phil! - - I like your line of logic there. It sounds like you used the completion backward principle, though some creationists call it theory.

 

[Phil A]

Kris, I don't take any of it personally. One friend I have as an example, formerly worked in the high end industry, has about $70k at retail in his 2-channel system, including very expensive (Goldmund) CD playback which is wonderful and bought a Marantz 8260 just to get his feet wet with 2-channel SACD and has no immediate plans for further hi-rez. I've helped deliver and install many $100k+ 2-channel only systems, many with a turntable and CD as the sources and probably a lesser extent some with high end CD/SACD players. DVD-A as Charles Hansen noted is not thought out as a format with those people in mind. If you don't believe what I say, take a look at audioasylum.com and the DVD-A and SACD areas. It won't take you more than a few days to see that. It's not that there can't be good mat'l on DVD-A (and the recording and mastering on any format plays such a critical role), it's that there's no interest. A few yrs. ago I went to the Home Entertainment Expo in NY and brought back a bunch of AIX sampler discs (I already had a couple) and gave them out. The copy in the high end shop is still unopened, while they sell universal machines like Linn, Marantz and the soon to be released Ayre and likely something from Rotel in the near future, they just don't get any requests for it. A few of the other copies I gave to people who have machines that are mainly used for DVD-V but have DVD-A capability have not been opened either. When Linn had their prototype Unidisk to play at the store (which had no video output) at a seminar, they played one cut from Hotel California (which sounded dreadful - I talked to them afterwards and I think they just played the L&R channel of the multi-channel mix) and noted that they included DVD-A but they don't see much interest from CES, other shows, just wanted to have a machine that can play anything and they played lots of SACDs and CDs.

So I'm not talking about people who claim to have experience, I'm talking the real world and not a single request in a store for 3 yrs. to play a single DVD-A, Charles Hansen of Ayre, whether you agree with him or not he is brillant when it comes to audio, Linn, etc. The DVD-A spec and the way it works with various associated hardware plainly did not take into acct. the high end 2-channel market (which I noted is small - but has people who buy hardware and software) and that's one of the primary reasons it is not popular. On top of that audiophiles are not going rush out and buy an unpopular format that might do something to their expensive transports. The Linn incidentally from I understand has 4 separate clocks. I don't the believe the Arcam is that anal.

Most people as noted are more into multi-channel and home theater and Warner (and others too) is clearly shooting for the masses with DualDisc. If they have problems, it will flop and they'll likely switch to a 2-disc release. If they don't, the format may succeed with the masses. It just doesn't have much or any interest among audiophile. I think that a well recorded 192/24 DVD-A can sound every bit as good as a well recorded SACD, depending of course on what it was mastered from. The majority of DVD-As I have are better than CD clearly, but can't touch the quality of SACD is instrument timbre and other factors. I have DVD-As that are better than most SACDs. This notion about technical superiority of one vs. the other in real world recording with the mixing and mastering taken into is like debating whether Miller Lite is less filling or has great taste without all those nice commericals:b

 

[anthony_b]

I personally think Dual Disc could be best thing ever. A few hundred post ago I wrote that my wife and I had an argument over getting a fleetwood mac DVD-A or CD during one of our visits to Best Buy. We ultimatly got the cd becuase the DVD-A would not play in the car. If this thing would have existed we both would've been happy....After purchasing the Original single layer disc from Sony when they first came out, I feel like I've been robbed, since I can't play them anywhere else.

 

[Lee Scoggins]

Regardless of how you feel about the merit, most audiophiles are coming from a background of listening to heretofore shitty PCM sound. DVDA is a much improved version but among audiophiles it has a lot of baggage being PCM. Many audiophiles simply feel that PCM does not get the tonality of the instruments right and feel the theory behind DSD is more analog-like than PCM. That is the current audiophile mindset. I like hirez PCM as well but do feel pure DSD has a slightly more natural sound.

In talking to many audiophile friends and those who work for audiophile labels, I feel that there is a belief that DSD is more analog sounding. Many audiophiles remember are thriving with their turntable and vinyl collections. When they spin a Red Book they are not satisfied.

There are many excellent 24/96 recordings but I would guess that most audiophiles find they still pale compared to high quality 180 gram vinyl.

Another thing is title selection: there are few DVDA titles available of the jazz and classical works that audiophiles love. SACD has oodles of both.

