 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
195.92.168.177
In Reply to: Re: that has to do with limited disc space as both the DVD and CD layers are thinner so they can fit in regular CD playe posted by jimby on October 25, 2004 at 21:10:45:
>You have no idea what you are talking about. We put on whatever we can fit on a DVD5 for Dual Disc. If we could fit both surround and stereo 96/24 on a DVD5, we would put it on. On many titles that is not possible.<For a unidentified Universal rep you're very defensive. I have a fairly good idea what I'm talking about; I know the size of a DVD-5, have made countless DVD-Video titles so know all about overhead (which for extras such as bios, catalog info etc., is far less than you contend) and just like John can also do the math about how much audio can fit on a disc. You should know that the MLP calculator is really quite reliable and while compression varies, remarkably efficient.
It'll be very interesting to see just what Universal put on their DualDiscs and how much space is left on the DVD side, space that could've been used for higher resolution audio but is probably going to be wasted on pointless extras such as a DTS track.
Follow Ups:
NotMe:On the title information at UMGs website, no mention is made of DTS and they are usually spot on about the contents of their discs.
Let's be fair about our criticisms.
I do agree with you, that the MLP calculator is definitely a good estimate of required space when comparing the calc vs. delivered product I'm finding it to be within 5-6% for most titles.
Regards,
John Kotches
John, it's true that Universal haven't so far wasted space with DTS (regardless of the DTS vs. Dolby debate it offers nothing that MLP can't do, only better), sorry to imply otherwise, but Jimby wrote:"Dual Disc is marketed as having a lot of extra video content in addition to surround sound. Cutting videos is not an option, and the space that would be gained is usually not significant enough to make a huge difference."
That extra content, especially if it's video content, is sooner or later going to involve the likes of DTS. Incidentally, the idea that cutting videos doesn't save enough space to make a "huge difference" is nonsense, but that's not the issue here.
The concern is that DualDisc is going to be aimed at the masses, in which case everything but the kitchen sink is going to be on the DVD side and that means our precious high-resolution audio will suffer because nobody listens to DVD-Audio anyway, right?
With Universal being firmly behind SACD, it seems logical to assume they'll compromise their DualDisc releases and only present the "best" version of the audio on SACD.
> > With Universal being firmly behind SACD, it seems logical to assume they'll compromise their DualDisc releases and only present the "best" version of the audio on SACD. < <"Best version"?? Puleese! Gimme the 24bit PCM of the master (yes -- even if it's halved to 48kHz from 96kHz) any day, rather than some minced-up one-bit DSD facsimile. ;-)
"best" was in inverted commas for a reason! :-)
I can't remember a single Universal DVD-A with DTS.Setting aside arguments about whether DTS is truly better than DD (I'm ambivalent about this), I think there could have been an opportunity to release more titles with DTS 96/24 to tempt those with non DVD-A players but a fancy surround processor - in other words, the bulk of the HT market.
then again, on the one DTS 96/24 title I sampled, it didn't sound very good to me. Maybe there is something wrong with my DTS 96/24 decoding.
I suspect it's a moot point as the HT crowd would probably avoid buying DVD-As no matter how many DVD-Video features they have.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
