Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo

Will DVD-Audio Survive


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
287 replies to this topic

#1 of 288 OFFLINE   TrevorST

TrevorST

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 51 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 11 2003

Posted January 16 2003 - 11:31 AM

I was in a large local Music Store today looking for a couple of DVD-Audio discs and there were a couple of people behind the counter and one guy in front talking to them. Well I asked where their DVD-Audio section was and they said they didn't have one. Then the guy talking to them jumped in and said he was a rep for a recording company and they were backing of DVD-Audio in favor of SACD.

We got in a conversation and he said they were going with SACD because of the backward compatibility with existing CD players and people were not buying the DVD-Audio titles. I hope this is not the case because I love the sound from the DVD-A discs. I picked up a Panasonic 72 for the PQ and bought one DVD-A just to try it out, WOW I was sold. When I said why, when DVD-A is so much better than SACD he brought up the BETA v VHS story, where a superior technology is pushed out of the picture because of software availability.

If anyone wants to hear what DVD-A can be then pick up the Fleetwood Mac Rumours disc. I remember listening to this when it first came out in the late 70's and it never sounded like this.

#2 of 288 OFFLINE   James RD

James RD

    Supporting Actor



  • 788 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 04 2001

Posted January 16 2003 - 11:42 AM

That's interesting, but what makes you think DVD-A is superior?

#3 of 288 OFFLINE   TrevorST

TrevorST

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 51 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 11 2003

Posted January 16 2003 - 11:54 AM

Just listen..... That is the best way.

#4 of 288 OFFLINE   Kevin C Brown

Kevin C Brown

    Producer



  • 5,713 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 03 2000

Posted January 16 2003 - 12:21 PM

I wonder where Lee Scoggins is at! Posted Image

My impressions is: that purely from a technological standpoint, SACD has the edge.

But.

It really has to do with how the mastering was done. And in reality, both DVD-A and SACD *should* be better enough than CD that the difference between them is negligable.

But in direct answer to the question:

Quote:
Will DVD-Audio Survive?

Don't care. I only care that at least *one* of DVD-A and SACD survive. *That*, I would bet on. Posted Image
If it's not worth waiting until the last minute to do, then it's not worth doing.

KevinVision 7.1 ...

#5 of 288 OFFLINE   TrevorST

TrevorST

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 51 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 11 2003

Posted January 16 2003 - 12:28 PM

Kevin,
You got my interest with your comments.. Please explain how SACD is better from a technological point of view. It has much less bandwidth to work with so by it's very nature can not contain the same amount of detail as DVD-A.

#6 of 288 OFFLINE   Tomoko Noguchi

Tomoko Noguchi

    Second Unit



  • 461 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 23 2000

Posted January 16 2003 - 12:39 PM

Trevor,

Have you even listened to a SACD? Indications by your post suggest that you haven't.

#7 of 288 OFFLINE   TrevorST

TrevorST

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 51 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 11 2003

Posted January 16 2003 - 12:51 PM

I have listened to SACD but not in my own environment I must admit. have you ever listened to DVD-A ???

#8 of 288 OFFLINE   Cary P

Cary P

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 124 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 21 2000

Posted January 16 2003 - 12:53 PM

I have both SACD (Sony SCD 333ES) and DVD-Audio (Toshiba SD9200) in my system and greatly prefer SACD.

Cary

#9 of 288 OFFLINE   EdD

EdD

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 50 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 31 1969

Posted January 16 2003 - 01:09 PM

Look here here for some technical info.
EdD

#10 of 288 OFFLINE   KevinJ

KevinJ

    Supporting Actor



  • 558 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 20 2001

Posted January 16 2003 - 01:10 PM

dvd-a's going to have a cd layer added sometime in the future btw so i'd say it's survival while not guarnateed is at least given a better chance with that development

#11 of 288 OFFLINE   Lee Scoggins

Lee Scoggins

    Producer



  • 6,396 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 30 2001
  • Real Name:Lee

Posted January 16 2003 - 01:16 PM

Quote:
It has much less bandwidth to work with so by it's very nature can not contain the same amount of detail as DVD-A.


This is not true as the sampling rate of Super Audio is 2.82 MHZ versus 192 KHZ.

It is really quite difficult to compare the two formats by mathematical terms as DSD looks at changes in height and PCM looks at absolute values of height.
Viewing: Sony KDSXBR150, Sony Bluray S570, ATT Uverse
Listening: Sony SCD777ES, Benchmark DAC1Pre, VPI/Modwright SWP9SE/Lyra Argo, Audio Research Ref3/VT100, Maggie 1.7s

 


#12 of 288 OFFLINE   Iver

Iver

    Second Unit



  • 324 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 23 2002

Posted January 16 2003 - 04:07 PM

Right now, neither of the formats are exactly exploding in popularity.

