Is this the future of Surround Music?
- Thread starter JonUrban
- Start date
Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:
Kal Rubinson
2K Club - QQ Super Nova
On Direct TV channel 101 they have this Nine Inch Nails concert for free all month long in March.
DaneelOlivaw
300 Club - QQ All-Star
I am not buying into another hi-res surround music format unless the music and hardware people prove they plan to fully support it. I don't mind paying extra for a niche format but not if it gets the unprofessional, sloppy and inconsistant support sacd/dvd-audio have received over the past eight years.
Yeah right. I think the phrase "high-res surround music" pretty much says it. You're hooked just like the rest of us. We're praying that if/when sacd/dvd-a disappear that there will be some high-res surround sound format to go to. Go back to cd stereo??? - no way!!
Chris Gerhard
2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Interesting opinion. I would say you are part of the intended market for high resolution surround. The problem is, what is fully support it? Obviously no profits on the software can be made without hardware in the hands of consumers to play the software so these products are introduced with a promise of initial releases and support from companies who then analyse market penetration. CD took off like a rocket as did DVD and software came rapidly. Sony spent a fortune to promote SACD, many initial releases and various hardware manufacturers made players. The format exploded on the launching pad and tens of millions (hundreds of millions?) were lost with no way to turn it around that Sony could see. DVD-A did poorly as well and now I read Sony and Silverline and poor marketing and poor software and poor hardware and Best Buy and Circuit City and the media screwed it all up. I look at it and believe the error was trying to price it and promote it all like a mass market product. I think on balance both formats had great hardware and both formats had great software with exceptions of course. I have stopped buying both SACD and DVD-A now, for the most part, and moved on to the new formats.
I think both of the new formats are supported by companies with a commitment to making their product work with a good selection of initial movies and acceptable hardware. The important group of early adopters needs to buy the hardware now and any software that is at least interesting. So far both are doing better than I would have thought in terms of software availability and affordable acceptable hardware but neither is doing well enough to see any future profit potential with my eyes. There has been some poor quality software and buggy hardware, sure but overall things are going smoothly, just nothing impressive has happened to either format yet. The PS3 is, I guess, a success and probably plays more Blu-ray discs than any other player.
If everybody like you waits until you are sure the formats are going to be fully supported according to some firm standard, it probably isn't going to happen, there isn't enough money. These formats don't do to DVD what DVD did to VHS or what CD did to the LP. DVD doesn't look obsolete to the overwhelming majority of people that see Blu-ray or HD DVD, myself included. The formats look and sound better, to some way better and to others, a little better. With the limits of human eyes and ears, I find the difference closer to a little better, but worthwhile. I heard CD, I kept my turntable but quit listening to LP. I saw DVD, I sold my LaserDiscs, and put the players in storage. I own Blu-ray and HD DVD and I continue to buy DVD's and rent the new formats. It may be most people here are waiting for a decent affordable universal Blu-ray/HD DVD/SACD/DVD-A/DVD-V/CD player and I never dreamed that would come, but now think it might and possibly soon. I think one or both of these formats could become a niche market success and a library of excellent software could exist.
Chris
neil wilkes
2K Club - QQ Super Nova
5.1 Dolby True HD is optional on all Blu Ray players.
This means unsupported on the cheaper and early players.
Most players will only play the Dolby Digital stream.....
This means unsupported on the cheaper and early players.
Most players will only play the Dolby Digital stream.....
Chris Gerhard
2K Club - QQ Super Nova
I read about this stuff often and usually get in on any format of interest early and I can't even figure out all of the different audio codecs and what it takes to play them this time. I believe most (all?) Blu-ray players will pass the DTS signal so I don't know what you mean by "will only play the Dolby Digital stream". I looked at what the Samsung BD-P1000 would do now and decided I wanted in. I knew the HD-A1 HD DVD player could play Dolby TrueHD over the analog connections after a firmware update. I couldn't grasp all of the issues and decided what the heck, if there is something I want that I am missing, it won't be the first time I have shot myself in the foot and I can limp along and enjoy what I can play. Both of these formats are great but it is all too confusing even for the long time audio/video junkie like me.
Possible (required?) with Blu-ray hardware and optional with software:
Linear PCM (LPCM) - offers up to 8 channels of uncompressed audio.
Dolby Digital (DD) - format used for DVDs also known as AC3, offers 5.1-channel surround sound.
Dolby Digital Plus (DD+) - extension of DD, offers increased bitrates and 7.1-channel surround sound.
Dolby TrueHD - extension of MLP Lossless, offers lossless encoding of up to 8 channels of audio.
