Anyone else dissaponted that DSOTM is not coming on DVDA (1 Viewer)

[Jeff Kleinberg]

Hi,
I dont want to start a format war, so I will start off saying that I have a universal player and feel a well done DVDA is equivical to a well done SACD(Lee I realize you have heard mic feeds from both and disagree). I happily purchase both formats on the basis of the music on the disc. I just think with this release a video addition with lasers or such would be cool and more importantly I am DYING to hear the original QUAD mix. SACD can't deliver two multichannel mixes on one disc as DVDA can. Anyone have any opinions?

Jeff

 

[KeithH]

Jeff, I am disappointed because I think a DVD-Audio release could offer some great video content along with alternate surround-sound tracks (i.e., Dolby Digital and DTS). However, I am glad to see an SACD release forthcoming.

 

[Ryan Spaight]

Well, SACD is definitely capable of containing both mixes. The album is only 40 minutes long, so I'd think there'd be plenty of room for three versions, considering there are several examples of SACDs with two mixes of a 70 minute album. The only difference is that the SACD would have to run the two consecutively (like the current CD of Pet Sounds, with mono and stereo versions) instead of selectable via a button on the remote.

Sadly, it doesn't sound like we'll get the original quad version. But I doubt we would have if it was on DVD-A, either.

As far as video, that's pretty low on my list. It's a nice bonus, but not a deal-breaker.

Ryan

 

[KeithH]

Ryan,

Video is not a deal-breaker for me either. It would be a nice option, though.


Jeff,

Another point, which Ryan reminded of, is that a DVD-Audio release would make it more likely that we would get alternate high-resolution surround-sound mixes (i.e., 5.1 and 4.0). While it could be done with SACD, in principle, I don't see it happening.

In the end, I would like to see Dark Side of the Moon released on both SACD and DVD-Audio.

 

[Al B. C]

You betcha.

Sony stole this one with their deep pockets.

But all's fair ya know.

Oh well, if the Bowie releases on SACD haven't convinced me to get a player, the release of DSOTM won't either.

 

[LanceJ]

EMI & Pink Floyd are greedy weiners.
LJ

 

[DennisK]

This is the reason I bought a universal player but I'm still disappointed. I was really looking forward to the menu's, lyrics, etc. you get on DVD-A. Pink Floyd is such a visual band I was prepared for something really outstanding. I was also hoping the DVD-V section would include the videos for Dark Side of the Moon.
I think Sony wanted this to be released on SACD because the later Floyd albums are are on Columbia which I believe is owned by Sony. It would have been a disaster for them when Floyd fans went out and bought DVD-A players to take full advantage of a DVD-A DSOTM release. When Sony was finally ready to release the later albums on SACD, those fans would have been upset because Sony wanted them to buy new hardware. Even if they bought universal players, they would still want to know where all the extras they had grown accustomed to had gone.
Oh well, I guess I'll just go back to waiting for a Pink Floyd video collection to be released :frowning:

 

[Michael_T]

the later Floyd albums are are on Columbia

As far as I know, all the rights to the Pink Floyd albums that were once with Sony (like "Wish You Were Here", "Animals" and "The Wall", etc.) now lie with EMI.

So I merely think Sony wanted one of the most enduring rock and roll albums on the planet to be on SACD (as opposed to DVD-A)and they probably paid Capitol/EMI for the privilege.

The true test as to whether Sony was able to "buy" EMI with regard to SACD for all future hi-rez releases, is if other future hi-rez releases from Capitol/EMI are released on DVD-A or SACD. Capitol/EMI has stated in the past that DVD-A was their format of choice.

Personally, owning both a DVD-A player and a few SACD players, I prefer SACD - so I am not disappointed. But then I probably would be just as happy with a DVD-A release if that was how EMI would have decided to go with this one.

