Universal DVD-Audio press release. (long) (1 Viewer)

[Jesper]

Hi Mark,

Thanks for the information. It's really nice to hear from you again.

I am looking forward to you Jennifer Warnes work.

UMG is doing a great job for DVD Audio - is looking better then ever!

 

[Lee Scoggins]

IMHO, DVD-Audio has one big advantatge over SACD: song titles. (And I don't understand why a dozen or so characters of text couldn't be added to each SACD track, in just the same way that the album title text is included.)

Ken, have you ever used an SACD player? The track text is always on the disc. At the beginning of every song the title comes up...I'm starting to think you are very uninformed about hirez.

 

[Lee Scoggins]

For every engineer that Lee can count on the side of DSD, I have an equal number who prefer PCM.

I will give you that you can find engineers, but currently more audiophile labels prefer DSD by a wide margin as witnessed by the 180 labels that have invested in DSD in some fashion.

P.S. I am looking forward to Jennifer Warnes as well.

 

[Michael St. Clair]

PCM to DSD conversions still can dramatically improve the sound. Effectively you get an upsampling of the source.

Whether upsampling improves sound is still highly debated, and also likely depends on the different DAC or DAC sections used and are not necessarily based solely on the upsampling itself. Additionally, most who feel that there is an improvement feel that the difference is subtle, not dramatic.

 

[John Kotches]

In his latest series of posts, Lee made a bunch of statements.....

I will give you that you can find engineers, but currently more audiophile labels prefer DSD by a wide margin as witnessed by the 180 labels that have invested in DSD in some fashion.

How many labels have invested in 24/96K or 24/192K units vs. DSD? That's the telling part.

Why did Universal use 24/96K on a very prominent title to be released as SACD and DVD-A (Steely Dan's Gaucho)? Surely UM could have their choice of any tools on the market, yet they picked those that are 24/96K PCM based.

Regards,

 

[Lee Scoggins]

John,

Here is what Ken said:

Why did Universal use 24/96K on a very prominent title to be released as SACD and DVD-A (Steely Dan's Gaucho)? Surely UM could have their choice of any tools on the market, yet they picked those that are 24/96K PCM based.

Why did Universal create SACDs first? You cannot judge by one album at one label that has chosen both. My point was that most audiophile labels have gone with Super Audio. And that's true.

I'm glad that AIX and Tacet are doing good work and I will continue to support them, strongly at 192K in fact. The fact remains that most audiophile labels have chosen Super Audio for the moment.

 

[Lee Scoggins]

The only preference I have for DVD-A is the backwards-compatibility that SACD lacks.

Michael,

This statement is highly misleading. Super Audio is the only format that is backwards compatible with redbook CD as you know.

If you meant that it is compatible with lossy formats like DD and DTS, then you should have said so.

Remember there are a lot more CD players out there than DVD players.

 

[Jon_Stevens]

I don't think we will ever be able to directly compare the two formats. There just seem to be too many variables. I will say that I love dvd-a. I remember when it first came out how happy I was about everything but the ability to play them in my car. Great recordings but lack of compatibility sucks.

I got an sacd player about 4 months ago and I'm now a big fan of it also. The two Nickel Creek recordings I purchased are simply some of the best sounding recordings I've ever heard period.

I love both formats but the clincher for me is the ability to play a hybrid sacd (that is if it's not cracked LOL!) in my car. It's just so much easier than dealing with dvd-a sometimes.


I really hope both succeed.

Jon

 

[Mark_Waldrep]

A couple of additional thoughts and then back to the completion of the new Kiss double DVD (yes, we do have to make a living from some less than audiophile work!)

Why did Universal create SACDs first?

This is a no-brainer...they were given $25 million by Sony/Philips to produce SACDs. I have know for a couple of years that they were planning to release in the DVD-Audio format but had to wait an "appropriate" amount of time before introducing their DVD-Audios to not seem ungrateful to their patrons. Heck, if Sony gave me $25 million, I would have had to think long and hard about which format to support.

Finally, the debate about the number of audiophile labels choosing one format or another is a red herring. IMHO the reason Concord or Harmonia Mundi have jumped in with SACDs is because it is a natural extension of their current business...making and distributing audio-only plastic discs. In this day and age of multimedia, I believe that model is severely limited and will die a slow death as broadband delivered music (including high-resolution, multi-channel audio) takes over. These companies simply don't grasp the paradigm shift that is occuring...the integration of media (audio, video etc) in high-resolution (both audio and video), interactive scheme will drive a forward thinking record company. Sadly, Chesky, Telarc and Concord are not among those that have the understanding or capacity to create outside the existing model. AIX Records is much more than a record company...we are about producing products in a radically new way. It takes a lot more time and resources to produce a DVD-14 with 3 hours of video, multiple high-resolution discs etc.

What counts is what will be the entertainment disc of the future. Ever wonder why Sony is scrambling now to introduce SACD II...a new version of their platform that includes all of the video stuff? BTW none of the current players will be able to access the new discs. Ouch!

 

[Danny Tse]

Keith H said

That's easy. They use a dartboard with three sections -- SACD only, DVD-Audio only, and SACD & DVD-Audio. They then throw darts blindfolded. If they miss the dartboard, then they just leave the title on CD. They miss a lot.

 

[Justin Lane]

This is a no-brainer...they were given $25 million by Sony/Philips to produce SACDs. I have know for a couple of years that they were planning to release in the DVD-Audio format but had to wait an "appropriate" amount of time before introducing their DVD-Audios to not seem ungrateful to their patrons. Heck, if Sony gave me $25 million, I would have had to think long and hard about which format to support.

