February/March Sound & Vision

[jrahrah]

There are two articles that discuss the multi-channel formats. They give various reasons as to why things aren't kicking off. One that I agree with is the fact that from the get go they developed two incompatible formats. For the life of me I can't understand why the music industry couldn't get it together and decide on one- I think a lot of people are just confused and intimidated.

They go on also to point out that not a whole lot of folks have the time or desire to sit down and really listen to music to appreciate the format; in other words, not too many audiophiles out there. Ken Pohlmann points out that neither DVD-A or SACD will be big, but that is no reason why a "minority of us can't still enjoy superb sound quality and spatial realism that blows stereo away." Here-here!!

My thinking is that the industry needs to come to a consensus. I think that so far the hybrid SACD format is the best way to go. I think if you put a CD in someones hand that has a hidden gem included; people curiosity will lead them to discover what we already know.

 

[Guy Robinson]

Personally I love SACD. In fact, I have more SACD's than DVD-A's at this point in time. However, of all the formats out there I think the DualDisc can have the most impact. You have the CD side and you also have the DVD side. The DVD side has Dolby/DTS and DVD-A(hopefully). There are usually a few videos thrown in as well. So I can see people getting the disc for the CD layer. Thousands/Millions of these same people have surround capability via Dolby/DTS. I can see them curiously flipping the disc to try the surround stream (possibly first just the included videos) and then discovering possibly that it sounds better to them than the CD side. From here they might get DVD-A capability to see how much better the DVD-A is. With the SACD they actually have to get a new player to explore the surround aspect at all. I can't see SACD as ever having mass appeal because of this. Audiophile appeal yes but not mass audience appeal.

 

[timw]

I read these articles too and feel very dissappointed that most people just don't seem to care about music in surround or even high quality sound for that matter. I have friends who seem to get more excited about the fact that they can download their music or live concerts for free...not caring about the quality at all!!! (Believe me, I've heard some of this crap. Much of it is just poor quality soundboard mono mixes!) I'm really beginning to think that if we were to go from stereo back to MONO most people wouldn't care....or even notice!!!!
((( It's kind of similar to the way High-Definition TV is slowwwwly catching on here. They've had it in Japan for years now!!!)))
just my thoughts,
Tim

 

[bmoura]

Personally I love SACD. In fact, I have more SACD's than DVD-A's at this point in time. However, of all the formats out there I think the DualDisc can have the most impact. You have the CD side and you also have the DVD side. The DVD side has Dolby/DTS and DVD-A(hopefully). There are usually a few videos thrown in as well. So I can see people getting the disc for the CD layer. Thousands/Millions of these same people have surround capability via Dolby/DTS. I can see them curiously flipping the disc to try the surround stream (possibly first just the included videos) and then discovering possibly that it sounds better to them than the CD side. From here they might get DVD-A capability to see how much better the DVD-A is. With the SACD they actually have to get a new player to explore the surround aspect at all. I can't see SACD as ever having mass appeal because of this. Audiophile appeal yes but not mass audience appeal.

Of course that assumes that the CD side of their Dual Disc plays. Something that isn't the case with a Dual Disc release and some players.

 

[rusinurbe]

I hate to say it but Dual disc does offer the most potential mass appeal of the current formats. CD compatible side. DVD compatible side with the protential for Both Multichannel MLP and Videos.
I have always preferred DVD-A but its has been so badly sold its incredible that its stll even being talked about.

As it stands I believe that DVD-V is going to still be the mass appeal surround format, with DTS the best quality, unless a better algorythem comes around.

Unless all the companys get together like they did for teh original DVD specification, and come up with a new format that is an inprovement on the older formats then its doomed to failure, couple that with the fact thet the public have got to be looking for a new format, Blue Ray and HD-DVD anyone !!


WOW just noticed this is my 150th post !!

 

[Larry Geller]

The CD side of my American Beauty Dualdisc will not play on either my Denon 3910 or my Sony 755.

 

[Guy Robinson]

Of course that assumes that the CD side of their Dual Disc plays. Something that isn't the case with a Dual Disc release and some players.

I have a few of them and the CD sides plays in all my equipment. That covers 3 CD only players and 10 DVD players.

 

[Guy Robinson]

I have a few of them and the CD sides plays in all my equipment. That covers 3 CD only players and 10 DVD players.

But I don't have any Sony or Denon players so I can't remark on those. Neither do I have the Grateful Dead DualDisc.

 

[kvsawilson]

They go on also to point out that not a whole lot of folks have the time or desire to sit down and really listen to music to appreciate the format; in other words, not too many audiophiles out there.

Sad, but true. I don't know many people my own age that actually sit and listen to music any more. It's background noise from the radio or to listen to while cooking dinner, but not to really listen to. And my kid has never apprecitated good sound as much as I've tried to get him to. I think most kids would be more interested in a 1.5 system with 5 subwoofers cranked so loud you can't hear the lyrics than to actually want their music to sound like the studio.

But I did like the comment that the rest of us can still enjoy it. I don't think we need dvd-a or sacd to become mainstream, just profitable enough that they keep releasing titles.

KW

 

[timbre4]

Didn't find much encouragement in this issue; no less than three surround music articles or op-ed pieces that video reigns supreme over audio anymore.

I've joined the iPod nation for a ton of casual music listening in travel or just having a big collection to shuffle through on whims. But I still want the high end experience of great DVD-A or SACD surround music. I still enjoy my DTS CDs too.