Finally, there is an audiophile bias toward 2 channel and away from 5.1. Really good 2 channel is very holographic. Many past surround recordings have been very gimmicky and a sideshow that distracts from the music-these past attempts have formed opinions in audiophiles in favor of good ole stereo. Many also simply don't want to spring for an MC receiver (why do that when you have a tube preamp already?) or speakers....

I'm not justifying their views but trying to give you insight why DVDA is not selling well. It is a hirez format in search of an audience that may not exist or at least is very small.

 

[Phil A]

All hi-rez is also hurt by the fact that those audio shops who carry it really don't care all that much about either new format. They certainly don't want to hurt the expensive turntable market. They don't want to take away whatever they're selling of expensive CD players only for a less expensive unit that plays hi-rez and sound better. So that hurts all hi-rez. Where I friends worked, I talked both of them into getting a Marantz 8260 which has no level controls for multi-channel and one could not give a rat's ass about it and the other is a hair better than a rat's ass. The owner would not carry the 8260 for the very reason I indicated. When he was not there one day, my friend brought it in and sold 3 of them and then he carried it and sold a bunch more.

The more formats a machine plays, the more potential for disc playback problems. One room in the store just has expensive audio, no video. Another has an expensive projector. It is also simply a matter of fact that they don't want to waste bulb time for the projector if someone even wanted to hear it or risk getting the L&R channel from a multi-channel mix playing (especially playing things in different rooms and shuffling back and forth to talk to the various customers) and blow a big sale due to a poor listening experience. I've helped out at the store when my friends could not make it and the owner did not even want me to leave the DVD-As I brought in the store. I found the AIX sampler (in the back room) I brought back that was unopened and gave it to someone else.

As Lee and I pointed out, SACD has catered its releases to the audiophile crowd. Kris, even agrees "They went right after one of the most gullible markets there is, audiophiles." They have an established niche market that has grown steadily to the point now where there are almost 2,600 titles available worldwide, despite the fact Sony has done little in recent times. DVD-A has gone thru multiple re-launches as it apparently was hallucinating more than SACD thinking the mass market was going to jump for a new format with MP3s and CDs still perfectly OK with consumers. I personally feel the next mainstream audio format is yet to come, that SACD will never be more than a niche market and DVD-A will hang on for use by independents and musicians. Not sure if the next new format will be with HD DVD or not. Something likely with less compression that common DD 5.1 mixes

 

[Lee Scoggins]

Excellent point. SACD has had better marketing and business strategy overall. I think the music business missed its opportunity (or maybe is still missing) by not launching BluRay or HD-DVD as also a new music carrier.

 

[Phil A]

Lee, I don't think audiophiles are gullible. I was just indicating that Kris agreed SACD targeted this as a market. I would also agree than many audiophiles are extremely knowledgeable and that those who may be more into HT and still enjoy their music in the manner in which their systems are set-up have not generally invested the time of listening and owning different things over many years (some good purchases, some great ones and some awful ones) and therefore really don't have a good understanding of many things audiophiles do. They tend I think to look at a bit of the lunatic fringe and equate that to every tweak is something sold by someone who has bad motives to someone who is really stupid and gullible. As I've noted, I've sat thru many demos helping my friend deliver stuff that the people thought were excellent music systems that were quite awful. They just don't have a clue as to what a good music systems sounds like. They may be better off for it though

 

[Lee Scoggins]

Just came across this:

http://www.stereophile.com/news/112204dual/



I know, but I was I was just pointing out what Kris said.

 

[Bill Leber]

Most music is recorded in the studio at 24/96 or 24/48. If the master recording is 24/48, it doesn't get anymore "hirez."

That's why I agree with Kris' asertion that DVD-A is better for rock & pop than SACD. The native recordings are PCM, converting them to DSD won't improve them.

A lot of people it seems are buying both versions of The Downward Spiral today. I'll be interested to hear if there are any differences.

 

[Michael St. Clair]

I'm 95% sure that The Downward Spiral was recorded in low-res PCM using Macs and DAT. I remember reading some articles about the production back when it was released.



I have no idea what percentage of audiophiles are gullible, but there are certainly a lot of gullible ones, and some of the most vocal ones are gullible.

Heck, I would say the majority of all americans are gullible, but I can't discuss that without violating some forum rules.

