DVD-Audio PCM only? (1 Viewer)

[TomK]

Some SACD disks are recorded with DSD technology, which to my mind, must be superior to PCM. Are there DVD-Audio disks that are recorded with a digial bitstream?
I am really anxious to get into either SACD or DVD-Audio, but I keep going around and around.
Tom

 

[Wayne Bundrick]

DVD-Audio is based on PCM, with Meridian Lossless Packeting compression applied.

My mind isn't convinced that DSD must be superior to PCM.

 

[Ryan Spaight]

SACDs can come from analog, PCM or DSD masters, but the SACD itself is *always* DSD.

DVD-A can also come from from an analog, PCM or DSD masters, but the disc itself will *always* be PCM.

Which is better is the subject of much debate, but I think everyone agrees both are better than CD, which is PCM but much lower-res than DVD-As are capable of.

Ryan

 

[Thomas Newton]

I think everyone agrees both are better than CD

Not when you consider factors such as the price of a disc, the number of titles available, compatibility with the huge base of CD players and CD-ROM drives, or the ease of doing digital audio extraction for Fair Use purposes.

 

[Jagan Seshadri]

Buy for the music, not for the technology.

(Sayeth the man with a DVD-A player, so patiently waiting for more titles to be released).

-JNS

 

[Bobby T]

Amen brother Jagan. I read somewhere on the net that Queensryche Empire is to be released on DVDA in June.

 

[Ryan Spaight]

Not when you consider factors such as the price of a disc, the number of titles available, compatibility with the huge base of CD players and CD-ROM drives, or the ease of doing digital audio extraction for Fair Use purposes.

I was referring strictly to sound quality.

SACDs cost a buck or two more than CDs (16.99 - 18.99 at Best Buy). DVD-As, though, are pricier, at 6-8 dollars more than CD (22.99 at Best Buy).

Obviously, the number of available titles is extremely limited on both new formats.

SACD has the ability to be CD-compatible via a redbook layer, but not all discs use this capability. DVD-A has no provision for CD compatibility, but is DVD-V-compatible with alternate DD and/or DTS tracks.

And not to start a huge flame war, but I disagree that fair use guarantees you the right to extract digital audio. Seems to me that the ability to record the analog outs is sufficient in that sense. Sure, it would be nice to be able to rip, but fair use says nothing about the copying process, just your right to make one.

Ryan

 

[KeithH]

Ryan said:

I think everyone agrees both are better than CD

You will never find everyone agreeing on this point. There are some who still believe that CD is just as good as the high-resolution formats. Actually, I've come across more people who have said that SACD is no better than CD than have made such statements about DVD-Audio and CD. I have read more comments from people who have compared SACD and CD. One has to be careful before making a claim that SACD is no better than CD. What equipment did you use for the comparison? What SACD(s) did you use? Did you compare an SACD and CD of the same title?* And the big one, are you an objective listener? There are some out there who believe that Sony and Philips introduced the SACD format simply because the patents for the CD were expiring. They are convinced that SACD is smoke and mirrors. The conspiracy theorists cannot be objective in their evaluation of SACD. Let's also remember that some out there have a strong anti-Sony bias.

*That may seem like a stupid question to ask, but I have read comments from people who have tried to qualify SACD in relation to CD after listening to different titles between the two formats.

 

[Ryan Spaight]

Fair enough -- I knew that there was widespread skepticism about Sony/Phillips' motives, but didn't know so many heard no sonic advantage over CD.
Heck, it sure sounds better to me on my lousy little system. But I stand corrected that that's a common opinion (that it's better, not that my system is lousy ).
Ryan

 

[Micahel C]

Amen brother Jagan. I read somewhere on the net that Queensryche Empire is to be released on DVDA in June.

Bobby, June 18th to be exact.

 

[Thomas Newton]

And not to start a huge flame war, but I disagree that fair use guarantees you the right to extract digital audio. Seems to me that the ability to record the analog outs is sufficient in that sense. Sure, it would be nice to be able to rip, but fair use says nothing about the copying process, just your right to make one.

I don't think you understood what I was trying to say.

Fair Use means that copyright holders do not have an exclusive right to perform digital audio extraction in all circumstances, any more than they have an exclusive right to record from the analog outputs. The fact that they can use copyright monopolies to get hardware vendors to artifically cripple new devices and formats is a pretty big loophole. The DMCA makes the matter even worse by protecting those who abuse this loophole, instead of cracking down on the abusers.

With that out of the way, my point wasn't about what's legal or not legal. I was trying to suggest that a "new and improved" format that has been deliberately crippled in a way that interferes with lawful use may not be so improved after all.

For an imperfect analogy, think back to when Circuit City was pushing DIVX. We could have said, "the Government is not going to force DIVX off the market, so let's buy DIVX players and learn to live with whatever restrictions the DIVX 'upgrade' brings." We didn't. We voted with our dollars against DIVX, it failed miserably, and a format that was better despite having fewer features (i.e., DVD) won.

 

[Ryan Spaight]

We'll have to agree to disagree on the interpretation of fair use. IANAL, but in no way that I can see does fair use disallow the use of copy protection or guarantee the availability of copying tools, it simply states that copying for certain purposes is not a punishable offense. Now, you can certainly argue that fair use and the DMCA are at odds, and I wouldn't disagree -- but that's a different kettle of fish.

As to the second point, if the ability to rip is high on your list of priorities, then clearly you won't be satisfied with DVD-A or SACD. Fair enough. But I enjoyed CD for well over ten years before ripping tools became available, and I see no reason why I can't enjoy other formats that lack ripping tools. If I really want to make a copy for backup or compilation or whatever purposes, the friendly analog outs are always available.

I understand the point you're making with the Divx comparison, but with Divx we were talking about a format that restricted actual playback, not just a certain form of copying. At least from my perspective, that was a much more objectionable restriction. (As an aside, I do have objections to the Verance watermarking scheme in DVD-A, since that affects playback. You can certainly argue the extent of that effect, but it's there.)

Ryan

 

[Thomas Newton]

If I really want to make a copy for backup or compilation or whatever purposes, the friendly analog outs are always available.

(As an aside, I do have objections to the Verance watermarking scheme in DVD-A, since that affects playback. You can certainly argue the extent of that effect, but it's there.)

Will your friendly analog outs be of any use if the music industry gets stereo vendors to look for the presence of that watermark, and make copy prevention decisions based on it?

The ability to completely block analog cassette tape recording of CDs (on new recorders) was to have been one of the 'features' of the infamous CopyCode notch.

 

[Philip Hamm]

DSD technology, which to my mind, must be superior to PCM.

Based on..... ?

NP: Talking Heads: More Songs About Buildings And Food