Home DVD-Audiobahn

New DVD-Audio music releases and talk about the latest players.

[ Follow Ups ] Thread: [ Display  All  Email ] [ DVD-Audiobahn ]
[ Alert Moderator ]

OK...

So let's back a format with less fidelity, and then tell people it's BETTER, because "it's all you need."

That's basically what your argument is at this point. Initially you responded to me that DVD-A is good for amatuer recordists, and DSD/SACD is better for commercial industry. I countered with fact that DVD-A / 24/192 has *better* resolution at all frequencies. Your current argument is, because I'm an amatuer I should have more bits and bytes to play with, and commercial music houses shouldn't because of *storage issues*, and the fact they "there is no point in wasting bits at higher frequencies"? PLEASE... As audiophiles, aren't we searching for the BEST format available? Isn't that what we seek? ESPECIALLY in the recording chain, so 30 years down the road when the next higher-rez format is available, we have good recordings for our reissues to be made from? ;)

Storage is NOT a problem anymore with growing harddrives, archival backup systems, etc. Storage is cheap. Sony is pushing DSD as an "archival" and "recording" format. So why not record and archive in the higher resolution format (24/192 LPCM)? Why should music houses have to buy equipment with high licensing fees to record in a LOWER RESOLUTION FORMAT? To save space? Because it's good enough (i.e., you don't need those bits)?

Multichannel: If consumers want multichannel, give them multichannel, I agree. They are where the money is. And you're right on the money here, because showing off 5.1/6.1/7.1 rigs is a probably a priority for the average consumer. My feeling is, though, that the VAST majority (99.5%?) of 5.1 rigs cannot even reproduce the full fidelity available on a *CD* let alone a DVD, so maintaining 24/192 on all channels isn't a priority for me. I don't feel the main stereo track should be compromised with a lower fidelity archiving system (DSD) so consumers can have the same quality 5.1 on their home-theatre-in-a-box rigs.

This has turned into a DVD-A vs. SACD spitting match, when really it shouldn't be. I have MANY beefs with DVD-A, too, among them *watermarking*, no digital out spec, no hybrid discs! At this juncture, DVD-A is dying as a viable commercial format, the DVD-A camp had best get their heads out of their asses or it'll go the way of Sony beta..

What we're really arguing about is 24/192 LPCM vs. DSD. Don't delude yourself into thinking DSD is the better format, because it isn't. Remember, if we all played something that had "enough bits" according to the engineers, we would all think MP3 sounded pretty damn good.

And recall the early days of CD, and Sony's marketing giant that spread the now-fateful words (perfect sound forever). "You don't need any frequencies above 22.05khz" they told us. Hmmn, that turned out to be wrong. Now the Sony marketing giant spreads "DSD has all the bits you need" and (my favorite one I hear audiophiles spouting all the time) "DSD sounds more analog!"

If you ever get the chance to listen to untouched 24/96 or 24/192 material, Snaggs, you'll understand what I'm driving at. The marketing geniuses are ruling this format war, not the quality gurus.

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  Sonic Craft  

Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups
You can not post to an archived thread.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]