And I don't use speaker cables as my benchmark for audiophile stupidity (though many people will overpay for cables and 'hear' changes that aren't there).

I present to you:


Shatki Stone
Bedini Clarifier
Wooden blocks for your cables and interconnects
The Tice Clock
CD Stoplight
CD Blacklight
Green marker

A lot of this bullshit (that's what Penn and Teller would call it, and they'd be right) is touted by audiophile 'journalists' and by many popular members of various online audiophile forums.

So if audiophiles carry a stigma of gullibility, that's where it comes from. It's understandable, to say the least.

ps If anybody actually thinks they can hear the difference when using any of this nonsense, prove it to the JREF in a series of double-blind tests and they'll pay you $1 million. No joke.

 

[ChristopherDAC]

How about $300 000 for a direct-heated single-end triode amplifier, which produces less than one watt of power at 1% total harmonic distortion? And in the review I saw of it the so-called audiophile claimed it made his recordings sound more realistic than anything he had ever heard!
Or how about rejecting a recording technique which provides a very low noise floor, excellent frequency response, and constant dynamic range over the whole bandwidth, because it is "harsh sounding"?

Many of these guys seem to have a fetish for second-harmonic distortion, and claim that it makes recordings sound more like actually being in the room. All I can say is that the rejection of the scientific or objective approach to audio makes many "audiophiles" vulnerable to any claim which comes along, so that they may reject true statements and adopt false ones because all are unverifiable by their approach. That is probably as good a definition of gullibility as I know.
As for me, I know that my system is not that great in terms of faithful audio reproduction; having spent all my money on sources and software I bought literally the cheapest multichannel system I could put together, because I happen to know that for my purposes I would have to spend at least an order of magnitude more money to get a substantial improvement, so I'm going to do it all at once at some future time. For now I just want to be able to hear sound from my discs!

 

[dan fritzen]

I just bought Downward Spiral on DualDisc, I am okay with the compatability, since I can burn the CD side to CD-R and the DVD side to DVD-/+R. Any reason to think this is not possible?

 

[Phil A]

You mean Michael you have never tried any of that stuff? I bought many things along with the Brooklyn Bridge for a good deal I do agree that many audiophiles can be neurotic to the point they are over analyzing things vs. enjoying the software.

 

[Bill Leber]

This was posted on a Nine Inch Nails fansite today:
:frowning:

 

[Danny Tse]

Here comes DualDisc advisory from Mark Levinson (the company)



http://www.marklevinson.com/press/de...prod=&press=24

 

[Phil A]

Well now add Marantz to the list too:

"IMPORTANT NOTICE ABOUT DUAL-DISC
Nov 2, 2004
Marantz became aware that some two sided discs - which are referred to as “DualDisc” - have been released into the consumer market by some music companies and/or record labels. These double-sided discs appear to be a bonded combination of DVD on one side and non-DVD (which may incorrectly be referred to as a CD side) on the other side of the disc.
To our understanding the non-DVD side of the “DualDisc” does not meet the Compact Disc Digital Audio specification and clearly not includes a CD logo.

Until our Marantz development & research department has the opportunity to test the new commercially available double-sided discs, we cannot assure our products can safely handle these new double-sided discs, or whether these discs may damage your Marantz products.

Therefore we strongly recommend that consumers do not use “DualDisc” with any Marantz products, including CD players/changers, DVD players/changers, universal players or SA-CD players. "


http://www.marantz.com/new/index.cfm...cont=eu&bus=hf

 

[Rachael B]

I'm on the edge of my seat waiting for Apex and Brooksonic to issue their warnings.

 

[PaulDA]

Has anyone noticed the warnings all seem to be "cut and paste" with only the manufacturer's names having changed? Anyway, it only matters what's on the disc, and right now, I don't see much on DualDisc that makes me want to spend money. While I don't have a vested interest in one format over the other as to which is "better" at hi-res, there are more SACD releases that interest me at this time, as well as more SACDs in my collection. That's why I bought a universal player.

 

[Phil A]

Paul, I agree. That's why I can play all formats on any of the systems I have. I'm not going to control what an individual record chooses to put out on a particular format. There's not much announced that is of great interest to me on DualDisc. It just disturbs me a little that someone like Warner is apparently moving in the direction of abandoning real hi-rez DVD-A with such a great music catalog in their possession. Rachael, I do think the cos. you noted will issue and advisory before Cyberhome does