What's new

Is DVD-A over and done with? (1 Viewer)

Ken_McAlinden

Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 20, 2001
Messages
6,241
Location
Livonia, MI USA
Real Name
Kenneth McAlinden
I think the EXPECTATION that DVD-A carries a multichannel mix, as opposed to JUST a high-rez stereo mix, will ultimately be it's downfall. SACD's are more reasonably priced, and have multichannel CAPABILITY, however - there are many more SACD titles without multichannel mixes than there are ones that do
Judging by Sony's re-remastering of so many of their SACD titles in multi-channel, it looks like expectations for multichannel SACDs are starting to affect their efforts, too.

Regards,
 

John Kotches

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2000
Messages
2,635
Alex,
Thankfully you aren't in charge of DVD-A marketing :rolleyes
There is little differentiation if releasing only stereo and the average consumer (not an enthusiast, not an audiophile) could care less about "improved sound" for stereo which can barely be realized on the gear used.
The differentiating factor for both SACD and DVD-A with average consumers is multi-channel.
Further, the inclusion of a 24/96KPCM mix in VIDEO_TS means that the DVD-A delivery gives DVD-V players a "pick your poison" scenario -- multi-channel via lossy algorithm, or stereo, usually a remaster of the original stereo masters.
If / when a DVD-A player is purchased, the DVD-A surround and stereo mixes can be accessed.
Regards,
 

Mike Broadman

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2001
Messages
4,950
Additionally, some DVD-A manufacturers are including hi-bitrate PCM tracks, which allow for better sound (than redbook) through DVD-V players without the need to add DVD-A capability. This is almost like shooting themselves in the foot.
Why? Seems to me like backwards compatibility is a good thing.

More and more homes are getting surround sound setups. DVD-A's multi-channel high-res format does have a place in the market.
 

Alex Shk

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Apr 29, 2000
Messages
195
Well, u r talking to someone who LIVED through, and invested in Quadrophonics.

I have no qualms or bias against surround sound music - but I think John Q Public could care less. Maybe he could care less about hi-rez sound as well, but just try to explain to him that he needs 3 more speakers, optimally a sub, and more amplification just to play their "tunes".

My point was - there is an additional expense in remixing to surround sound. DVD-A's INSISTENCE on that preference automatically adds an expense to the release of new titles. There are some artists that will NEVER remix their back catalog. Even in the quad days - there wasn't any Stones, Beatles, Who, Zeppelin, Sinatra, Elvis, all of Motown, available in quad - hey, I'm talking HEAVY HITTERS HERE. I'm talking about a slew of artists that believe there is no need, or desire, or purpose, to remix their back catalog. This is down to remix vs. remaster. How many artists will allow their back catalog to be remixed without approval? Most artists control the multi-tracks, the record companies have the mixed stereo "master".

This is not a rant against surround sound - but all of you must realize that many have no interest. I think that DVD-MUSIC will survive as a proponent to surround sound (via DD or dts), but that DVD-A ITSELF will not be successful as a hi-rez format. I also think that the biggest threat to SACD are DVD-A's that are supporting high bitrate PCM tracks that are compatible with DVD-V players. John Q wants to know that he already owns a better system than CD's - and high bitrate PCM on DVD-V compatible discs are showing that he does.
 

Philip Hamm

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 23, 1999
Messages
6,874
Your point makes less sense to me the more you "clarify" it.

Whether DVD-A or SACD is the format, it's up to the content provider to decide whether or not to do a multichannel mix.

Both are niche formats and neither will ever displace CD.
 

John Kotches

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2000
Messages
2,635
Alex,

Your argument is strictly to further your personal preference towards SACD, and your points are lacking a logical foundation.

If SACD cannot survive on its own merits, than it shouldn't survive.

I feel the same way about DVD-A.

