Poll: CDs with your surround optical discs, yes or no?

[Mr. Afternoon]

The BD itself could also include files in CD and mp3 format ready to rip, which would make things easier, although still requiring a PC drive.

There's a PABD technology called mShuttle which allows your Blu-ray player to transfer a FLAC version of the album stored on disc over the network for those that don't have Blu-ray PC drives. Used on a couple 2L releases, I think.

 

[JediJoker]

JediJoker - not to be argumentative, but the stereo mix for the CD needs to come from somewhere (the existing stereo mix, a remastered stereo mix [a la Quadio], a new stereo mix or a surround to stereo downmix).

The existing stereo mix digital copy may be decades old (and not of the best quality), remastering and new stereo mixes cost more money whereas some software in a DAW can convert the digital surround sound source to matrix encoded stereo in the RBCD format, would just need a little extra time to wait for the DAW to make the RBCD format data files.

Including dedicated stereo mixes (vintage or new) doesn't seem to be of any financial concern, given that they are included with every physical modern surround release I can think of.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0CK53RV8R/ref=sr_1_1

Going OT somewhat - Amazon currently sells stereo MP3s of current songs that are Sony 360RA (matrix?) encoded.

Those are either binaural renders or akin to the way Dolby Atmos can be distributed in a 5.1 E-AC3 container and decoded on any Atmos-capable hardware up to any number of channels, only in this case, the "carrier" is stereo MP3. No analog matrixing involved.

A lot of the CD/BD or CD/DVD editions (e.g. Steve Hackett) I have were cheap because they were aimed at a large public, one that may or may not be able to play the multichannel disc, whereas things like the SDE series are more of a niche thing and often quite costly for various reasons (risk, low print runs, licensing). I guess Bill B has said that already.

I can live with having to buy CDs and BDs separately (as I have done recently for Animals 2018 Remix, Wet Dream and One Deep River) but I do think a simple digipak combining both is really the best of both worlds (sets mixing digital discs with vinyl, on the other hand, annoy me) and doesn't have to be expensive - the emphasis here being on "simple". I didn't consider myself enough of a Yes fan to buy the artbook 2CD/BD edition of Mirror to the Sky but I didn't have to think long when the slimmed down digipak edition was announced.

People saying that it's easy to rip BD are sounding a bit - excuse the term - privileged to me. It's an involved process and requires a BD computer drive plus several pieces of software, not to mention ample drive space (a recurring problem with me...).

However, it makes me wonder why download codes were only ever really a thing for vinyl releases, and not considered for things like CDs or BD-As. The BD itself could also include files in CD and mp3 format ready to rip, which would make things easier, although still requiring a PC drive.

I really couldn't have said it better myself. (Although, I did buy the Mirror Earbook... I'm a sucker for those things.)

There's a PABD technology called mShuttle which allows your Blu-ray player to transfer a FLAC version of the album stored on disc over the network for those that don't have Blu-ray PC drives. Used on a couple 2L releases, I think.

I've heard of mShuttle, but man, does it ever sound cumbersome.

 

[kfbkfb]

I found the 360RA "encoded" stereo MP3s a while back, so far, I haven't found any technical details about how 360RA MCH content is "encoded" into stereo.

I doubt that MP3 has data space for metadata to allow for "decoding/unpacking" into MCH (360RA) format, it seems to me the only way place MCH 360RA into stereo is to use a type of matrix encoding (the Amazon page doesn't mention using headphones for listening to the 360RA stereo MP3s).


Kirk Bayne

 

[jaybird100]

I Voted Yes. Still play CDs at home and I play the CD disc of a surround sound package when I'm not in the mood for 5.1 listening (also I can add tracks from the CD to my MP3 player for portabilty

 

[jaybird100]

Does anybody even bother making single-layer SACD's anymore? It certainly makes sense that SACD's can be made compatible for regular CD players too, so a stereo (or even matrix-encoded quad) layer, along with the discrete quad (or 5.1) layer makes sense. Since SACD can do both on a single disc, and since pretty much all SACD's being released today do exactly that, As for DVD-A and BD-A, it should be a decision made by the producers, If it doesn't cost the consumer any more, I can easily burn my own CD's, if I choose to do so, and can RM-encode them, too. No need to include it.

