Why DV Didn't Select Blu-ray Audio

[DuncanS]

I believe (its what I was told) the biggest drawback with BD is the upfront royalty per disc that has to paid to Sony at the time of manufacture, so it could quite a while to recoup that outlay.

It would also be a disaster for a small label if they used Optimal who seem to have repeatedly taken a short cut to bypass quality

 

[4-earredwonder]

I believe (its what I was told) the biggest drawback with BD is the upfront royalty per disc that has to paid to Sony at the time of manufacture, so it could quite a while to recoup that outlay.

It would also be a disaster for a small label if they used Optimal who seem to have repeatedly taken a short cut to bypass quality

And whoever named that company OPTIMAL was subliminally deficient! BD~AWFUL!

 

[edisonbaggins]

2L includes SACD and BD in many packages and keeps the cost down.

 

[ubertrout]

2L includes SACD and BD in many packages and keeps the cost down.

But the MSRP of their releases is $30 or higher. And for all their releases the royalties are zero or fully controlled - they own the sound recording rights and the music is either public domain or by a contemporary composer they are actively working with. Very different from pop/rock reissues.

 

[Q-Eight]

However, the average consumer does not have SACD capabilities in their homes, whereas lots of folks have Blu-ray players.

I don't buy that for one minute. Best data I could find was from 2017, and it says that at that time, 90% of homes in the UK had a DVD player and 71% in the USA. Granted not ALL DVD players have SACD capability but a great number of them do. I would imagine a large number of those setups are in home theatre setups. So many people are posed for SACD Multichannel playback and probably don't even know it!

On the other side of the coin, in 2016, there was 34% of American households had a Blu Ray player and that number has supposedly dropped since then (according to some of the articles I read, but they show no data). Suffice to say that Samsung is among the first manufacturers to cease production of Blu-Ray players. It's not so much that people switched from DVD to Blu-Ray, but more like Blu-Ray got passed over for streaming services.

So, what D-V has chosen was a good idea, based even just on the numbers in the UK.

 

[par4ken]

While I still think that Blu-ray Audio is great, a super fantastic format in fact. A Blu-ray disc can hold so much and all in high - Rez! I'm still happy with DV's use of SACD, compatibility of hybrid SACD's with a regular CD player is important and cost is important as well. I would of thought that most people would have a Blu-ray player by now but what I'm reading here is that most don't. So that's another reason to go with SACD.

 

[Circular Vibes]

As long as a disc fits into my Oppo and plays, I will buy what I enjoy. I like HFPA/Pure Audio discs, but I like SACD and DVD-A as well. I won't claim to be able to hear the difference between those formats. I can however hear the difference between RBCD and higher resolution discs. I don't plan on buying a new digital disc player for a long time and streaming is not my bag. I am just glad DV sells us what we want musically in quad as they are capable, just as I was with Audio Fidelity and other reissue labels on Hi Res.

 

[proufo]

While I still think that Blu-ray Audio is great, a super fantastic format in fact. A Blu-ray disc can hold so much and all in high - Rez! I'm still happy with DV's use of SACD, comparability of hybrid SACD's with a regular CD player is important and cost is important as well. I would of thought that most people would have a Blu-ray player by now but what I'm reading here is that most don't. So that's another reason to go with SACD.

The question for DV is if most of their customer base has SACD players, not if uninitiated do. I'd guess the answer is yes.

 

[MrSmithers]

Personally I'd like to think it's down to getting the closest match to that 'analogue sound' from the tapes that the DSD format can provide? I have no idea how Michael Dutton goes through his mastering process but they really do sound excellent to me... It may just be a happy coincidence and it's to do with the reasons listed above...

Although I've not once listened to any of the RBCD layers from my DV collection! They could release a single layer, multichannel only SACD and I wouldn't even notice. Could even provide the way for extra releases (thinking of MFSB).

Glad they didn't choose Blu Ray as I'd probably still be ripping the last batch!

 

[Q-Eight]

Glad they didn't chose Blu Ray as I'd probably still be ripping the last batch!

