Pure Audio Blu Ray releases are not, really......

[neil wilkes]

Just as the title says.
There is currently no such thing as "Pure Audio Blu Ray".
It will be - eventually - profile 3.0, but right now it is vapourware, and no players currently available support it either, and it is still uncertain that a simple firmware update will enable or facilitate it when it is finalized.
All discs calling themselves "Pure Audio" blu ray right now are one of 2 things:
1 - Music Blu Ray in the same way that DVD-Video can be "adapted".
2 - a Java disc, which is essentially a BD-ROM with playlists & folder structures. It's a java widget in a BD-ROM type disc that boots in BD-J and may or may not have BD-MV folders added.
Each type has it's pros and cons, as with type 1 we are looking at an HD version of Music DVD where the graphical content is still dominant and changing this must force an audio change to suit and with type 2 it is a simple playlist type interface for a folder structure.

We found this out when buying our authoring software, as we specified that we must be able to create these Java "Pure Audio" discs, and it turned out that it is all smoke & mirrors until the actual specs are finalized.

What joy!

 

[Disclord]

One thing I don't understand is why all the motion menus, video, etc... are needed for a pure audio Blu-ray disc? While that stuff can be "fun", all it does is add to the work that needs to be created, plus rights clearances for every picture used - leading to less output from a studio. A few of the SACD rips I've gotten via Torrent are BD's with DTS-HD Master Audio and they play just like a CD - you put it on, and it plays. If I want track names or playing time, then I can turn on the TV and see the simple text the creator of the disc used. Why can't a commercial format be like this? I really do not think that lack of spinning/twirling/flashing pictures/lyrics or full-motion video are going to be a major drawback to any potential BD-A disc purchaser - they certainly didn't drive DVD-Audio sales!

If those kind of features are desired by the studio/artist for the BD-A, then the BD spec is usable and available to all BD player owners, today. Why does BD-A NEED a 'new' standard that will only delay things further?

 

[Kal Rubinson]

One thing I don't understand is why all the motion menus, video, etc... are needed for a pure audio Blu-ray disc? While that stuff can be "fun", all it does is add to the work that needs to be created, plus rights clearances for every picture used - leading to less output from a studio. A few of the SACD rips I've gotten via Torrent are BD's with DTS-HD Master Audio and they play just like a CD - you put it on, and it plays. If I want track names or playing time, then I can turn on the TV and see the simple text the creator of the disc used. Why can't a commercial format be like this? I really do not think that lack of spinning/twirling/flashing pictures/lyrics or full-motion video are going to be a major drawback to any potential BD-A disc purchaser - they certainly didn't drive DVD-Audio sales!

Have you tried the Naxos BD audio discs? Just put them in and push play. I don't even have a monitor and they work fine.

 

[Disclord]

Have you tried the Naxos BD audio discs? Just put them in and push play. I don't even have a monitor and they work fine.

Actually, I don't own a single Naxos recording in any format: yet, in The Audio Critic Magazine, both Peter Azcel and David Randa raved about the Naxos label, in terms of audio quality and low price.

Why, oh why, can't there be a Mo-Fi type label that specialized in ONLY quadraphonic, 5.1 and tri-phonic (the early RCA and Columbia 3-channel stereo recordings) releases... Brad Miller sure had the right idea with his HDS CD label, but that idea died when he went to his reward.

If I was able to get the rights and re-issue quad stuff, I'd make sure that all releases had the original discrete quad mix, plus the SQ or QS encoded version for those listeners who wanted/needed 2-channel compatibility via a quad matrix (or they simply prefer the ultra-wide imaging of a matrix decoded by an adaptive matrix system to that of discrete - amazingly, those people do exist! I was one of them once: in the early days of Dolby AC-3 LaserDisc's I thought I was one of them because of the matrix decoder's near-constant leakage. In my ignorance, I took that to mean that matrix had more accurate imaging than discrete.) Thus, since each album would have both the discrete mix and the 2-ch matrix quad mix, I'd label them as Universal SQ or Universal QS. A standard stereo, non-surround encoded, mix would be included too, and because neither SQ or QS decodes correctly with Pro-Logic or PL-II, I would include a Pro-Logic II or Lexicon Logic-7 mix too, so that all possible listeners would benefit. Oh, and include a 2 channel version as a digital pilot disc. Packaging would slavishly duplicate the original Quad release - as well as any inner bits. Yes, I can dream....