DTS Digital Surround - format used for DVDs, offers 5.1-channel surround sound.
DTS-HD - extension of DTS, offers increased bitrates and up to 8 channels of audio.
What can I play and how can I play it? Can my player be updated to allow for decoding over HDMI when I get an HDMI 1.something capable amplifier? This link I read and trusted indicates all Blu-ray players must support the above audio codecs but doesn't explain how and what is needed.
http://www.blu-ray.com/faq/#bluray_audio_codecs
I think HD DVD also provides for support for all of the above and even the first generation player has hardware to decode much of it.
Any help would be appreciated.
Chris
Chris Gerhard
2K Club - QQ Super Nova
I was able to find some of the simple answers when using my Samsung BD-P1000. (2) and (5) on a Blu-ray disc can be passed over digital or decoded and output over the 5.1 connection. (2) and (5) when playing a DVD can be passed over digital connection for decoding but can only be output over analog in stereo, which seems weird and maybe that is something to be addressed in a future firmware update, I don't know. I believe (1) can be decoded and output over analog 5.1 but I don't have one to check. The rest are yet to be determined by me.
Chris
Odys
701 Club - QQ All-Star
Don't forget this disc comes in HD DVD too. I have a first generation HD DVD player and it plays TrueHD through the analog connections.
Chris Gerhard
2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Have you heard it in Dolby TrueHD? I would guess this is one of the titles available on both formats that favors HD DVD.
Chris
DaneelOlivaw
300 Club - QQ All-Star
Sorry guys but my decision is not based on a knee-jerk or emotional basis. I didn't buy a $330 hi-res player, large (nearly) fullrange speakers for rear channels, etc rearrange my listening room for the ITU spec buy three pairs of interconnects etc etc.............all so I could only look forward to one new surround title I like every six months. 
And almost always, that title is an album I have already heard over and over and over i.e. "classic rock" (I don't listen to classical and only a bit of jazz). I like music too much to stay stuck in the past so back in the 90s at the age of 32 I decided I was missing too much good stuff by making myself "act my age" when it came to choosing albums. So for example, as good as the surround version of Hotel California is supposed to be I still don't own it - I have that album on vinyl & two versions on CD all for a total of 27 years. So along with hearing it on the radio......every......single.......day, I have burned out on that music.
When I see a surround title my first reaction is "Is that music I will like?" If so then I'll buy it. Second reaction: if it's in hi-res form, great! But if it is just in DTS or (bleh) Dolby Digital, I will still buy it. But bottom line, if the music is not to my liking, I don't care how good it sounds or how well done the mix is, I will not buy it. Though I will try out older music that I wasn't previously into but seems interesting, like the Talking Heads or Depeche Mode or newer material like the Super Furry Animals' 5.1 sacd.
So as much as I like surround, I would rather listen to Beck or Thievery Corporation on my Tivoli table radio's 3" mono speaker than some audiophile recording w/lame formulaic music on a $5K surround system.
And almost always, that title is an album I have already heard over and over and over i.e. "classic rock" (I don't listen to classical and only a bit of jazz). I like music too much to stay stuck in the past so back in the 90s at the age of 32 I decided I was missing too much good stuff by making myself "act my age" when it came to choosing albums. So for example, as good as the surround version of Hotel California is supposed to be I still don't own it - I have that album on vinyl & two versions on CD all for a total of 27 years. So along with hearing it on the radio......every......single.......day, I have burned out on that music.
When I see a surround title my first reaction is "Is that music I will like?" If so then I'll buy it. Second reaction: if it's in hi-res form, great! But if it is just in DTS or (bleh) Dolby Digital, I will still buy it. But bottom line, if the music is not to my liking, I don't care how good it sounds or how well done the mix is, I will not buy it. Though I will try out older music that I wasn't previously into but seems interesting, like the Talking Heads or Depeche Mode or newer material like the Super Furry Animals' 5.1 sacd.
So as much as I like surround, I would rather listen to Beck or Thievery Corporation on my Tivoli table radio's 3" mono speaker than some audiophile recording w/lame formulaic music on a $5K surround system.
Sorry guys but my decision is not based on a knee-jerk or emotional basis. I didn't buy a $330 hi-res player, large (nearly) fullrange speakers for rear channels, etc rearrange my listening room for the ITU spec buy three pairs of interconnects etc etc.............all so I could only look forward to one new surround title I like every six months.
And almost always, that title is an album I have already heard over and over and over i.e. "classic rock" (I don't listen to classical and only a bit of jazz). I like music too much to stay stuck in the past so back in the 90s at the age of 32 I decided I was missing too much good stuff by making myself "act my age" when it came to choosing albums. So for example, as good as the surround version of Hotel California is supposed to be I still don't own it - I have that album on vinyl & two versions on CD all for a total of 27 years. So along with hearing it on the radio......every......single.......day, I have burned out on that music.