I would consider a Blu-Ray player, if it was affordable (under $150), worked with my current setup (ie: had RCA audio outs instead of JUST HDMI) and was backward compatible with the formats I use (SACD, DVD-A, DVD-A/V, DTS and Dolby).

Not that I've actively gone out looking, but I've not heard of any machine that fits the bill. I'm quite happy with my Pioneer Elite that DOES match that criteria, sans the Blu-Ray functionality of course.

Even the thought of buying a Blu-Ray Audio disc, simply to rip it, have to chop and edit it and then shove it onto a lesser-quality format doesn't really gun my motor anymore, plus the obvious fact I don't have a Blu-Ray player for my PC.

Yes, I'm 39 years old and already a fucking Dinosaur.

 

[Scott65]

I don't mind what disc format they use - as long as the discs don't fail.

 

[stevedemena]

I believe (its what I was told) the biggest drawback with BD is the upfront royalty per disc that has to paid to Sony at the time of manufacture, so it could quite a while to recoup that outlay.

It would also be a disaster for a small label if they used Optimal who seem to have repeatedly taken a short cut to bypass quality

What is the royalty rate per disc? I rant it only 10-13 cents. I thought the royalties went to a consortium of about a dozen manufacturers, not to Sony.

 

[Owen Smith]

DVD-V full rate DTS has a lot going for it. While not lossless the sound quality is very good (I can't hear a difference compared to lossless of the same audio and I can with DD 5.1). And it is the widest supported multichannel format, more people have players that can play it than any other multi channel format.

Personally I'd prefer DVD-A/V with both DTS and MLP, I think that format has even more advantages. To me that's the ideal format for multi channel, I don't understand why it died.

Instant play is possible with DVD-A/V, it just depends how the disc is mastered. You don't have to put menus in, or you can make it instant play but with menus that appear on a button press.

 

[Owen Smith]

I don't buy that for one minute. Best data I could find was from 2017, and it says that at that time, 90% of homes in the UK had a DVD player and 71% in the USA. Granted not ALL DVD players have SACD capability but a great number of them do. I would imagine a large number of those setups are in home theatre setups. So many people are posed for SACD Multichannel playback and probably don't even know it.

Not true. Most DVD players cannot play SACD, they'll play the CD layer only. Only expensive models are SACD capable generally, and not even all of those. If you are convinced otherwise then post supporting data.

 

[4-earredwonder]

Not true. Most DVD players cannot play SACD, they'll play the CD layer only. Only expensive models are SACD capable generally, and not even all of those. If you are convinced otherwise then post supporting data.

You ARE correct. MOST DVD players, especially no brand names that flooded the Walmarts and Targets of the world were bare basic players .... capable, of playing RBCD but offering NO OTHER options like upsampling, etc. Some of them were blown out for as low as $59. What's even more surprising is the amount of DVDs still being produced in MASS quantities to this very day. If you check the UPCOMING or NEW RELEASE schedules on ImportCD, for instance, the new DVD releases out number the newer BD~V releases and UHD4K is but a 'ripple!'

OPPO, I believe, popularized the concept of the UNIVERSAL PLAYER, with other hardware manufacturers following suit and if you recall, SONY NEVER released a true Universal player until they FINALLY incorporated DVD~A playback into their X800 UHD4K player.

 

[ar surround]

You ARE correct. MOST DVD players, especially no brand names that flooded the Walmarts and Targets of the world were bare basic players .... capable, of playing RBCD but offering NO OTHER options like upsampling, etc. Some of them were blown out for as low as $59. What's even more surprising is the amount of DVDs still being produced in MASS quantities to this very day. If you check the UPCOMING or NEW RELEASE schedules on ImportCD, for instance, the new DVD releases out number the newer BD~V releases and UHD4K is but a 'ripple!'

OPPO, I believe, popularized the concept of the UNIVERSAL PLAYER, with other hardware manufacturers following suit and if you recall, SONY NEVER released a true Universal player until they FINALLY incorporated DVD~A playback into their X800 UHD4K player.