Many people already find CD's expensive at $15 each (even accounting for the $20 we're supposed to get back now that the music outlets and record companies have been found guilty of price-fixing). There's not what you could call a clamor for $25 discs.

Unless the record companies severely cut the prices of the new high-rez discs, I would be readily willing to bet that five years from now you will find very little difference from the current situation: most music will still be on CD; and most stores won't even sell DVD-A and SACD discs.

Before the high-rez audio lovers flame me, I appreciate that those who have gone out and purchased DVD-A or SACD decks are naturally excited about the boost in audio quality they can get with the new discs. I have nothing against high-quality audio reproduction.

What I do object to is the electronics and music marketers thinking that we're all going to march out like robots and pay 40% more to be part of the onward march towards the latest and greatest.

What they have forgotten is that people need a reason to upgrade. A new technology must solve a problem in order to gain popularity.

For example, it used to drive me crazy that I couldn't read the music credits (always in the smallest type size) in movie credits on VHS tape. That made me very eager to move up to DVD. In other words, DVD solved a problem: the relatively low resolution of VHS tape.

But to my way of thinking, there's too much of a "technology for technology's sake" aspect to the high-rez audio formats. The audio quality of CD just isn't that terrible that every time somebody plays a disc they're thinking to themselves: "Boy, I would pay just about anything to get better audio quality than I'm getting from this CD."

#13 of 288 OFFLINE   Jagan Seshadri

Jagan Seshadri

    Supporting Actor



  • 530 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 05 2001

Posted January 16 2003 - 05:14 PM

Will DVD-Audio survive? Maybe, but here's where SACD is beating DVD-Audio:

A simple user interface.

SACDs are like CDs. No funky menu system. No "Groups". No "Why don't I get track 4 when I press 4 on my remote" problems.
Just load and play.

Why do you think those Macintosh "Switch" campaigns are proving popular? Same reason - simple user interface.

Then again, how will any of these formats survive when the MP3 and the iPod are so popular? That is the real question...

-JNS

#14 of 288 OFFLINE   Kevin C Brown

Kevin C Brown

    Producer



  • 5,713 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 03 2000

Posted January 16 2003 - 06:25 PM

Good point. I do *not* like having to fire my TV up just to play a DVD-*AUDIO* disc.

Maybe I should rephrase my statement: I *hope* at least one of them survives.

Both of them could use a lesson in Marketing, 101.
If it's not worth waiting until the last minute to do, then it's not worth doing.

KevinVision 7.1 ...

#15 of 288 OFFLINE   Philip Hamm

Philip Hamm

    Lead Actor



  • 6,885 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 23 1999

Posted January 17 2003 - 12:25 AM

Wow so much disinformation on this thread it's almost funny. Definitely proof that lots of people are misinformed.

Re: Technological Edge. Neither has an edge over the other. There are definite arguments for and against both formats. How much weight one places in these different arguments determines which one is "better". I've auditioned both since I have both players in my house. They both sound stunning, better than CD. How much better and the importance of that difference is highly debatable.

Re: High prices. The prices aren't really much higher than regular CDs. Most are about the same.

Re: Hybrids. They are coming for DVD-Audio. They are slightly problematic for SACD (don't play in many DVD-ROMs or DVD players).

Re: People thinking either of these are going to replace CD as a mainstream music format. Ain't gonna happen. CDs are fine for everyone but audiophiles.
Philip Hamm
Moderator Emeritus

#16 of 288 OFFLINE   KeithH

KeithH

    Lead Actor



  • 9,427 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 28 2000

Posted January 17 2003 - 12:51 AM

DVD-Audio is sputtering at this point due to a dearth of quality software coming to the marketplace. We just keep waiting and waiting and waiting for a software explosion there.

I agree that SACD is far more user friendly, and I prefer SACD over DVD-Audio for that reason. In my experience, SACD also sounds better, but I have not been in a position to properly compare the two formats. For one thing, I have no recordings that are common to the two formats. Furthermore, I feel that my SACD players (Sony ES models) are better audio components than my DVD-Audio player (Technics DVD-A10). Given all of this, DVD-Audio in my system easily beats CD.