Regards,
 

Mike Broadman

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2001
Messages
4,950
Alex's reasoning is based on the idea that these formats are looking to replace CDs. This is the same axiom used by many, and I just don't get it. There are audiophile/hobbyist formats. CDs are very good for everyday use and for the vast majority of applications. High-res is just a nice treat to have as a compliment to our collections.
 

Lee Scoggins

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2001
Messages
6,395
Location
Atlanta, Georgia
Real Name
Lee
Both are niche formats and neither will ever displace CD.
Philip,

You are likely right on this, but I would never say "never" given the history of recorded media. Once many thought the same about DVDs replacing videotape and now things look very different.

John,

Good to see you back on the forum! Have you been away listening to my McCoy Tyner disc? ...still waiting for any impressions you have. Even better, hopefully had a nice vacation

I would like to toss in one current opinion (and I will be very neutral to DVDA and SACD here):

Surround sound may be over-hyped I think in terms of the belief that we will all wind up there.

I'll explain my thinking...The requirement for additional speakers seems a high barrier to entry for Joe Sixpack at the end of the day, and moving up from 2 channel to a 5 channel receiver can be expensive. The wiring is complicated as well with even a simple setup as I have found out the hard way on two recent HT I helped install for friends.

Perhaps good ole' two channel's death is greatly exaggerated.

I don't blame the HT emphasis at dealers given the hot trend toward it and the difficult economy, however.
 

Lee Scoggins

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2001
Messages
6,395
Location
Atlanta, Georgia
Real Name
Lee
The differentiating factor for both SACD and DVD-A with average consumers is multi-channel.
John,

I missed this on your earlier post. I am not sure I agree with this. I do think that with proper education and a grass roots campaign that is effective, the consumer can be persuaded to upgrade to "high definition" sound. I agree that multi-channel is a very important factor, but saying it is the differentiating factor is too strong as I feel audiophiles of both PCM and DSD stripes are driving the formats so far.
 

John Kotches

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2000
Messages
2,635
Lee,
Consumers aren't going out of their way for either format (as much as we'd like to think we define the market). They (consumers) have little to no interest in a "better CD", when they are quite happy with that, and no desire to seek improvements to fidelity. Even MP3 is "good enough" at the mass market level.
If any wholesale change is going to occur this means the "stealth upgrade" will be the avenue that will assist in making these formats successful. The "stealth upgrade" path will be inclusion in inexpensive DVD-Video players. To this point, manufacturer support at the entry level greatly favors the DVD-A side, with JVC, Toshiba, Panasonic supporting DVD-A players well under $400. OTOH, the SACD side has Sony, and soon Philips joining in with entry level priced players. The latest announced universal Pioneer at an MSRP around US$750 is a bit higher than the average consumer will go, as are their DVD-A players. While Sony sells a lot of players, they don't outsell the other names I've mentioned. There are other brands involved, but they don't play in the under US$400 space which we're discussing presently.
Given that both DVD-A and SACD are both tremendous improvements over Redbook CD, what's left if the reason of choice isn't sonics? The only differentiating factor is the potential inclusion of surround mixes.
In the "title race", SACD has a nice lead, but DVD-A hasn't had any real marketing behind it whatsoever, yet has managed to still get ~300 titles released, with zero seed money offered as an incentive to get titles released in the format. EMI just started their next round of releases, and the WB titles are about to show up as well. It'll be an interesting 3rd and 4th quarters.
John Marks (I'm sure you know him) recently had posts on the Audio Asylum saying that even with Sony's economic support for the first few titles, it is a money losing proposition for his company to change over to SACD or DVD-A. Until that side of the equation is changed over for all the record labels (not just the big boys) the formats are destined to remain niche market.
With respect to NY Reunion, I don't think any recording can fully capture the power that McCoy plays with. I think the piano breathes a sigh of relief when he walks away for the night ;) I don't necessarily agree with the way the piano was mixed (a little "larger than life", from side to side) and overall the presentation is a bit more distant than my personal taste would prefer. Does this mean it's a bad recording, or that the instruments were badly captured? Nope -- just not my preference for recording results.
Performance wise it screams though, which is more than can be said for many audiophile recordings :)
I think this makes my point in a clear, rational fashion.
Regards,
 