BTW, Kal, since you work for Stereophile magazine do you have any access to older reviews that haven't been published on the website? I'm looking for the Surround Sound decoder survey/review by William Sommerwerck done in June or July 1987, I believe.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

See PM.

Kal

 

[wappinghigh]

This thread is great! What it is telling me is, right now there maybe no such thing as a universal BD/SACD/DVD-A player for true pure audio surround formats.....not even the Denon, Oppo, Marantz, Yamaha or Cambridge Audio. because without True audio bluray compatibilty.... These will not be "universal"...

So advice for someone starting out without ANY surrond player at all, would it be best to 'sit out' blu ray for a while (and say even use my playstation for this (no Im not joking) and spend the serious money on a really good second hand DVD-A/SACD player? Pure Blu Ray Audio may never happen.... The next format might be streaming....

If so, what player? There are alot of great CD/SACD hi-end combo's, but not alot of True high end SACD/DVD-A combo's. Or are there? What would you guys recommend? I could get my hands on an Integra 10.5. I missed out on an NAD M55 recently. Any other ideas?

 

[Kal Rubinson]

This thread is great! What it is telling me is, right now there maybe no such thing as a universal BD/SACD/DVD-A player for true pure audio surround formats.....not even the Denon, Oppo, Marantz, Yamaha or Cambridge Audio. because without True audio bluray compatibilty.... These will not be "universal"...

Not at all. What it is telling you is that some producers of so-called BD-Audio discs are still larding them with menus and extras. I can pop in a 2L or Naxos BD to the Oppo or Yamaha players in my main monitor-less system and they just play. Hit a button if you wish to change audio format but, otherwise, they play like CDs.

 

[wappinghigh]

Oh. I misunderstood the OP. What was the reference to "profile 3.0"...I quote from the OP.."It will be - eventually - profile 3.0, but right now it is vapourware, and no players currently available support it either, and it is still uncertain that a simple firmware update will enable or facilitate it when it is finalized.) I thought current blu ray players wouldn't play these if the format goes to proflile 3.0....

Actually I'm real suspicious of blu ray as a developing medium. For Audio, I think it will go the way of the last quad LP format. What was that again? In a similar fashion to LP...It will be the last of the "Discs" and it's life will be real short.... You know. Nobody really learns from history do they?

I sure wish studios would just release the pure tracks online (the itunes model). The way iTrax does. But everyone now knows my opinion on this (roll eyes)

But I guess if the industry still foolishly thinks a "disc based" business model is the only one for the future of surround audio...well heck..what can a mere mortal like me do to change their mind....?
We just need some consistent players with solid DLNA to make this take off. All the latest. Denon/Yamaha/Oppo. Even receivers like the Marantz SR7005 will stream... it's just a matter of time/beta testing and new firmware upgrades before this happens consistently with surround PCM and flac. Or .iso

And when it does... it's goodbye blu ray discs for surround audio. But until then, I guess we'll still need SACD players (because of Sony's belligerence), and blu ray disc players to fool around with the small no of BD-Audio discs that trickle out before streaming takes on. My take is the cat is already out of the bag. The train has already left the station on this. And robust streaming will be possible before a critical no. of pure audio disks become available. Rendering the pure bluray disc players (the ones without DLNA and/or USB) "old technology" before they even hit the shelves.. This is IMHO (No more than from a consumers perspective) But a bloke with your background would already know all this already...

The two companies to watch in this space are Classe and Ayre. But unfortunately their latest offerings will be way over my budget

 

[Kal Rubinson]

Yes, the situation for physical media is tenuous and, for that reason, I doubt that Profile 3.0 or any new restrictive format will float. I also do not see a reason for it.

Kal

 

[LizardKing]

I agree that it will (eventually) go the way of online stores/downloads.

Then we won't need to hunt out expensive copies of disc that are out of print.

I think/hope it standardises on FLAC 5.1.......

 

[0tto]

profile 3, BD-A, DLAN or USB - it doesn't matter as long as majority of the labels continue to ignore hi-res sound in general.
192/24 and 96/24 tech.specs have been around for about 10 years and easily accessible practicaly in every household.
how many labels for this 10 years had offered their releases in such resolution?
i guess among all stuff released during this 10 years, less than 0.5% was replicated for marketing purpose in hi-res quality.