Interesting...given that I bought a Sony BDP S5100 new for $60. It plays multichannel SACD via HDMI. This machine was proof that SACD capability can be provided dirt cheap along with Blu-ray. Unfortunately, it won’t play DVD-A, so not a true pre-4K universal player.

 

[4-earredwonder]

Interesting...given that I bought a Sony BDP S5100 new for $60. It plays multichannel SACD via HDMI. This machine was proof that SACD capability can be provided dirt cheap along with Blu-ray. Unfortunately, it won’t play DVD-A, so not a true pre-4K universal player.

You can actually buy a BD player for dirt cheap today that will not only UPSAMPLE DVDs, play RBCDs and of course BD~Vs but doubtful it will play SACD and DVD~A. Of course it's NO OPPO but it can safely retire those old DVD players and ironically, sometimes BD~V discs are cheaper than DVDs. Go figure.

 

[bmoura]

What is the royalty rate per disc? I rant it only 10-13 cents. I thought the royalties went to a consortium of about a dozen manufacturers, not to Sony.

That is correct. BluRay royalties go to a consortium of companies that includes Sony, Philips and Panasonic.

A new license will be established by mid-2009 as a "one-stop shop" for device makers. The license will include all necessary Blu-ray, DVD, and CD patents for selling Blu-ray players. The licensing program will be handled by a new licensing company to be led by Gerald Rosenthal, former head of intellectual property at IBM. It will be based in the U.S., but will have local branches in Asia, Europe, and Latin America.

Instead of having to approach Blu-ray, DVD, and CD holders individually and paying them separate royalties, the single license should cut down the total cost of royalty payments by 40 percent, according to Sony.

The fees for the new licenses will be $9.50 for a Blu-ray player, and $14 for a Blu-ray recorder. Making Blu-ray Disc will cost 11 cents for read-only, 12 cents for recordable discs, and 15 cents for rewritable discs.

The idea for a one-stop shop for Blu-ray has been floating around since a 2007 meeting of the 18 companies that hold Blu-ray patents. Licensing fees can be extremely lucrative for disc format patent holders: several years ago license fees for making a DVD player cost between $15 and $20.

This one-stop shop will help avoid the headache DVD licenses created. To make a DVD player or disc, manufacturers have had to ink deals with three separate organizations that represented various patent holders. There is DVD 6c (Hitachi, Panasonic, JVC, and six others); DVD 3c (Philips, Sony, Pioneer); and MPEG LA (representing encoders and decoders).

https://www.cnet.com/news/sony-philips-panasonic-to-create-single-blu-ray-license/

 

[kfbkfb]

One advantage of a DV (type) company using Blu-ray (or DVD)
is the multiple (possibly Surround Sound) soundtrack option
on both formats.

For example, a DVD could contain the (1970s Quad) content as
4.0 Dolby Digital, 4.0 DTS and 2 channel (2.0 DD or 2.0 DTS or
2.0 PCM).

Blu-ray could also add 4.0 Dolby TrueHD and/or 4.0 DTS-MA.

An additional option would be to involve Involve Audio
(been waiting to type that) by providing a QS encoded
version of the (1970s Quad) content for the 2 channel
soundtrack.

This QS encoded content could be decoded using DynaQuad,
(original) Dolby Surround, no logic QS or full logic QS.


Kirk Bayne

 

[sjcorne]

An additional option would be to involve Involve Audio
(been waiting to type that) by providing a QS encoded
version of the (1970s Quad) content for the 2 channel
soundtrack.

The SACD format can already do this. In fact, D-V's recent SACD releases of Herbie Hancock's Sextant and Don Sebesky's Giant Box included a matrix-encoded quad audio option. You can even play it through a standard CD player + matrix decoder setup, which Blu-Ray does not support.

Here's the breakdown of the various audio options on both of those releases:
1. DSD Discrete 4.0
2. DSD SQ-Encoded 2.0
3. DSD 2.0
4. CD SQ-Encoded 2.0
5. CD 2.0