Lee Scoggins

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2001
Messages
6,395
Location
Atlanta, Georgia
Real Name
Lee
John Marks (I'm sure you know him) recently had posts on the Audio Asylum saying that even with Sony's economic support for the first few titles, it is a money losing proposition for his company to change over to SACD or DVD-A. Until that side of the equation is changed over for all the record labels (not just the big boys) the formats are destined to remain niche market.
I read John's post with great interest, but you left out a key factor: his label is not just small, it's tiny. It is much more economical for most to release Super Audios. The few titles that John sells, and they are excellent quality, are not going to determine the format outcome. Where SACD has the lead is that larger audiophile labels have embraced Super Audio much more so than DVD-Audio. Super Audio has become the format of choice for the independent labels. I think this could ignite in a grass roots fashion and lead to more popular titles in additions to quality catalogs from The Who, The Rolling Stones, and CCR. Look at the goings on at Steve Hoffman's site. Almost no DVDA discussion, like the last two HE shows in NYC, and a lot of focus on vinyl and Super Audio.
 

Lewis Besze

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jul 28, 1999
Messages
3,134
I'll explain my thinking...The requirement for additional speakers seems a high barrier to entry for Joe Sixpack at the end of the day, and moving up from 2 channel to a 5 channel receiver can be expensive
Check with CEDIA as to how many homes has HT set up in the US which "essentially" is ready for MC sound.
 

Philip Hamm

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 23, 1999
Messages
6,874
I'll explain my thinking...The requirement for additional speakers seems a high barrier to entry for Joe Sixpack at the end of the day, and moving up from 2 channel to a 5 channel receiver can be expensive. The wiring is complicated as well with even a simple setup as I have found out the hard way on two recent HT I helped install for friends.

Perhaps good ole' two channel's death is greatly exaggerated.
The way I see it, Joe doesn't care one bit about multichannel, he's happy with his boom box, computer speakers, and car stereo. Multichannel isn't the barrier between hi-rez formats and mass acceptance. The people could care less (and well they shouldn't IMO).

In this age where CD technology is not even used close to it's potential do you really think anyone's going to care about better than CD sound quality?

One thing Joe Six-pack does know about is that whatever format comes around, it will be copy-protected and he won't be able to make mixes and MP3s or share it with his buddies (not that he should do the latter). He knows that he has that flexibility with CD.

NP: Dave Matthews Band: "Everyday"
 

KeithH

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2000
Messages
9,413
Philip, excellent post. Very down to earth and real-world. I still contend that the majority of people do not have home-theater set-ups, but the majority of those that do have them for movies, not music. Honestly, how often do any of us run into casual music fans who complain about the sound quality of CDs? I have never heard such a complaint from non-audiophiles. In the long run, I feel SACD and DVD-Audio will be a tough sell to the masses, even with multi-channel capability thrown in. The masses don't see the need for better stereo sound. There is no issue with the sound of CDs as far as they are concerned. Also, many have no interest in surround-sound music. Even if they have surround-sound systems in their homes, and many don't, they don't have them in their cars or offices.

You said:

One thing Joe Six-pack does know about is that whatever format comes around, it will be copy-protected and he won't be able to make mixes and MP3s or share it with his buddies (not that he should do the latter). He knows that he has that flexibility with CD.
I am afraid that some record labels may be hell-bent on changing that with the CD. Look at what has happened with the second Fast and Furious soundtrack CD and the versions of Celine Dion A New Day Has Come and Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones marketed overseas by Sony Music.
 

