|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
Would anyone care to hold me back? I am not switching to SACD for any supposed improvement. My system is probably not at a level to discern the difference. What is drawing me is the music. I'm tired of going to Best Buy or Sam Goody and seeing the crap that is being turned out on DVD-A. I mean Insane Clown Posse...this band is a joke! Motorhead, Bob Marley Tribute Albums, etc. It seems like they are emptying the catalogs of the dreck and seeing if they can make a buck or two off it. Yes I have some good DVD-A's, Fleetwood Mac, ELP, Blue Man Group, Queen, etc., but SACD scored a big win with DSOTM, they've got the Stones, The Police, Peter Gabriel. I just can't take another DVD-A from some obscure and otherwise lackluster artist. This format will not suceeed without good music.
Sorry about the rant. I really don't want to see either format go belly up, but something has got to give.
Follow Ups:
My local record store mentioned that the whole process of ordering and organizing DVDAs has become just too complex so they're going strictly with SACD (they've now set up a separate section for them). I have both systems but it looks like I'll be placing the emphasis on SACDs from now on.
Listen to whatever you like! Who really gives a damn? I'll continue to enjoy SACD [i]and[/i] DVD-Audio.Were you trying to start something with this thread? Do you think we really care if you decide to draw up boundaries?
Don't get we wrong I love SACD, but LPs sound beautiful.
honestly, if i had a room, I don't mind having one around.
The bass dynamics found on vinyl is hard to come by in digital world.
but for classical they are simply too limited in storage capacity and dynamic range. Plus orchestral music is far more convincing in 5.1. Or at least it will be when the software is available.
Boy are you out of touch! Either one of my two turntables will blow my 9000ES in the weeds playing just about anything!The soundstage must be twice as deep and at least half again wider.And I might add that I really don't use a good phono preamp either.
If it wern't for movies that Sony would have been out the door along time ago. My Jolida plays redbooks better than the Sony as well as my Cal Delta. Over the last year or so I've almost bought a DVD-A player a couple times, and may yet do it (where I'll put it I haven't a clue). I like the sound in two channel, but can't see me going multi channel in the future. Still my first love will always be LP's.
gary
where LPs shine, they have that beautiful wooden tone you hear when you hear violins live in a concert hall with lots of woods and velvet seats. Vinyl is sweet and highly enjoyable, instead of selling my LPs 4 years ago I should have gotten a less tweeky turntable!
Don't you think your personal experience is basically subjective with your setup and ears?
I think my system would blow away any turntable, tube amp, what have you. How I can I make that claim? Well, quite easy. It's my system and my ears.
On the other note. I used to love my TR3 Triumph sports car. But I'm sure there are a lot better sports cars out there now.
And why listen to DVD Video in 6.1? The old mono tv sounded great.
Each to his own. Their equipment. Their ears.
PS just playin with your head.
I still heard surface noise; I thought a good TT would lose the surface noise, guess not... maybe a worn record (Duke Ellington's "Blues in Orbit") ...Otherwise, it sounded more relaxing ("better"?) and better soundstaging than it's SACD counterpart (which in turn sounds more relaxing than 24/96 PCM).
It's the TLC which mostly keeps me from getting serious about vinyl. Maybe listening to a decent analog rig with more (and mint condition?) LPs might get me interested.
Teresa will sell you her rig after she makes the umpteenth change to the "best format". Who knows what it will be. If we're really lucky the "best format" will be the sound of her head as it bangs against the padded room she is locked up in. :')
(nt)
Cheers,
Paul.
It will always be there, even on a $65,000 turntable. The better records are surprisingly quiet when new, but even some new records have noise. And then the bad part about LPs is that they degenerate slightly on every play- a record that has been played 50 times is not going to sound like a new record. Noise accumulates. I don't know why that doesn't really bother me. It is uncorrelated noise, so it is like having an air conditioner going in the background or traffic noise outside. It is, for me, easily ignorable. Nobody loves surface noise or the inherent fragility of analog. But, for what it can do, still beyond what I have heard any digital do, I put up with those things.
i also have an sacd player and a bunch of discs, in both formats. i have to agree that the titles available for dvd-a is pretty poor. not that sacd is overflowing w choices, but the selection is a bit better imho. dvd-a has got to start putting out some software that is in demand. i really love the format, really both formats. but dvd-a seems to be losing steam. its a shame, the format has alot to offer, but the record companies dont seem at all interested. since i have players for both, i will keep buying both. gimpboy is correct, some of the dvd-a titles are jokish.
I have a player for SACD. I don't have one for DVD-A. If enough titles come out with 192/24 stereo tracks, I'll get a player for DVD-A. It's not a religion. You can have both. The either/or mentality gets really old.