 

[JediJoker]

Does anybody even bother making single-layer SACD's anymore?

All Japanese SHM-SACDs are single-layer only.

I doubt that MP3 has data space for metadata to allow for "decoding/unpacking" into MCH (360RA) format, it seems to me the only way place MCH 360RA into stereo is to use a type of matrix encoding (the Amazon page doesn't mention using headphones for listening to the 360RA stereo MP3s).

360RA is largely a headphone-focused format. AVRs that can decode it are exceedingly rare.

 

[barfle]

I'm curious, not being argumentative, but sincerely want to know what you actually listen to when it comes to a surround disc (any format) when you want to hear it but you don't have access to a surround setup and there are not portable surround disc players? Like in the car, working in the garage, etc. For me it is a cd, that may or may not have been included with a box surround set. Like someone else said, a lot of times, I already own the cd of the surround, but with all the new releases, there are many new discs being released I do not own.

For serious listening, it’s always with the good setup. In the car, I have burned a handful,of CDs that rotate in and out, but I often find that experience to be kind of meh. I also have downloaded a hendful of songs to my phone, but it’s rare that I listen to them.

“Casual” listening doesn’t seem to be something I do much any more.

 

[Jim.olga]

I'm curious, not being argumentative, but sincerely want to know what you actually listen to when it comes to a surround disc (any format) when you want to hear it but you don't have access to a surround setup and there are not portable surround disc players? Like in the car, working in the garage, etc. For me it is a cd, that may or may not have been included with a box surround set. Like someone else said, a lot of times, I already own the cd of the surround, but with all the new releases, there are many new discs being released I do not own.

Now I have 3 surround setups to listen...2 in my house, 1 in my car, but my car only plays DVD-A or DTS. Bluray is worthless for portability, and I can't listen to it anywhere other than my house with my surround setups. Not my garage, but inside. I do not want to invest the time or money into trying to convert a surround disc into stereo only, or copy from a bluray disc because I don't have that setup on anything I own. Maybe I am too old school, but in the end, you still end up with a stereo copy, most likely about cd quality anyway, that you have to work to get playable away from your surround set up. Which is why I don't understand the passionate resistance to having a stand alone cd included.

I do not stream music other than Pandora, in stereo, because they are all paid subscriptions for anything in surround. If I am not seated correctly, surround is not great to listen to either. It is definitely a fixed position listening experience. Thereby making a portable stereo version universally more practical. I realize you can copy to a drive, which I have done, but I have only ever done that from cd, or downloaded stereo music. Maybe there is a surround sound conversion to stereo for dummies that I can use, but I still like my cd copy. I even have my kids borrow them to use in their rooms/house and vehicles.

Again, just my perspective, and I am trying to understand the other view. No hate just trying to learn and progress.

I often times will make a recording of the blue ray onto a dvd-r disc using a dvd recorder. Then convert the stereo audio from the dvd and burn it onto a cd. It's almost like the old days when we made personal cassettes. The resulting CD is very good and I can play them in the car or when I'm away from my surround system. You can usually find a decent deal on a used dvd recorder on ebay. I much prefer when the sets come with a CD. It saves me a lot of work making the CD myself!

 

[Blrac]

Thank you all for the replies. I appreciate the input.

What I am gathering is that the people that make portable playable copies in stereo, regardless of how and where they play them, have both a hardware and software setup to do this. I understand the idea there that you are not inclined to pay anything extra for a cd because of that. However, as posted by another member, this does sound a bit cumbersome to just get something playable elsewhere. As I stated before, I do not have the hardware or software necessary to do this, much less the storage and time to do that work. Perhaps it is simple for those of you that do this, but for me it doesn't sound so simple.

