Posted April 03 2003 - 12:34 AM
| I think the term transcode is more accurate |
John, you know as well as I that the industry term for this is "downconvert" - it does not connotate good or bad.
| I have yet to see anyone prove that the multichannel sacd tracks have the same resolution as the stereo sacd tracks. |
Lance, look at the SACD spec - all channels in hirez are at 2.8 mhz. Nobody has mentioned this because it is so obvious to those familiar with the technology.
| I just did not expect a DVD-A to be out in the same year as the 30th Anniversary SACD release. |
I did not either - I see that Brian Moura is skeptical that this is true and points to the rumors about the DSOTM DVDA. Maybe we should wait until an EMI rep officially puts forth a release date.
Posted April 03 2003 - 01:24 AM
| If to analog, then there is still work to A to D to 24/96 or 24/192 which will cost EMI extra. Then they have to produce and edit the video and extras content. |
As far as A to D @ 24/96K or 24/192K is concerned, I'd be shocked if EMI doesn't have very high quality A to Ds that run at the required speeds.
There's the distinct possibility that such work has been underway for some time.
Until just before CES, this was slated for DVD-A release, and I sincerely doubt that EMI would scuttle the work done. There's no way a March '03 date could have been made without said efforts being well underway.
As far as this goes:
| And based on Guthrie's comments on Super Audio, they might need to line up a new engineer... |
If Guthrie chooses to play the role of prima donna, that's his choice. There's supposed to be some guy out there named Alan Parsons, who might be delighted to work on the material.
Surround Music Enthusiast / Curmudgeon in Training
Opinions are my own, not representative of the publication I write for.