|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
68.15.199.114
In Reply to: Sony and DVD-Audio/DualDisc posted by Steven R. Rochlin on November 04, 2004 at 12:35:51:
I recall the beta test versions of the DualDisk were slightly thicker than the maximum allowed for in both the CD and DVD specifications. This of course because they are kluged together by taking a CD disk and a DVD-A disk and gluing them together. Being out of the specifications the engineers designed the disk drives for some did get stuck in drives during the DualDisk beta testing. I believe slot loading drives were most at risk. This being an especially cruel twist as slot loading drives are typically used in applications like notebook computers and car players where getting the drive out and opened up to get the disk out can be quite a bit more work than the five screws to get the lid off a home player.Educate me guys & gals. Between DualDisk’s beta test phase and production did the disk pressing plants perfect their processes to get the disk within specifications? Is it right at, over, just under, or comfortably under the maximum thickness specification? It is an inalterable fact of engineering that if your design tradeoffs include pushing your product to the maximum edge of the specifications it will result in a higher failure rate. Its hard physics meets the mathematical certainty of the statistical bell curve of a production batch’s tolerance variability. These realities exist outside the politics of formats, which are undeniably at play here.
The Sony/SACD bashers here, led by Steve R., want to tar Sony with a broad brush for not accepting a disk which meets its functional requirements by pushing the physical tolerances involved right up to (or beyond) the maximum allowed by internationally agreed upon specifications. Is there not an equal share of blame to be laid on the DVD camp for choosing this route of cobbling together yet another variation of the DVD and releasing it after testing showed a certain percentage of players will have problems when fed a DualDisk?
happy listening
Follow Ups:
It's a player (design) flaw if a just onder spec disc get stuck in a player that is 'on the limit' of the spec.This is especially the case if the player is a DVD player.
Another entirely different issue is 'layer thickness' (0.9mm for DD CD side) .
A deviation in that spec can throw off the focussing and tracking mechanism.
Normal CD players should be able to cope with dualdisc.CD players that happens to be sa-cd players as well can get into trouble.
If the player defaults to sa-cd readout it looks for layers at 1.2 and 0.6 mm and at the 0.9mm DualDisc CD layer is smack in the middle.
If the players firmware is programmed to conclude (wrongly) that in that particular case the disc is defective because it can't focus on the expected layer thickness (0.6 and 1.2) then it probably refuses to play at all.
(This could make the player incompatible with redbooks minimum spec)It's hard to blame the problem on DualDisc or the player without nowing exactly what is going on in the players internal logic.
Thanks Frank for correcting my spelling!On http://www.dvdforum.org searching for DualDisc we find one hit which includes the following:
--begin quote--
“DualDisc” is a trademark owned by RIAA.
*The DualDisc format has been developed by the record industry and is not a DVD Forum format, although it may include a DVD side. The DVD Forum makes no representation regarding the DualDisc, which is exclusively the responsibility of its developers and not the DVD Forum.---end quote---
What leaps out at me here is “developed by the record industry” and the trademark on the name owned by our old buddies the RIAA. So its that bastion of engineering excellence whose main agenda is an un-hackable copy protected CD. Oh good, now I feel all reassured.
So the picture that is emerging is that the DualDisk (opps I mean DualDisc) is NOT an officially recognized DVD standard disk rather one which exists outside the core specifications of DVD/DVD-A. I for one am pleased that content providers are exploring all avenues to deliver value added high resolution music. However the confusion is that because it looks like a DVD/CD we expect it to act like one. In fact it appears an informed consumer will be aware there may be some ‘issues’ in owning DualDiscs. Personally I will buy them if they have music I want. I find it an acceptable risk to use them in my Sony and Pioneer home players. I won’t be risking placing one in my Alpine slot loading car player. Which of course is one of the advantages of DualDisc and Hybrid-SACD disks that I can rip the CD layer, burn it on a CD-R and take that disk in harms way in the car while the expensive pressed disk stays safe at home.
How ironic the RIAA is involved in DualDisc! While their army of lawyer drones sue 1000s of music lovers for sharing ripping CDs they are involved in opening a easy path to rip content off DVD-A!!! I love it! :-)
happy listening
The statement on www.dvdforum.org saying DualDisc is not a DVD Forum approved format is dated Oct 2004. Have they approved it recently and the webmaster is slow to update? It is a minor detail as approved or not the DVD Forum appears resigned to allowing DualDisc as it is an agenda item at their conference while they footnote the press release “these ain’t official, and don’t come crying to us if they jam your drive”.
happy listening
Norman Tracy
"*The DualDisc format has been developed by the record industry and is not a DVD Forum format, although it may include a DVD side. The DVD Forum makes no representation regarding the DualDisc, which is exclusively the responsibility of its developers and not the DVD Forum."It doesn't say it isn't an approved format.
It only states that the DVD Forum doesn't make representations regarding DualDisc.As long as the DVD side is according to specs a DualDisc can carry the DVD logo.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: