Oh My God !! Real Music (1 Viewer)

[GeorgeC]

Doug, I hate the 18 cable thing, too (and 18 good quality cables at that), in addition to all the problems of being a consumer stuck in the middle of a format war. I think most people would like universal players, and at a variety of price points. However, the first reasonably priced one, the Apex 7701, was plagued with problems, and I belive is in its 3rd revision now - otherwise, I think it could have been an incredible hit - and specially with a price under $300! The Pioneer 47 (around $750 best price) has gotten very mixed reviews, with some folks saying it's SACD playback is substandard, among other problems. So many people have been scared away by the feedback on these two players (though there are some who love their Pioneer 47s). So we're still waiting for universal players that open out to better overall feedback, and at different price points.

 

[Greg Br]

Doug,

Early reports have not been that great for this 1k player. Bass managment is not offered and video quality has been less than stellar. I have no first hand knowledge but that is the jist of what I have read.

 

[Doug_B]

I may not have need of bass management for any of my 5 channels (for music), and I would guess that the 47A should be better than my Pioneer 333 for video (would need to use S-Video connection for now). Thus, I would think it all boils down to where DVD-A and SACD fall on the quality radar map relative to other units that support either of these formats.

In any case, I may just take a drive in a few weeks to a dealer in PA with whom I've done business who has the 47A as well as some of the Sony players. I plan on purchasing 1 or 2 hybrid SACDs; maybe I'll get a DVD-A disk as well. They're also supportive of home demos.

Doug

 

[David Judah]

Tony,

I apologize if I hurt your feelings--that was not my intention and I hope it won't stop you from participating here. I was simply trying to say that using a receiver's DSP's to simulate multi-channel is not analogous to a true multi-channel mix and an inherently higher resolution one at that. That is how I interpreted this comment:

With a good receiver, you can play a 2 channel track in a surround mode and get the same 'mix' that DVD-A seems to give

Please note the smiley after my excommunication comment(meaning it isn't a popular notion, not that you would literally be banned).

"Middle of the Band" is a term used to describe mixes that stray from the traditional approach that simulates the listener as an audience member listening to a band perform on a stage. Instead, the listener is on stage with the band, but it is not meant to be interpreted as the listener is in one spot on the stage and every sound has to be accurately placed relative to that spot. It simply means that sounds can be placed in areas we are not used to hearing them come from in traditional stereo mode.

As far as my preferences, I stated that I enjoy both types and I understand that everyone has different tastes. IMO, one should not listen to a "Middle of the Band" mix and say, "well that's not accurate." It's not supposed to be accurate in a conventional stereo way. The whole point is that it is a completely different animal all-together that is only limited by the creativity of the engineer. To me those kind of mixes can be fun, but in the case of Rumors, I'm glad they also included a traditional stereo mix(although I don't consider the 5.1 mix all that radical).

Alot of multi-channel mixes are more traditional with most everything coming from the front three channels(in some cases the center channel is completely removed) and the rears are used for ambience or sounds from the audience if the recording was done live.

My point to you, Tony, was that the type of mix used doesn't have anything to do with the format involved. The kind of mixes I've mentioned are all represented in DVD-V, DVD-A, DTS CD, and MC SACD.

Have fun discovering these different mixes and sharing your thoughts about them here.

DJ

 

[tony randall]

David,

No problem. You are actually helpful, although your writing style seemed a little harsh (not that mine is smooth).

What these formats offer is higher resolution. Many people are happy with that, and don't mind the higher cost of these discs. Personally, I don't care to pay about twice the cost of redbook for the higher resolution only. Maybe in six months that will change (my opinion or the price gap).

I have the redbook for all the titles I have heard in these two formats. I would no longer use the redbook cd in my HT, because I do hear an overall improvement in sound quality.

the type of mix used doesn't have anything to do with the format involved

I understand that. What I am concerned about is this: The multi-channel mixes of the SACDs I have heard have all blown me away, whereas the multi-channel mixes of the DVD-As I have heard have been so-so. Quite possibly, the engineers of these particular SACDs have a little more creativity (read: larger budget). I am just wondering if any one else has the same experience. Based upon the lenght of time I have had posts on this forum about the multichannel mix of DVD-A, I have to conclude the oohs and aahs for DVD-A on this forum are more geared to the resolution of the disc than the multichannel mix. That's fine.