When I see a surround title my first reaction is "Is that music I will like?" If so then I'll buy it. Second reaction: if it's in hi-res form, great! But if it is just in DTS or (bleh) Dolby Digital, I will still buy it. But bottom line, if the music is not to my liking, I don't care how good it sounds or how well done the mix is, I will not buy it. Though I will try out older music that I wasn't previously into but seems interesting, like the Talking Heads or Depeche Mode or newer material like the Super Furry Animals' 5.1 sacd.
So as much as I like surround, I would rather listen to Beck or Thievery Corporation on my Tivoli table radio's 3" mono speaker than some audiophile recording w/lame formulaic music on a $5K surround system.
Good point. I have purchased stuff I knew nothing about, and it turned out to be clunkers. I would never have purchased half the stuff I have on DVD-A and SACD if we were talking plain old CD.
Of course, I did find Flaming Lips, Porcupine Tree, Bjork, among others that I would have never purchased in stereo alone. Heck, I would have never heard them..........
Well, I guess I have to take back what I said earlier - you're not hooked on surround. In that case you've got lots of options. Me, well, I'm still waiting/praying for surround to estabish itself as a commercially viable format. Unfortunately, I can't go back to stereo. It would be like going back to B&W movies or B&W TV. Surround is the greatest thing that ever happened to my ears. It simply amazes me. So, no, there is no way I won't buy into the the next surround format.
DaneelOlivaw
300 Club - QQ All-Star
Didn't mean to come off sounding so cranky but........darn it, MP3s, the Internet and iPods and their ilk IMO are the biggest reasons surround is limping along. Because many people that might have at least tried out 5.1 music now are "hooked" on plastic earbuds and cramming as many 120kbps lossy files into their player as possible (I'm still not sure why either). And actually just audio in general is doing badly for the same reason - go to any place that sells it and count how many people are looking at it. There's a very good chance you'll be the only one doing so.
Last night I was listening to Trespass by Genesis on CD rather loudly on the Pioneer speakers in my avatar, and thinking how can someone compare this experience to some lo-fi file from a little box while sitting in a cramped cubicle as they are scrambling to get their work done? I dont get it. I'm only 41 but jeez I am feeling like an old fuddy duddy!
rant over.
Last night I was listening to Trespass by Genesis on CD rather loudly
on the Pioneer speakers in my avatar, and thinking how can someone compare this experience to some lo-fi file from a little box while sitting in a cramped cubicle as they are scrambling to get their work done? I dont get it. I'm only 41 but jeez I am feeling like an old fuddy duddy!rant over.
I've only had a chance to watch a few tracks of the new NIN Blu-ray, but it looks and sounds incredible. I'm playing it through a PS3 through an Onkyo 674 onto a 60" SXRD. The Dolby TrueHD track consistently exceeds 5Mbps and blows away the DD5.1 track.
The only problem with uncompressed audio is that it makes it very difficult to go back to lossy standard surround formats. I used to like watching concerts on HDNet and MHD, but now they sound unsatisfying.
Now all we need is more content. The Legends of Jazz disk is great, but Destiny's Child and Incubus just aren't doing it for me.
Natiahs
The only problem with uncompressed audio is that it makes it very difficult to go back to lossy standard surround formats. I used to like watching concerts on HDNet and MHD, but now they sound unsatisfying.
Now all we need is more content. The Legends of Jazz disk is great, but Destiny's Child and Incubus just aren't doing it for me.
Natiahs
Chris Gerhard
2K Club - QQ Super Nova
I missed that this Blu-ray disc has Dolby TrueHD and thought only the HD DVD did. So far my HD DVD player is the only one that I can use to play Dolby TrueHD but I would rather get anything I acquire on Blu-ray if I can determine my Samsung Blu-ray player will be updated to decode Dolby TrueHD as my HD-A1 DVD player was.
Chris
The Blu-ray version does feature a Dolby TrueHD soundtrack. The only differences between the Blu-ray and HD-DVD versions are 1) the Blu-ray uses a slightly higher bitrate video stream, and 2) the Blu-ray features multiple camera angles on 3 tracks (the HD-DVD contains the footage, but the angles are not switchable on the fly).
N
N
Chris Gerhard
2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Is the PS3 the only Blu-ray player currently that can take advantage of the Dolby TrueHD? It appears my Samsung will never able to pass Dolby TrueHD or decode it.
Chris