John Kotches

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2000
Messages
2,635
Lee,
When you are going to reuse a quotation of mine, can you please put it in proper context :D I'd like to think we're miles ahead of tabloid TV ;)
Aside: For those of you that are wondering, I know Lee didn't intentionally take my statement out of context.
With respect to consumer acceptance of the formats, in the end it will boil down to the mainstream catalog releases, not what an audiophile label (large or small) does. If you'll pardon the expression, the sales of Telarc, Chesky, AIX etc are a pimple on the butts of the big labels (Sony, Warner, EMI et al).
With respects to costs to produce SACD vs. CD, I'd love to see the numbers for the costs (unsubsidized) for Telarc to produce a CD and a hybrid SACD. CD is a very mature technology from a production standpoint, and the cost to produce them are measured in cents (well less than $1). Can the same be said of hybrid SACD at any audiophile labels volume?
Regards,
 

John Kotches

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2000
Messages
2,635
Keith,
As usual, a level headed post. But you know I don't completely agree with it, or I wouldn't say anything, would I? ;)
Even if they have surround-sound systems in their homes, and many don't, they don't have them in their cars or offices.
With respect to cars, DVD-Audio has at least one player on the market already for car use. Others will be coming later this year and early next year. Newer cars are coming with 4 to 6 speakers so that's part of the battle conquered (an appropriate number of speakers). In terms of quality of playback environment -- people take their CDs along now, so if they so wnated they could take DVD-A along with an appropriate player. Lest we forget, car DVD-V players have been around for a couple of years which will playback the DVD-V inclusion. Hybrid SACD can be played, but not SACD only media in cars currently.
For offices, most peoples playback (when they have it) is either those killer multimedia speakers attached to PeeCees :rolleyes:or a boombox. Stereo provisions in both formats allow a workaround, with an edge going to SACD for the moment due to the hybrid media potential. So hybrid SACD titles are playable, but SACD only media (Sony, Sony, Sony) aren't. The changeover to DVD drives instead of CD drives in PeeCees mean more people would be able to access the DVD-Video portion of their DVD-Audio titles in the office.
In either of these cases, it is decidedly not about playback quality, it is about playback capability :)
Regards,
 

Mike Broadman

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2001
Messages
4,950
With respect to consumer acceptance of the formats, in the end it will boil down to the mainstream catalog releases, not what an audiophile label (large or small) does. If you'll pardon the expression, the sales of Telarc, Chesky, AIX etc are a pimple on the butts of the big labels (Sony, Warner, EMI et al).
This is the truth, brother. I adore AIX, but who notices what they do besides us hobbyists and audio freaks?

I also think you people are forgetting a significant portion of the consumer base- people who aren't total audiophiles, but who still have some interest in their sound at home. These are the types of people who maybe have a decent but not stellar record player, buy big Bose speakers, and like to crank up the bass in the EQ. That is, it's a passing interest that they have fun with. These people might be interested in multi-channel and maybe high-res.

NP: David Bowie, Scary Monsters
 

Lee Scoggins

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2001
Messages
6,395
Location
Atlanta, Georgia
Real Name
Lee
I'm sorry Phil, but I must disagree. Everyone who heard it on my system noticed the difference, and my setup is mid-range at best. The difference between CD and SACD is huge, and that's without considering the obvious difference when multi-channel is involved.
Mike,

I agree completely. With a good marketing campaign, we can get people way above the shitty MP3 sound.

I think at a minimum it is very possible Super Audio will maintain itself as a niche format of reasonable size. If Sony does a little bit better job, it can perhaps replace redbook since it (1) offers better copy protection (even if this won't last, and (2) has momentum in the key title race.

The average consumer is dumb, but even my friends recognize the difference between CD and MP3. More importantly, they find the difference between SACD and CD is tremendous.

As for DVD, it may have looked good from the beginning but I still distinctly remember the conversations I had with friends about that format and believe Joe SixPack definitely was not convinced DVD would replace videotape. I still think this is a reasonable analogy.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Forum statistics

Threads
356,813
Messages
5,123,610
Members
144,184
Latest member
H-508
Recent bookmarks
0
Top