Warner DVD-A not full resolution

Discussion in 'Music' started by Tony Casler, Apr 25, 2003.

  1. Tony Casler

    Tony Casler Agent

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2003
    Messages:
    43
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    On several of my Warner DVD-A releases, the music is not full resolution DVD-Audio. Disturbed's Believe is 48kH/24 bit surround, and merely 44.1 kHx/24 bit in stereo, not much better than CD. Linkin Park's Reanimation is mastered at the same rate. Metallica is in 96KHz/24 bit in both Stereo and Surround. The Eagler's Hotel California is the only one I own that uses 96/24 surround and 192/24 stereo. Has Warner isssued any statements about these discs? Is it legal for them to deceptively label the discs as Advanced Resolution DVD-A when they are not?
     
  2. Phil A

    Phil A Producer

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2000
    Messages:
    3,181
    Likes Received:
    44
    Trophy Points:
    1,610
    Location:
    Central FL
    Real Name:
    Phil
    Tony, there is no std. for what constitutes 'Advanced Resolution.' On some of the later Warner discs I have noted that they have listed the resolution on the back of the case (even though I hate the in-between size) which I think is a good step forward. I have a bigger gripe about 2 discs I bought that say 'Advanced Resolution' stereo when there is no stereo track. Warner as well has at least priced their discs realistically vs. other DVD-A software. If I am buying a release that has been out sometimes I check http://www.greatgig.com/quad/dvd-a-list.html for the resolution.
     
  3. Felix Martinez

    Felix Martinez Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2001
    Messages:
    1,466
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    1,610
    Location:
    South Florida
     
  4. John Kotches

    John Kotches Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2000
    Messages:
    2,635
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Felix,

    I agree... the practice of "disguising" for lack of a better word the recording heritage is IMO a bad one.

    Of course, with SACD, you have no choice -- it's a digital sausage grinder. It doesn't matter what you put into it, the output always looks the same.

    Many SACD fans think this is a selling point, since you're always getting disc at "full resolution". Of course if the recording is originally a PCM recording, at whatever rate, you're getting something entirely different than full resolution.

    Whether this is beneficial or not, is a matter of personal preference.

    Regards,
     
  5. Lee Scoggins

    Lee Scoggins Producer

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2001
    Messages:
    6,394
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Real Name:
    Lee
     
  6. John Kotches

    John Kotches Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2000
    Messages:
    2,635
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Lee,

    God forbid, someone should post anything remotely critical of DSD. I'll explain this again, in more detail since you seem to be missing my point.

    If the original recording is 48K, 96K, 192K or even 44.1K fs, DVD-Audio has the capability of delivering the updated recording at its initial sampling rates. To get DSD one is required to do a transcode to the original data that represents the recording.

    With DSD there is NO choice for the artist or engineer to preserve the original fs if the recording was initially captured via PCM. DVD-Audio supports fs from 44.1 to 192K in multiples of 44.1K and 48K and the choice to change fs is entirely in the hands of the artist or engineer.

    I can do a table if that makes the point even clearer.

    Regards,
     
  7. Felix Martinez

    Felix Martinez Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2001
    Messages:
    1,466
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    1,610
    Location:
    South Florida
     
  8. charles white

    charles white Second Unit

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2002
    Messages:
    292
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I think a better or more recent example of Felix's question is Fragile by YES. On the back, it is listed as 192/24 stereo but my player displays it as 96/24 stereo.
     
  9. Lee Scoggins

    Lee Scoggins Producer

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2001
    Messages:
    6,394
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Real Name:
    Lee
     
  10. Brian-W

    Brian-W Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 1999
    Messages:
    1,149
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Lee, get him!

    [​IMG]
     
  11. Rich Malloy

    Rich Malloy Producer

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2000
    Messages:
    3,998
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I think proper labeling is very important, but even more to the point: is there an audible difference between 24/48, 24/96, 24/192?

