DVD-Audio backers - What Happened?

QuadraphonicQuad

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I love surround music and have several hundred dvda,sacd, and blu ray titles. I also understand that there is still a market out for surround titles that we all buy on ebay and other sites. I look at the things like our hi-rez poll and see that as a surround site we can't get our members to vote on titles they own. I am guilty because I have probably only voted on 10 or fewer discs. The fact that we have only 7 titles with over 100 votes makes me think the market might be smaller then we think. We shouldn't beat up Jimby over what he tells us, but lobby or own members to vote on the discs they own to get a more accurate number of hardcore surround people. I am going to start at the A's and work my way through my collection to vote on all of them.
 
I look at the things like our hi-rez poll and see that as a surround site we can't get our members to vote on titles they own. I am guilty because I have probably only voted on 10 or fewer discs. The fact that we have only 7 titles with over 100 votes makes me think the market might be smaller then we think. We shouldn't beat up Jimby over what he tells us, but lobby or own members to vote on the discs they own to get a more accurate number of hardcore surround people. I am going to start at the A's and work my way through my collection to vote on all of them.
To get an accurate assessment, why do you think that everyone that listens and wants more surround titles are a member of this Forum? Your logic is skewed. :confused:
 
While it is true that not all forks who are into surround are members here, I must admit I have not voted on all of the polls either and will make an effort to go through them all.

Of course one thing that's frustrating is that we are all not able to vote on everything as many titles are OOP and the record companies do not keep these product in stock as disc or offer as a Paid download at this time, which IMHO is missing another channel for revenue, no matter how "small" the market is, assuming that's still true now or how one defines "small." Certainly one could reasonably argue that there's more interest for surround music now than there was in 2000. This site and many other surround sites did not even exist then.

Also, this thread is not about just one person or entity, but IMO includes anyone who bought/buys DVD-A players and discs. It includes the store managers and employees no matter what their position was/is. Certainly we need to give credit to those who paid $1000 for a DVD-Audio player when they first came out and who were willing to take a chance in the early 2000's on a then unknown format. And finally we need to give credit to all of those out there now who continue to support surround and Hi-Rez formats.
 
Last edited:
I want to say if I upset anyone. Jimby, anyone. Im sorry. I can't actually believe the depth of knowledge and passion on this forum, and in particular on ths thread. There are clearly alot of people here who (unlike me) know what they are talking about. :rolleyes:

Somehow I stumbled on this thread looking for info on DVD-A's. I had no previous knowledge of this format....I was interested in using them actualy as a source of older catalog rock material in stereo 24/96, as I simply couldn't find any to buy on sites like HDtracks and Linn records. I can say that reading other threads I am involved in like computeraudiophile and Linn forums, that I'm certainly not the only one out there who is frustrated by the lack of modern/rock/dance tracks in this format!

As a dumb arse general sort of "Joe public", its hard to know just why this quality is not out there for legitimate purchase. Honestly. It really is. There seems to be no problem with anyone selling higher rez 1080p video, tv streams or larger megapixel cameras, yet for some perculiar reason (which I still fail to comprehend) music is different. This is even more perculiar when we all know the money people spend on hifi (as apposed to TV sets or cameras).

That is why I asked the question, trying to pin point the real reason. Is it because of some legal contract between the current players in track downloads, and the labels?
Quite frankly, any other reason than a big fat legal one just doesn't make sense to me.

Guy's. I'm no music guru. I can only make observations as a customer sitting on the sidelines. All I want to add is that it sure must be frustrating for the audioengineers, musicians, and sound techs on this forum to live in a world where all their millions of dollars of audio mixing machinery, gear, expertise and time simply gets wasted as it finally gets sold to the public in less than CD redbook standard.

I dont know how you guys cope with this. I Really don't. How you live in a world of pragmatic mediocrity. It must be sole destroying.

I wish you all the best in the fight, and your efforts to keep hirez and surround formats alive. Without dedicated people like you guys (including jimby) the world would be a much duller place.

But I'm out of my depth(and probably outta line) on this thread. Ive said what I have had to say, come to find an answer and failed to get the "real" one. The one that makes any sense. On that note, I'm done with this :)
 
Comon guys! There's no need to banish yourself from the forum just because of open discussion. It's the freaking internet, for crying out loud! You don't expect to butt heads with folks?

No one speaks "for the forum", not even me. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and their ideas. Everyone is free to express themselves. I try and avoid the stupid rules that other forums have, like profanity, politics, etc. Sometimes we have to draw a line, but when it's about the stuff we're here for, let 'er rip.

