DVD-Audio backers - What Happened?

[Old Quad Guy]

We are beating a very dead horse.

I agree and thank you very much for the info regarding the past from the insiders point of view. But can't you offer us any hope for us here at QQ that we'll get surround from UMG anytime in the future? Like in the next 10 years?

Can you give us some encouragement that you're looking out for us to get surround again should the opportunity avail itself?

 

[The Rang]

Maybe it just goes along with martinis and cigars on the trendy scale or is it?

I fear this is the case for many young vinyl buyers.....it's trendy.

 

[jimby]

I agree and thank you very much for the info regarding the past from the insiders point of view. But can't you offer us any hope for us here at QQ that we'll get surround from UMG anytime in the future? Like in the next 10 years?

Can you give us some encouragement that you're looking out for us to get surround again should the opportunity avail itself?

Yes, but if and when surround music resurfaces, it will probably be as a download model, at least initially. If there is any traction, then the labels will be incentivized to do more surround music. But it will a long slow slog with catalog material being the first products offered.

There has also been some interest in Blu-ray audio discs around the industry, but for right now the interest is confined to the classical genre.

 

[ArmyOfQuad]

How is the industry looking at delivering surround downloads? Flac? windows media? mp3? iso images?

What is the expectation for the end user to do with these files. Burn their own disc? What software would easily burn surround media, and to what format? Or, are there expectations for more people to have computers equipped with surround, or some setup that allows them to listen to their surround downloads from their computer to their home theater system, like a squeezebox or something like that?

I just see the possible download model being another failure if not planned and implemented properly. People need to know about it, be able to easily use it, and have equipment that will play it. I've found that you can turn on a 5.1 windows media stream that is free for the end user to listen to, but that does no good if barely anyone is setup to listen to it.

With the streaming of movies becoming more common, I suppose we'll see the ability to stream surround to a home theater start there.

 

[Jeffrey Michael]

Personally, I would rather see a physical disc like Blu-ray but I wouldn't be opposed to downloads if forced into it.
Would I have a choice?
If they make downloads easy enough and user friendly, I will consider it.
Otherwise, I will stick to my boxes and boxes of compact discs, DVD-V, DVD-A and SACD's.

 

[MyCuff]

ISO and IMGburn. Nothing could be simpler. However, the size of the files if DVD-audio or DTS HDMA could be a problem for some. Retention long term also means redundant storage, as DVD-R/+R discs do tend to go bad.

 

[Ge Someone]

Yes, but if and when surround music resurfaces, it will probably be as a download model, at least initially.

This has already been tested on a smaller scale by some of independent artists (like Diatonis who is also a member here, but it doesn't look as if his still incomplete online catalog is being maintained for whatever reason) and a small classical label, the Nordic 2L label.
In both cases, besides the surround versions, there are alternative downloads available of most titles (stereo versions (lossless), lossy (mp3, DTS), videos). Maybe these outsell the surround?

Also the fear of piracy might be bigger when the we're talking downloads in the first place.

 

[ArnoldLayne]

I am not sure what you mean with that statement. We had a number of new title releases on DVD-A as well as back catalog. If you think that baby bands or unproven acts are going to sell a new format, then I think you don't have full understanding about the relationship the music industry has with CE companies, retailers, or artists. Retailers generally don't want to devote bin space to unproven acts on new formats; the quick demise of so many independent record stores basically meant that there are only a few retailers left controlling physical format distribution.

Well, In Spain I think no album whatsoever was released in DVD-A. I have a few albums by Latin American artists but AFAIK they were released with a huge lag after the CD received a Grammy award. Neither did I ever find any new albums in Madrid's physical stores. The "Sacred Love" you mention later on in your post was one I specifically looked for but not even Amazon had it. Wife wanted it badly and we ended up getting the CD instead. Was the situation really so much different in other countries? (This is NOT a retorical question, I'm asking because I'm interested)

Again, I can't figure out what you are trying to say. We (the labels) didn't spend "R&D money" on DRM; the CPPM technology on DVD-A is licensed and developed by the 4C (IBM, Intel, Toshiba, Matsushita). SACD copy protection was developed by Sony and Philips. Both of these technologies were simply licensed to the music industry.