That takes me to the others who see things similarly to me with the hardware and software required. Instead of that investment of both money to get the drives, storage, etc. as well as my precious time, I think having an included cd solves that issue. I am personally willing to pay a bit more to get that included. I do admit there is a limit though, but can't conclusively say what that limit is. I am merely looking at avoiding to having to get everything necessary to make my own stereo playable copies. I am not opposed to a downloadable version.

I guess it comes down to personal preference, duh Capt. Obvious, but with caveats. I agree that I honestly buy the new releases because they are in surround, and that is what I want. I am being picky in requesting a stand alone cd to come with it. I can and do live without the cd, but if available would like it. However, if I already own the cd, then I definitely don't want to pay extra for it to be included with the surround release, unless it is remastered, has bonus materials, etc.

So I guess we can agree that we all still want surround to keep coming, with or without an included cd (or stereo download) playable everywhere. But we can disagree as to how simple it is for some to make stereo recordings playable anywhere from multichannel sources.

Just my perspective. Thanks again for your input and views.

 

[Werno]

This thread could have been named 'CD or not CD', but I guess it's too late now. Just seeing the OP posted a nice summary and closing statement, so apologies for going ahead and posting this anyway.

I'm always glad to get a CD along with whatever multichannel optical disc I'm acquiring. I listen to music in stereo on various devices, and I like to have access to new acquisitions across all devices which a CD makes easy. I'm not set up to extract files from most non-CD disc formats, so when no CD's included I often dub the whole stereo mix onto an SD card, pop it into my laptop to carve into tracks and burn on a CD, then rip MP3s, and distribute files to my phone, tablet, laptop, whatever. If someone else is willing to make the small effort of adding a CD to the package, they've lowered my sales resistance to the extent that it's saved me some work. I might even play the CD in my car.

Here are two cases where I’ve felt compelled to roll my own CDs in the absence of one being provided, and one label that sets a high bar for giving you every possible option.

The SDE Atmos Blu-ray releases that I've bought have largely been albums I didn't already own, so they've inspired me more than most to make the effort to make player-agnostic stereo versions, even to the extent, in the case of T4F’s Atmos/5.1-only ‘Tipping Point’, of recording my Oppo BDP83's stereo downmix of the 5.1 mix from the player's higher-speced stereo outs. I have a Tascam DR-680 8-track digital ‘field’ recorder that does a nice job recording up to 6 analog inputs, so I connected 2 cables from the BDP83’s stereo outputs (which always carry a downmix of whatever’s playing) and hit ‘record’. The result sounds better to me than the stereo versions I found on streaming. YMMV.

Sometimes including a CD of the main program isn't enough. Gentle Giant's '3 Piece Suite' came with a CD with the stereo remixes of those songs whose multis were available for a 5.1 mix, but if you want the original complete stereo mixes of their first three albums, they're only on the Blu-ray. So I dubbed them, now I can play them everywhere. FWIW I've dubbed Steven Wilson's stereo instrumental mixes from his various projects’ blu-rays so I can freely access them when the mood strikes, because I'd probably never choose them over the surround mixes when parked in the sweet spot with the blu-ray loaded. They’re fascinating in controlled bursts when the mood strikes.

My last example is the 2L label, which is the 'include every option' king. Many if not all their albums have a blu-ray with multiple surround and stereo formats (Atmos, Auro-3D, 192kHz DTS-HD, LPCM), plus a hybrid SACD with stereo and 5.1 mixes, plus network-downloadable 'mShuttle' hi-res Flacs and MP3s on the Blu-ray. I'm not always in the mood for Nordic chamber orchestra/folk/jazz, but when I am it's there in any format I could possible desire. The mShuttle process sounds more ‘cumbersome’ than it is, it’s just a matter of connecting the blu-ray player to your computer over your local network to download the files; you’d probably only do it once per disc. I’d say it’s less challenging that the process required to rip stereo files from Blu-ray discs but since I lack the capacity to do so that’s mere conjecture on my part.