We've had members pack up and leave (Mike Cunningham, Daved64, Dot Cotton, etc) just because they got pissed at what one member said. That is totally stupid! If we're all going to agree, then why have a forum?

SPEAK YOUR FUCKING MINDS!!! :D (OK, speak your freaking minds)

But speak, don't leave.
 
Comon guys! There's no need to banish yourself from the forum just because of open discussion. It's the freaking internet, for crying out loud! You don't expect to butt heads with folks?

No one speaks "for the forum", not even me. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and their ideas. Everyone is free to express themselves. I try and avoid the stupid rules that other forums have, like profanity, politics, etc. Sometimes we have to draw a line, but when it's about the stuff we're here for, let 'er rip.

We've had members pack up and leave (Mike Cunningham, Daved64, Dot Cotton, etc) just because they got pissed at what one member said. That is totally stupid! If we're all going to agree, then why have a forum?

SPEAK YOUR FUCKING MINDS!!! :D (OK, speak your freaking minds)

But speak, don't leave.

Well, for starters, I don't like your tie.

J. D.
 
Ha!

I'd like to buy a vowel but wanted to see what other members thought first; I could go with that "sometimes 'y'" thing if needed....

Seriously, the discussion should continue until we hit on something that might work not previously discussed. :smokin:
 
Comon guys! There's no need to banish yourself from the forum just because of open discussion. It's the freaking internet, for crying out loud! You don't expect to butt heads with folks?

No one speaks "for the forum", not even me. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and their ideas. Everyone is free to express themselves. I try and avoid the stupid rules that other forums have, like profanity, politics, etc. Sometimes we have to draw a line, but when it's about the stuff we're here for, let 'er rip.

We've had members pack up and leave (Mike Cunningham, Daved64, Dot Cotton, etc) just because they got pissed at what one member said. That is totally stupid! If we're all going to agree, then why have a forum?

SPEAK YOUR FUCKING MINDS!!! :D (OK, speak your freaking minds)

But speak, don't leave.

Ok. I'll ask the f..'n question (again) for the 4th f...'n time. Is there a legal or other arrangement between music labels and Apple/Sony/Universal preventing them from releasing their current catalog or new content in hi rez stereo or surround?
If the answer is NO, then why the f... don't musicians, recording studios and labels tell Apple/Sony/Universal et all to f... off, and just sell direct on line themselves?


There. How's that!!!
 
There's not really anything preventing the labels from releasing hi rez stereo or surround. They just choose not to because their market research suggests that it's not profitable enough to bother with.
 
The labels market research? WTF? Well blow me down...so the labels are at fault?... well I'll be darned.... I just assumed it was the big guys.. Now THAT definitely does not make sense...
If the labels have no legal restrictions then, what's stopping someone like HDtracks, or anyone for that matter, just approaching the labels are saying..well look. We'll do it for you?
 
The labels are the big guys.

The labels want too much for the rights for it to be profitable enough for a 3rd party to come along and sell it for them.
 
Well for goodness sake. Some labels need to change their "formula" for profitability then. Like they have obviously done with the recent HDtracks release of some of Universal's Deutsche Grammophon's catalog.

Lets put 2 and 2 together here. At least for Universal music's DVD-A's anyway.. The logic for EMI and Warner is a little more difficult to follow through....

Some of the DVD-A masters are "owned" by Universal. Correct?
The same company that owns Universal also owns Deutsche Grammophon. Corrrect?
This same company has obviously had no problem with striking a deal with HDtracks for hirez release of some of the Deutsche Grammophon material.
Same goes for Verve....Ah! ... I get it. Some of these original tapes are starting to become available from HDtracks/Universal in hirez...Verve/Deutsche G/Decca?
Something like Wings BOTR (which no label has copyright too?) is also starting to appear..

It's EMI and Warner, with the much larger rock DVD-A catalog, that are dragging their feet here...
 
it's sort like Rhino's Quadio. they already pulled from vault their master tapes,
did conversion from analog to digital, did remastered and... downgraded to lossy DTS.

same with latest release from EMI BJH "Once Again"
they did make new 5.1 mix based on original descrete quad master and here we go again...
Audio DVD contain DTS in 48/16 and DD.
but at least they retained stereo and SQ mixes at 96/24
 
The obvious current act to push the boundary here is Radiohead.
Huge act. Recent history with their own downloads of In Rainbows...
Now if someone could get them to release hirez/surround of this and their future content...

Others might follow...
Then THAT might change things.
Anybody know Thom Yorke? Why doesn't someone approach him... :)
 
I don't know if anyone is reading this who might be able to pull something like this off, but here goes anyway.