When I tell people about the surround music discs, nearly all of them expect video. The world has changed this much, Happy New Year.

PS - Why must Sony abandon SACD software and then ALSO muck up their DualDisc participation by not providing a hi-rez 5.1 layer?

 

[bmoura]

Why must Sony abandon SACD software and then ALSO muck up their DualDisc participation by not providing a hi-rez 5.1 layer?

I think Dual Disc has bigger problems than whether Sony Music U.S. includes a hi rez audio 5.1 layer.

Seems to me that the patent problems in Europe and the CD playback problems on some equipment are even bigger hurdles to the format's success.

 

[dauQula]

I read these articles too and feel very dissappointed that most people just don't seem to care about music in surround or even high quality sound for that matter. I have friends who seem to get more excited about the fact that they can download their music or live concerts for free...not caring about the quality at all!!! (Believe me, I've heard some of this crap. Much of it is just poor quality soundboard mono mixes!) I'm really beginning to think that if we were to go from stereo back to MONO most people wouldn't care....or even notice!!!!
((( It's kind of similar to the way High-Definition TV is slowwwwly catching on here. They've had it in Japan for years now!!!)))
just my thoughts,
Tim

HDTV would enjoy a much faster satisfaction curve if the stations broadcasting HDTV would stop cheating on the bandwidth. Many are dividing up the bandwidth for multicasting to increase ad revenue to try and recoup costs. The result is poor HDTV signal and pixelated fast-action during sports. People who shell out for HDTV expect more than just extra channels for "I Love Lucy" re-runs.

 

[proufo]

HDTV would enjoy a much faster satisfaction curve if the stations broadcasting HDTV would stop cheating on the bandwidth. Many are dividing up the bandwidth for multicasting to increase ad revenue to try and recoup costs. The result is poor HDTV signal and pixelated fast-action during sports. People who shell out for HDTV expect more than just extra channels for "I Love Lucy" re-runs.

That realy sucks. I thought that happened only in cable/DTv sat feeds for South America. Here the local Warner channel has cut the BW so much that when images fade out and in the images pixelate horribly. Big, big squares.

 

[dauQula]

That realy sucks. I thought that happened only in cable/DTv sat feeds for South America. Here the local Warner channel has cut the BW so much that when images fade out and in the images pixelate horribly. Big, big squares.

Hey, but you get "Andy Of Mayberry" and Three Stooges reruns in digitally delivered black & white clarity!!

 

[neil wilkes]

What does anyone actually expect?
The labels have sold the myth that quality does not matter as long as you got quantity for Audio, now they will naturally do the same with HDTV too.

 

[bmoura]

HDTV would enjoy a much faster satisfaction curve if the stations broadcasting HDTV would stop cheating on the bandwidth. Many are dividing up the bandwidth for multicasting to increase ad revenue to try and recoup costs. The result is poor HDTV signal and pixelated fast-action during sports. People who shell out for HDTV expect more than just extra channels for "I Love Lucy" re-runs.

It varies. In this area we have several stations broadcasting in full quality HDTV and when you see the broadcasts it shows.

Once more people have Hi Def TVs, I wonder if they'll accept anything less.

 

[dauQula]

It varies. In this area we have several stations broadcasting in full quality HDTV and when you see the broadcasts it shows.

Once more people have Hi Def TVs, I wonder if they'll accept anything less.

Many people will simply assume they are watching HDTV because they have digital reception, and because the HDTV network signals ID the HDTV signals as "HDTV". Too bad bandwidth readout capability isn't available in consumer receivers that I know of. Then people wouldn't automatically assume the pixellation problem is in their receiver/monitor and give the stations a pass.
For the rest that know HDTV when they see it (or don't), you'll have some who will rationalize bandwidth loss because the extra channels will still give them something extra for their bucks and temporary bragging rights over their analog-only neighbors.
The remaining viewers who bought HDTV capability to watch true 1080i HDTV will be a number too small I fear to keep the stations "honest", and, in turn, will cause HDTV manufacturers not to develop cheaper 1080i systems, but just "get by" with lower-res delivery standards defeating the original promise of HDTV.

 

[bmoura]

Many people will simply assume they are watching HDTV because they have digital reception, and because the HDTV network signals ID the HDTV signals as "HDTV". Too bad bandwidth readout capability isn't available in consumer receivers that I know of. Then people wouldn't automatically assume the pixellation problem is in their receiver/monitor and give the stations a pass.
For the rest that know HDTV when they see it (or don't), you'll have some who will rationalize bandwidth loss because the extra channels will still give them something extra for their bucks and temporary bragging rights over their analog-only neighbors.
The remaining viewers who bought HDTV capability to watch true 1080i HDTV will be a number too small I fear to keep the stations "honest", and, in turn, will cause HDTV manufacturers not to develop cheaper 1080i systems, but just "get by" with lower-res delivery standards defeating the original promise of HDTV.

Well, as one who now has an HDTV set, it's pretty obvious which channels are - and are not - broadcasting a full bandwith HD signal. It's not too hard for anyone to tell the difference!

 

[GaryW]

I have a few of them and the CD sides plays in all my equipment. That covers 3 CD only players and 10 DVD players.

Totally off the subject, but man I thought I was excessive with 6 dvd players.

 

[Guy Robinson]

Totally off the subject, but man I thought I was excessive with 6 dvd players.

This includes an XBox and Playstation2 and 4 computers. Ooops, I miscounted. I actually have 12 units capable of playing a DVD.