To explicitly return to the actual thread topic, my bottom line is ‘Toss in a CD- where’s the harm?’

 

[par4ken]

I’d say it’s less challenging that the process required to rip stereo files from Blu-ray discs but since I lack the capacity to do so that’s mere conjecture on my part.

Mere conjecture alright, but I'm not trying to convert you. The way you go about it seems very cumbersome to me but if it works for you that's fine by me.

AnyDVD HD along with DVD Audio extractor, is very fast and easy for me to use to rip audio from Blu-rays. Then I use MP3Tag to quickly label the files but that step is not necessary if you just want to burn a CD, unless you want it to include text.

Even if a CD is included making a copy will ensure that the original does not get destroyed!

 

[GaryG]

Yes. I like to rip the CD and put it on my NAS. Having the CD (or stereo download) makes it much easier for me. I have the ability to record the stereo version off of any disc format using Audacity. But it is time consuming.

 

[Bill B]

For serious listening, it’s always with the good setup. In the car, I have burned a handful,of CDs that rotate in and out, but I often find that experience to be kind of meh. I also have downloaded a hendful of songs to my phone, but it’s rare that I listen to them.

“Casual” listening doesn’t seem to be something I do much any more.

I always have music playing somewhere. My computer has a basic small speaker + subwoofer stereo setup and some playlist is always on repeat mode. Not loud enough to be heard across the house but loud enough to be heard in a couple of rooms.

 

[JulesRules]

The result sounds better to me than the stereo versions I found on streaming. YMMV.

Oh yes, the stereo mix of The Tipping Point was ruined during mastering.

On a similar plane, the 40th anniversary remaster of The Hurting is a much better mastering than the 1999 CD, the 2013 box set or the 2013 BD-A, but it's only released on LP and the SDE BD, no CD.

The same goes for Steven Wilson's stereo remixes of this and Songs from the Big Chair - I did rip the latter and make my own CD because ripping a DVD-A is a lot easier than ripping a BD! I just directly dragged the audio files from the disc into Audacity (and then performed some fixes).

 

[Mackspower]

Voted No:
"Should CDs be included with Blu-rays and DVDs" - I am buying these formats for non-stereo reasons
"Should SACDs be hybrid with a CD layer?"- I don't think I have ever listened to the Redbook layer on any of my SACDs, I am buying the SACD format for the sweet, sweet DSD stream (90% of the time I have an original CD anyway and prefer that pairing)
General feelings: when I am buying CDs, I am looking for the artists' original intention and the recording technology that supported that vision at the time.

 

[MidiMagic]

It continues to amaze me that people are still talking about it in 2024.

I still prefer matrixed surround. I can get rid of the cogging with matrixed. And it does not require the listener to be centered.

 

[kfbkfb]

Or...follow the marketing model of (most?) [UHD]Blu-ray movie releases - include a code (AudiosAnywhere?) to download the album in stereo (MP3 or .wav format - possibly matrix encoded too) for playback on smartphones, home computers or for making a stereo/surround CD-R personal use copy.


Kirk Bayne

 

[JonUrban]

If you asked me 20+ years ago, I would have said YES. I believe if WB/Rhino would have marketed DVD-Audio's with CDs (like the Flaming Lips and Morph the Cat), the format would have done better. For an extra few bucks, you got the CD and the DVD-A.

However, today, with cars not including disc players, it's really not that important. I suppose it's a convenience for ripping, but for a BluRay release it's pretty much a waste. However, for an SACD, there is no reason not to include both.

When I think about it, it really was a joy to walk into a store, buy a CD, then listen to it immediately in the car on the way home. (Even better when it was a DVD-A. I still remember getting 'Love' and cranking it on the highway on the way home)