Re: SACD/DVD-A: why didn't they just market vanilla DVDs as multi-channel audio discs?
Quote:
| In my recording experience, 24/176 or 24/192 (our recording sampling rate typically) is close but not quite as good as a good DSD recorder. And DSD is not as good as analog tapes can do. Much DTS, and some DVDA, is less than 96K like 24/48K which I don't like at all. So I would say: Analog tape (Listen to the Tape Projects reels) >> DSD >> 24/192 or 24/176 >> 24/48 >> 16/44 >> Empty3s. |
. But I'm not sure they are appropriet for this thread or the music forum.
Quote:
| No Sony player of any type plays DVD-A although I believe the Blu-ray hardware is probably capable if firmware was developed with that goal. I also expect the players could be made to play SACD but the demand doesn't justify the expense including licensing fees to make the players capable of SACD. |
. I new it wasn't exactly DVD-A, just thought it was ironic the Sony/Philips had to use something closer to DVD-A for BluRay rather than a variation of SACD. Was SACD ever championed as the hi-res format for BluRay? Maybe they won the war but lost a little battle in the middle? In any event, I think I'm pushing this thread a little too far off track.