Once again, the music industry generally does not develop CE technology, so you comment about digital interconnects is a mystery to me.

Yes of course. I suppose certain entertainment conglomerates also craved for DRM, but here I was mainly referring to the CE industry. They ended up providing sub-par technology for lower end gear. Just compare with how HDMI is right now making it possible to design cheap Blu-ray players without fancy DACs and analog outputs.

We did have simultaneous, or near simultaneous releases of DVD-A or SACD product with CD releases; just off the top of my head I can think of: Sting- Sacred Love, NIN-With Teeth, Diana Krall - Girl in the Other Room, Beck - Sea Change, Guero, etc.

Let me repeat myself here: DVD-A and SACD were discontinued because they didn't sell.

The public yawned.

No amount of revisionist history will change that fact that there was virtually no pull from the market wanting these products. If there had been even a glimmer of success, we would be making the discs today, but there wasn't. Zilch.

Everybody wanted iPods and portable music. Physical formats started a long decline that will eventually end with the demise of the CD in the future (or its relegation to niche status).

Hey, I'm not trying to rewrite history but rather wieving it from a slightly different perspective. Almost all of what you write makes a lot of sense to me.

To be honest, I have to agree that SACD and DVD-A had to coexist with important trends such as portable playback, proprietary technology strongholds and non-physical formats. But it's a new decade now and maybe, just maybe hi-res surround can have a second chance.

 

[ClarkNovak]

I just went back and re-read all seven pages. What a goldmine of information this thread is.

My main takeaway points are these:
* We MC fans are not typical music listeners (we already knew that)
* Trying to re-educate the buying public to our POV is futile
* MC from the majors may resurface when and if a new distribution model / profit model comes to light, and not before
* Back catalog will absolutely be the first source material tapped (which is as it should be - proven titles are greater potential sellers)
* In the meantime, support and encourage Rhino and any other boutique labels that release MC. Be grateful for what we get

 

[Jeffrey Michael]

* In the meantime, support and encourage Rhino and any other boutique labels that release MC. Be grateful for what we get

Amen, Brother!

 

[jimby]

A quick picture for you all from spring of 2002. Has it been that long?

From left to right: Jimby (yours truly), Steve Marcussen (of Marcussen Mastering), Lon Neumann (Sony liason for SACD production), Al Schmitt (legendary producer/engineer), and my colleague Howard.

Al and Steve had just finished up mastering on the 5.1 mix of Diana Krall's The Look of Love in Steve's beautiful mastering facility. We were there to audition the mastering in prep for its release on SACD and DVD-A.

Al Schmitt is legend even among industry veterans. He's produced or engineered more than 150 platinum records, and has a boatload of Grammys. Look him up for full credits.

 

[Jeffrey Michael]

Jimby,

Nice photo...thanks for sharing this and your thoughts on the industry!

 

[bmoura]

A quick picture for you all from spring of 2002. Has it been that long?

From left to right: Jimby (yours truly), Steve Marcussen (of Marcussen Mastering), Lon Murphy (Sony liason for SACD production), Al Schmitt (legendary producer/engineer), and my colleague Howard.

Al and Steve had just finished up mastering on the 5.1 mix of Diana Krall's The Look of Love in Steve's beautiful mastering facility. We were there to audition the mastering in prep for its release on SACD and DVD-A.

Al Schmitt is legend even among industry veterans. He's produced or engineered more than 150 platinum records, and has a boatload of Grammys. Look him up for full credits.

I think you mean Lon Neumann. He was the guy behind Sony's Hollywood SACD studio that was housed in Steve Marcussen's mastering facility. Lon also drove the SACD van when bringing SACD recording and workstations (like the Sonoma) to studios in the area. I did a profile of him (and Steve Marcussen) for High Fidelity Review back in the day.