 

[Michael St. Clair]

I'm not exactly disappointed per se, I'll certainly be buying the disc anyway.
But I have the quad vinyl surround version, and I like it a lot. It would have been nice to see it released on DVD-A so that the largest number of current fans can hear this in surround for the first time.
As far as another stereo remaster goes, multiple remasters often hit the point of diminishing returns these days, both from a sonic standpoint and from a revenue standpoint. The most recent remaster was from the original tape (according to both Guthrie and Parsons), and the right people were involved. And it was available in a limited tiny box version with extra stuff, plus in a plain jewel case...and it was hyped heavily.
I'll wager this new release sells less than the 25th anniversary release. I've talked to six Floyd fans that I know personally, and none of them are planning on buying it, and none of them would stick an additional component in their rack just for the surround version. The average 'audiofile' is out of touch with the typical music lover, who buys mid-end gear and is happy with CDs and compressed DVD audio (but knows that 80s digital mastering sucked and is willing to replace some old favorite CDs...once).

 

[Jack Gilvey]

Nope, quite happy with "only" MC SACD. No interest in video content.

 

[MichaelTa]

Yes.

 

[Jesper]

You betcha.
Sony stole this one with their deep pockets.

I completely agreed with you Al, 100%!
There is NO reason why this title should be out on SACD an not on DVD Audio - what can SACD do, that DVD Audio can't? Nothing at all...
But who said it wouldn't be released at all for DVD Audio format?

 

[Dan Joy]

what can SACD do, that DVD Audio can't? Nothing at all...

Jesper,
Lets try not to start another flame war! I believe the title to this thread was and still is: "Anyone else disappointed that DSOTM is not coming on DVDA".

 

[Brian-W]

what can SACD do, that DVD Audio can't? Nothing at all...

2 things: Hybrid discs.......and sound better

 

[Wayne Bundrick]

Yeah, I'm disappointed. I want to hear DSOTM in surround sound on the surround sound equipment I already own. The hybrid CD layer on the SACD is stereo, not surround.

 

[Wes]

If this is the final word that there will not be a DVD-A DSotM release then yes I am quite upset! I hate Sony products. Other then a Camcorder I will not buy Sony equipment nor will I buy into the SACD format, Just bullheaded I guess!


Was looking forward to a great 5.1 mix of DSotM but not now!
DVD-A has so much more to offer and everyone can enjoy it. I am yet to know even one person (other then here on the net) that has even a clue as to what SACD or DVD-A is. But at least DVD-A will play in every one of their house's!

Wes

 

[ReggieW]

Well, it is odd that all of the EMI support in the US thus far has been for DVD-A with the sole exception of this title. As far as the eventual SACD sounding better........we never will know since there won't be a DVD-A to compare it with will we? I wonder since EMI now has most of the Pink Floyd catalog will they release all of the other titles "exclusively" on SACD. If this happens, it will appear that EMI will simply be relegating two tier titles to DVD-A and blockbuster albums to SACD.

Reg

 

[Mike Broadman]

Based on my experiences with both formats so far, I've noticed a pattern with the type of music that works better on one format over another. There are some titles I hear on SACD that I feel might have worked better on DVD-A and vice-versa.

Dark Side is the type of album that seems it would sound better on SACD to me, so I'm quite happy with the news.

 

[KeithH]

Wes said:

Just bullheaded I guess!

Sorry, but yeah. Give SACD a chance!

 

[John Kotches]

Size constraints restrict DSoTM to a single surround mix on an hybrid SACD.

The DVD layer on an hybrid SACD would be:
Stereo Mix: 1.5GB uncompressed ~.8GB compressed
Quad Mix: 3.3GB uncompressed ~1.6GB compressed
5.1 Mix: 4.5GB uncompressed ~2.4GB compressed

This exceeds capacity for a DVD-5 disc, and I haven't included any overhead, just Audio Data.

You run out of space quickly with 3 mixes and a single layer to work with due to hybrid concerns.

Regards,