Both formats have technical merit, and given the label alliances to the two formats, I hope they both survive. My fear is that one format will die and the labels that supported the dead format, feeling burned by high-resolution music, will not jump over to the other format. As an example, given Warner's half-hearted support of DVD-Audio, if DVD-Audio were to die tomorrow, I am afraid that they would not jump over to SACD. Part of that decision might stem from an inability to swallow their pride and another part of that decision might stem from a feeling that CD is still king. Warner has a lot of great artists under its umbrella (e.g., Madonna, Prince, and Dire Straits), and I feel that DVD-Audio is our only chance to see these artists come to the world of high resolution. So, let's hope DVD-Audio doesn't die. One can easily make the same argument about SACD.
My:
Main Stereo and HT Systems ;
Second Stereo System ;
Equipment List ; DVDs, SACDs, and more ;
Planned Upgrades and Additions "You know, the tomato never took off as a handfruit."- George Costanza

#17 of 288 OFFLINE   Scott Merryfield

Scott Merryfield

    Executive Producer



  • 10,658 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 16 1998
  • LocationMichigan

Posted January 17 2003 - 01:06 AM

I do not see either format becoming mainstream, either, for several reasons. (1) On most systems, the average music listener will not be able to notice enough of a difference between CDs and hi-res music. By most systems, I mean what the majority of people listen to music on -- boomboxes, shelf systems, stock car audio systems, Walkmen, etc. (2) The growing popularity of MP3, with its portability advantages despite its audible inferiority to CDs, indicates that many people are not looking for something better than CD.

I have both DVD-A and SACD in my system. Both sound wonderful, and both are an audible improvement over CD. I do prefer SACD for ergonomic reasons -- its simpler interface, no need for a video monitor (yes, you can play DVD-A without a monitor, but selecting different audio tracks can be cumbersome without one), and the fact that I have a 5-disc SACD player but only a single-disc DVD-A player (yes, that only pertains to my system, I realize).

Even though I have both formats in my main system, I have no desire to add playback capabilities for either to my car or other audio systems in my home. Redbook CD works fine in those environments for my needs, as I imagine it will for most music listeners.

#18 of 288 OFFLINE   KeithH

KeithH

    Lead Actor



  • 9,427 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 28 2000

Posted January 17 2003 - 01:49 AM

Scott said:

Quote:
its simpler interface, no need for a video monitor (yes, you can play DVD-A without a monitor, but selecting different audio tracks can be cumbersome without one)


I am able to play some DVD-Audio discs without a TV, though some fumbling was involved the first time I tried it with a Warner disc and the Elv1s disc. However, with some DVD-Audio discs, I have not found a way to select the discrete stereo track without a TV (e.g., Queen A Night at the Opera. This is my biggest complaint about DVD-Audio -- the user interface.

Scott also said:

Quote:
I have no desire to add playback capabilities for either to my car or other audio systems in my home. Redbook CD works fine in those environments for my needs, as I imagine it will for most music listeners.


I love the sound quality of SACD and DVD-Audio, but I see no need for these formats in my car, on my computer at work, or for portable use.
My:
Main Stereo and HT Systems ;
Second Stereo System ;
Equipment List ; DVDs, SACDs, and more ;
Planned Upgrades and Additions "You know, the tomato never took off as a handfruit."- George Costanza

#19 of 288 OFFLINE   Wade Shapiro

Wade Shapiro

    Extra



  • 20 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 15 1999

Posted January 17 2003 - 02:48 AM

Quote:
I love the sound quality of SACD and DVD-Audio, but I see no need for these formats in my car, on my computer at work, or for portable use.


This is exactly why I haven't even bothered with SACD or DVD-Audio. While I may not be the most discriminating audiophile, I have a good ear for music and am very much into new technology and new formats. But, I am not going to buy an album twice just so I can have it in hi-rez at home and available to me in the car. Until the discs are universal or they come up with universal players for the car/computer that are affordable, I'll pass. Maybe I'm in a minority here on the HTF, but I just don't have all that much time to sit down in my living room and listen to music...I'd say 70-90% of my listening is in the car and at work.

I bought a couple of DTS 5.1 CDs before all of the SACD or DVD-Audio took off, and I loved them. The two I bought I also had on standard CD and I did that so I could compare the two...I prefered the DTS in both cases. But, I am not going to spend $20 for a DTS/DVD-A/SACD and only be able to listen to it in my living room. That is where I think SACD has the edge, because they have the technology to have backwards compatibility. But, they are missing the boat on this one too, because every SACD I have picked up that I was interested in buying had the SACD multi-channel only label, and did not have the dual format.

Don't get me wrong, I don't wish that these formats die, I just wish the recording labels would get their acts together and do it right. After all, I appreciate better technology...my family had 4 Beta machines and we fought buying a VHS machine till the bitter end Posted Image (3 of those 4 machines still work, incidentally...they don't make 'em like that anymore!)

#20 of 288 OFFLINE   StaceyS

StaceyS

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 180 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 11 2000

Posted January 17 2003 - 03:42 AM

DVD-A had a big showing at the LVCC N. and LVCC S. during CES. They were in car audio players, portables, and PCs, along with STBs.


Back to Archived Threads 2001-2004



Forum Nav Content I Follow