So the truth comes out. Kind of like how Lee always spouts off the number of labels supposedly supporting SACD, when Sony subsidized their first discs for free. With 180 audiophile labels supposedly behind the format, I would expect they would put out at least one SACD a month to stay in business. That would mean close to 200 SACD titles a month for consumers to buy. Of course we all know this is not true, and with Rich Uncle Sony not footing the bill, we are no longer seeing SACD releases from the majority of these so called audiophile labels. So much for grassroots support.

J

 

[Lewis Besze]

Lee this is DVD-A release thread?! If you wanna continue your redundant points,there are countless threads by you already,which features this pointless debate already.

I personally won't re buy the SACD counterparts,just for the reason,that it's easier play SACD,but I might replace some of the DTS disks I have,like Krall,Gruisin,Sting to get 'em in true hi-rez.

I guess certain artists like Sting and Elton John who signed onto SACD

Sting? Which album?

 

[Justin Lane]

Sting? Which album?

Lewis, Brand New Day is listed on Universals site as coming out in the first batch of DVD-A releases in September. Can't wait to get this one.

J

 

[Justin Lane]

I can't imagine the Peter Gabriel back catalog coming out in surround for years, he moves kinda slow...I can't see him cranking out a bunch of surround mixes quickly, or even delegating it and quickly approving it. I imaging lots and lots of tweaking. I'm not holding my breath.

True enough concering Gabriel. They could always put out stereo DVD-A discs with bonus features. Since many of Gabriel's albums were done in PCM in the first place, the DVD-A will provide improved sonics over the DSD which must make an additional approximation and possibly monkeys with the sound quality through inaccurate sampling.

J

 

[John Kotches]

Lee,

You have a serious comprehension problem:

There was no distinction made for what equipment one has. The Super Audio format shows the song title. Ken was mistaken and very uninformed. It underscores his other misguided statements and bias for DVDA. Heck, even the cheap Sonys show the track titles...

SACD shows the track title information on the player if the manufacturer chooses to implement. I cited several players that emphatically do not display the track title. I am neither mistaken, uninformed nor misguided. Ken is neither mistaken, uninformed or misguided.

Go find someone in Atlanta with an SACD1000, take a few SACDs over, and watch the display. What you won't see are track titles. You'll see (in order)

• encoding method and channel layout (ie DSD 2.0 for stereo SACDs, DSD 3/2.1 for most MC SACDs)
• track count and total playing time
• Track number and elapsed time

What you will not see is track title.

For the record, I pulled 4 titles from my box o' SACD media and checked them on my SACD1000 this morning, intentionally using different labels:

Pink Floyd Dark Side of the Moon Capitol/EMI
The Police Every Breath You Take / The Classics A&M/Universal
Dave Brubeck 40th Anniversary Tour of the UK Telarc
The Byrds Greatest Hits Columbia Legacy/Sony

Your assertion is fallacious. Deal with it.

Regards,

 

[Darryl]

IMHO, DVD-Audio has one big advantatge over SACD: song titles. (And I don't understand why a dozen or so characters of text couldn't be added to each SACD track, in just the same way that the album title text is included.)

Not that this issue is really worth a dozen posts, but...

As has been pointed out, there is track title information on the SACD disc; the player may or may not display this information. By the same token, there are DVD-A machines that also do not display the track titles.

 

[Mike Broadman]

Oh, Christ, for the love of...
WHO CARES?

Song titles are on the CD case!:rolleyes

 

[Greg Johnson]

The constant SACD vs. DVD-A, DSD vs. PCM debate on this forum has become tiring, tedious and quite frankly boring. My enjoyment of logging on here to learn about music and new hi-rez releases has reduced exponentially. I ask this one question to all. Isn't this hobby supposed to be about the enjoyment of music? Whether it be SACD, DVD-A, Vinyl or even redbook for that matter.

Greg

 

[Mike_Stuewe]

Sweet, Pickin up Frampton Comes Alive.

 

[Phil A]

This unfortunately seems to be headed for a format war, which is does not have to be (which Greg made a valid point of). Some points that I think are relevant:

1) Consumers can't control what is released on a particular format, so buy what you like on the format or formats of choice.

2) Upsampling can be a good thing or a bad thing. With a good source, upsampling can make an improvement. Upsampling does not choose what to upsample and what not to. So a bad source can sound worse. You can't make bricks w/o straw.

3) Both hi-res formats at this point in time are niche formats. Neither have mass market acceptance with the general population of consumer. Affordable hardware, along with available software that the public wants at CD-like prices will lead to more success. Hardware availability is not enough, look at DTS. Many consumers want MP3s so don't expect either format to catch on as fast as CD or DVD.

4) CD text, is a function of the player not of the format. What is on CDs or SACDs will not show unless a player has that feature. It is becoming more common but still is not on lots of hardware. And yes as Mike pointed out, song titles are on the CD case (why are people making an argument out of this - do you need something better to keep you busy?). Even with CD text, I have frosted glass doors and even if I did not, at about a dozen feet it would be just as easy to look at the CD (or SACD case or DVD-A case - let's not start an argument over this) case and materials.

5) Why do we spend so much time debating which format is better? From a consumer's standpoint, we likely will never be in a position to have equal playback mechanisms along with equal software chains to each format to make such a laboratory-like analysis that could be scientifically fair to each. I, like any other consumer naturally have preferences but even on my system, which is pretty high end, I can't possibly do such a valid comparison. Can we give this a rest?

6) I think there are lots of people who won't buy more than one hi-res version of a particular album. I don't know how record cos. (like Universal) come to a decision on what they
releas on a particular format. They seem to be trying to do something similar they do with DVD-Vs (e.g. special addition then the ultimate addition, etc.) which won't sit well will many consumers and I'm sure someone where down the road it will have an impact one or both of the formats.