Figure out how many prints of a surround album you need to sell to make a profit.
Let's say it's 1000 copies at $20 each.
This must cover your marketing, printing, shipping, etc.
Put up a web page that allows people to pledge $20 for a copy.
Wait until you get 1000 pledges. Print and ship.

Notes:
* The pledges have to be binding. No way to back out. A pledger either gets the disc when the limit is reached, or his money back if the limit is not reached. The easiest way to do this is pay-up-front.
* You would have to set a time limit. Say 2 or 3 months. If you do not get enough pledges, refund the pledgers. You could have the money in some interest-bearing account during the wait to cover the admin costs.
* Put up a "count-down" on the site showing how many pledges are still required to meet the goal. This will drive interest as the limit gets closer. Combine with email alerts for added "spread the word" effects.
* If interest in a release is much higher than 1000, figure out a way to make the price lower for everyone. This will drive the social effect and make the system more popular.

I am sure a professional marketer could come up with other smart details to make this work really well.
 
And I think right there is an example of why not many labels want to get into multichannel! Too many non-compatible formats. We found out in another thread that each mix requires a licensing fee. Strike one.

If they do decide to pick a format, such as DVD-A, you piss off all the folks who can't play it. The same goes for SACD. The same goes for the DTS/DD crowd. Strike two.
(Although, I would like to point out that an alrming number of households in North America already have a DTS or Dolby capable DVD player and don't even know about it)

Previously, I've voiced my discontent with the format arguement. Sadly, we can't have our cake and eat it too. We can't be selfish that way. DVD-A was a confusing format - even to me! (and I'm usually up on this sort of shit). It's pretty much dead. Goto the Wake, visit the grave, buy the t-shirt, have a good cry. The end. We have ONE chance at appealing to the masses and that's the DTS/DD crowd. If we as a community want to see MORE mutlichannel releases, we're just going to have to eat some crow and embrace the lesser quality format. Truth be told, it wouldn't be the first time. We can't have everything CD-4 now, can we? :)

The bottom line is.... the bottom line. Companies aren't going to accept major losses and continue on. If DVD-A was an unsuccessful product, then guess what? The industry abandons DVD-A. Just like they let go of HD-DVD, Betamax, U-Matic, SQ, QS, CD-4, UD-4, AM Stereo, Elcassette, Reel-to-Reel, 16 2/3rpm automobile record players, the 45, the 78, the Edison disc, the Edison cylinder, Kerosene lamps..... get the picture?

Rhino was smart. DTS/DD is STILL out there and going relatively strong thanks to DVD's being in surround sound. They capitalized on this "oversight". It was a smart move and I for one will continue to buy any 4-channel product they see fit to releasing. Who gives a flying fuck what format it's on? I'm in it for the music, baby! Good old 4-channel, drums over in that corner for god knows what reason QUAD.

They could release it on a steaming piece of dog shit but hey, if I can play it and it's four channel - groovy man! I for one don't give a crap if I can hear the tape hiss at 28,000hz. Last hearing test I had done, I can't hear anything over 16,500hz anyway.
 
Oh, and does anybody see the irony in jimby coming to a Surround Sound/Multi-Channel message board and stirring shit up by saying "there won't be any new Surround releases?"

I sure do. :D
 
I don't know if anyone is reading this who might be able to pull something like this off, but here goes anyway.

Figure out how many prints of a surround album you need to sell to make a profit.
Let's say it's 1000 copies at $20 each.
This must cover your marketing, printing, shipping, etc.
Put up a web page that allows people to pledge $20 for a copy.
Wait until you get 1000 pledges. Print and ship.

Notes:
* The pledges have to be binding. No way to back out. A pledger either gets the disc when the limit is reached, or his money back if the limit is not reached. The easiest way to do this is pay-up-front.
* You would have to set a time limit. Say 2 or 3 months. If you do not get enough pledges, refund the pledgers. You could have the money in some interest-bearing account during the wait to cover the admin costs.
* Put up a "count-down" on the site showing how many pledges are still required to meet the goal. This will drive interest as the limit gets closer. Combine with email alerts for added "spread the word" effects.
* If interest in a release is much higher than 1000, figure out a way to make the price lower for everyone. This will drive the social effect and make the system more popular.

I am sure a professional marketer could come up with other smart details to make this work really well.

Great Idea.
Get on the phone right now to whoever markets Radiohead.
Their new album Kings of limbs is about to be released..
This band alone is capable of making the labels stand up and take notice...

This is TOTALLY what is needed. A new music site like HDTracks needs a headline current act..

And Radiohead IS THAT ACT (y)

Anybody reading this thread with the knowhow, the means, a studio, whatever...get on the phone to Thom Yorke right now!
 
Back
Top