    That is, is going with a lower resolution a judicious choice in a given circumstance, or are hi-res stereo recordings being given short-shrift on DVD-A, either because they don't care to offer the higher resolution or simply to make space for videos, menus, "extras", etc.?

    I've noticed this trend, and asked a bit about it in some other threads. I must say, it's yet one more concern that's kept me from plunging headlong into DVD-A. It seems to underscore the perception that it's not a format for those who care first and foremost for best sound quality.
     
  12. John Kotches

    John Kotches Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2000
    Messages:
    2,635
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Lee,

    When you're going to quote and attempt to display incredulity, it helps your case to quote the original correctly.

    I said
     
  13. John Kotches

    John Kotches Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2000
    Messages:
    2,635
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Rich,

    If you ask someone like Mark Waldrep, he would say that until about a year ago the 192K ADCs for capture weren't as good as the 24/96K ADCs were. As such, the choice was between a better sounding 24/96K ADC or a worse sounding 24/192K ADC.

    As far as audible differences between the 3 rates you suggested, without hearing all of them in comparison to the original it's a bit tough to say, isn't it? Certainly the difference between 24/96 and 24/192K will be smaller than the difference between 24/48K and 24/96K.

    Menus are negligible, if memory serves me correctly 25MB is the biggest I've seen on a DVD-Audio disc which is less than 1% of the total storage space. So that isn't a significant factor. I can't cross check this, as my PC with the DVD-ROM drive is down for the moment.

    Videos? THis is the MTV generation, so videos are a strong selling point. Again, without my DVD-ROM drive I can't check here. This might chew up some substantial space, but it would need to be fairly high bit rate (7-8Mb/sec average) to chew up more than a few hundred MB. While this is a more substantial fraction (maybe as much as 10% of the total space) it wouldn't be a limiting factor IMO, since the disc can easily extend out to 2 layers and ~9.0GB of available space.

    IMO, there are two reasons for the small amount of 192K material:

    1) Limited number of tools available for 192K work, though this will grow rapidly over the next few years.

    2) Limited availability of quality ADC at 24/192K work, which again will grow rapidly over the next few years.

    Regards,
     
  14. Philip Hamm

    Philip Hamm Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 1999
    Messages:
    6,873
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I can't remember a thread that veered off topic worse than this.
     
  15. Lee Scoggins

    Lee Scoggins Producer

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2001
    Messages:
    6,394
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Real Name:
    Lee
     
  16. Lee Scoggins

    Lee Scoggins Producer

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2001
    Messages:
    6,394
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Real Name:
    Lee
     
  17. Philip Hamm

    Philip Hamm Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 1999
    Messages:
    6,873
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    IMO it's ludicrous to suggest that cross-conversion between formats in one way benefits the end result and in another way is detrimental to it.
     
  18. Lee Scoggins

    Lee Scoggins Producer

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2001
    Messages:
    6,394
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Real Name:
    Lee
    From Sony Super Audio site:

     
  19. Lee Scoggins

    Lee Scoggins Producer

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2001
    Messages:
    6,394
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Real Name:
    Lee
     
  20. John Kotches

    John Kotches Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2000
    Messages:
    2,635
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Lee,

    In the future, read through all the math, instead of the pieces you want to. I pointed out the exact integer ratios a bit later in the post.

    In the end, SBM results in a NON-INTEGER conversion when going from SBM to any PCM sampling rate with a 24-bit sampling depth which is current practice in the recording industry.

    As soon as you can get:
    147, 160, 294 and 320 to divide evenly by 24 please let me know.

    When last I checked, they were 6.125, 6.666, 12.25 and 13.333 respectively.

    My math is not in error. Perhaps you need to adjust your verbage instead.

    Also, just like Sony, you discuss theoretical improvements of SACD over redbook. No one is discussing redbook in this thread but you. This discussion is about DVD-Audio.


    Regards,
     

Share This Page