 

[jimby]

I think you mean Lon Neumann. He was the guy behind Sony's Hollywood SACD studio that was housed in Steve Marcussen's mastering facility. Lon also drove the SACD van when bringing SACD recording and workstations (like the Sonoma) to studios in the area. I did a profile of him (and Steve Marcussen) for High Fidelity Review back in the day.

Yes, Lon Neumann. Lon Murphy is another guy I know. That's what happens when you post late at night! I correct the original post.

 

[Jens]

Dear Jimby,

Multichannel music sounds like a great business to make a small fortune by starting with a big one

Now let's suppose I had a big sum of money to invest. I would *love* to start my own record company, license rights to interesting pop/rock/electronic music albums from the majors and then work with the original artists/producers/engineers as much as possible to create and release multichannel remasters of them on SACD, DVD-A or BD Audio. (I'm an SACD fan because at some early point I've been professionally involved with it but I'm really quite format-agnostic -- it's the multichannel music I care about really.)

Exactly how crazy and especially how rich would I have to be to start doing this?

 

[jimby]

Medium rich
Very crazy

This is pretty much what DTS did back in the late 90s when they licensed content from the record companies and released DTS surround CDs. Also, be aware that although you might remix an album in surround, the record company will probably retain ownership of the surround mix (as they own the original tracks), and the rights to that mix would probably revert back to them after a negotiated period of time. Plus you'll have to assume any publishing liability (statutory rates). You would have secure your own artist and management approvals (not trivial).

The record companies would probably be open to a such a proposal (as I have said, we have done similar deals in the past), but right now there is not a viable market for new surround music, so you would undoubtedly assume a lot of risk in such as deal.

 

[ArnoldLayne]

Hmm... I can't help coming to think about the steady stream of DVD-A from Porcupine Tree and related groups... I'm not sure if this phenomenon is to be classified as 1) Fairly rich and surround-crazy artists or 2) Niche artists trying to sell a few more albums. A combination of both, I guess... Anyway, it seems to be economically viable for them and in some cases these albums even run out of stock, albeit temporarly. What makes these "entrepreneurs" so successful in a field where bigger companies see no future at all?

 

[Jeffrey Michael]

True! With all the differing opinions on this Thread, it's hard to know what the real truth is to why surround hasn't/won't sell or why more popular discs aren't being produced in greater numbers. There are many factors to consider. Although, I'm on Army of Quad's side in his very informative Posts.

 

[jimby]

True! With all the differing opinions on this Thread, it's hard to know what the real truth is to why surround hasn't/won't sell or why more popular discs aren't being produced in greater numbers. There are many factors to consider. Although, I'm on Army of Quad's side in his very informative Posts.

Some of you guys assume that just because one band does this (in a niche market for incremental revenue) that it makes sense for lots of artists to do surround. It doesn't. Artists are not products to be sold like a box of Tide, or a can of soda; they have very specific opinions about what they want to do and where they want to put their limited energies. Most artists probably don't care about surround sound; it doesn't excite them. Or in the case of a band with several members, they may have wildly divergent opinions about doing surround, or what makes a good surround mix. I have seen this play out many times, and it can be the cause of much internal conflict. Sometimes it is not worth the strife.

This also goes back to the earlier comment I made about how the fundamental way that people consume music has changed in the last 15 years; it has also changed for artists as well, because artists make music for their fans and how they listen to music.

As an example, I don't know how many times I have seen audiophiles complaining about dynamic compression on a particular CD, and how the music is "ruined" by compression, etc. Guess what? There's dynamic compression on a lot of albums because people are listening to music differently (and on different equipment) than how they did in the past; on planes, in cars, while jogging or working out at the gym, and other high noise floor environments where having a bit of compression helps out quite a bit. Mastering styles follow the use patterns of most consumers and the target audience.

Music (as a product) is constantly evolving in a dance with what consumers want and don't want, and surround music is simply not on the radar for what most artist want to do with their energy and time.

 

[Jeffrey Michael]

I, for one, have never complained about compression on records. Yes, if a record is over compressed, I may choose not to listen to it. Anyway, who cares how a particular Artist wants their record to be heard? It should be the consumer who, in the end, decides the outcome of how they want to hear it.