Though the threshold is getting incrementally smaller. It used to be a limitation to 2-channel 24/192 titles. Now I have the flexibility to go 24/96 MC but even so the available software is pretty lean.And it would appear to me the disparity in absolute numbers of DVD-A and SACD titles is increasing in SACDs favor. It will be interesting to see if those hybrid DVD-A/CD "flipper" discs actually become a reality at BBs... Otherwise, it appears to me DVD-A will be abandoned by the major labels.
HPs list of excellent MC recordings in SACD is very short. On the other hand, there are at least two dozen DVD-As from Tacet, AIX and Teldec which are truly excellent. I'm in no rush to go multichannel with SACD because of the lack of excellent MC software. But I'm certain it will come, especially if Telarc, Channel Classics and Hyperion continue on their current paths.
Your definition of "truly excellent" MC recordings may not match my own. And BTW, I still prefer 2-channel to MC for most recordings I have listened to (DSOTM being a notable exception); perhaps due to unidentical amp/speaker combinations for the center/rears - which issue I am still trying to find a solution for.I bought into SACD because the player appeared to be an excellent CD transport (as opposed to DVD-V player I had been using) in addition to experimenting with hi-rez (ironically, looking at Fleetwood Macs "Rumours" and the other DVD-As at BB got me started looking for better digital sources). Than listening to SACD resulted in an SACD buying spree for 2-channel music, resulting in a collection probably exceeding 100 multichannel(MC)-capable titles as a side "benefit".
A close-out sale on an alleged "statement" MC SACD player (Philips SACD1000) got me a relatively cheap hi-rez MC source.
I'll admit to getting a bit rash on a pure analog MC preamp. But there were few products out there to support 2x6 analog bypass preamp capability (to support HT, MC SACD, and possibly DVD-A). Fortunately, I bought into a relatively expensive solution (for my budget) which also resulted in a quantum leap in 2-channel preamp performance in my system.
I now need only a DVD-A capable source player to give me DVD-A playback capability. I'm loath to try this "half-baked" with a cheap DVD-A player and the expense for the "better" DVD-A players (e.g. Meridian) is not justified by the available software (YMMV). Maybe when I splurge on near-SOTA DVD-V playback....
The Hi-rez music DVD-As do include a 24/96 DVD-V layer so I may try more of these in the interim.
He is doing a series of articles on surround sound.
Ahh! The Absolute sound. Funny how many classical-genre records are on that list. Same goes for DVD-A. An alternate explanation to this apart from just being an old audiophile fart, is this keyboard right next to me: the Korg M1. Along with the Yamaha DX7 (*), one of the most popular keyboards in the 80’s, the Korg M1 is actually a PCM based keyboard. I can’t remember the resolution but I doubt it’s 24/96.
are all nearly all digital synthesizers.the sound generation algorithm is based on FM synthesis, but the end result is a PCM bitstream that is sent to D/A converter.
the early gen synths only had 12-14 bits D/A - current generation synths of course have 24 bit D/A.
but modern synths also used sound generation algorithms based on PCM sampling.
Wow, you just surpassed my knowledge of these synths. I owned the DX7 a long time ago but it was a real bitch to create new sounds. It’s much easier with the predefined PCM-samples on the Korg. Do you know the Korg M1 sample rate? I only remember that a friend of mine was impressed by the more than CD resolution.
if it's "better than CD" then probably 48/16a lot of the early wavetable synths were terrible - sampling rates of 32/12 were common - and that's before they compressed the wavetable to fit into limited ROM space
the beauty of FM synthesis was that you didn't have to allocate huge ROM space to store wavetables for your sounds and you can create quite complex sounds using 4 or 8 operators
the downside was it's pretty nonintuitive to create a sound (as you found out) and after a while you start recognising an "FM" sound because every band had a DX7 ... and they were all using factory presets :-)
Lars,
My point to Oscar is that if you critically examine what is available in MC in SACD the much-vaunted software advantage over DVD-A pretty much disappears.
I see The Stones, Pink Floyd and Dylan as reasons NOT to go to SACD and ICP as a reason NOT to go DVD-A. However, whichever format releases more titles from more wanted artists (from the masses' point of view) is going to survive. Or is that survive "longer"? You need to do what you think is right for your musical taste. If SACD has more music to your liking, go for it. If DVD-A has more music to your liking, go for it. Or, why not get a Universal player or 2 seperate players and enjoy what BOTH formats have to offer. Who says you HAVE to make a choice?
You are 100% correct. I've said it over and over that in order for a hi-rez format to succeed other than as a niche format it needs software from name artists on mainstream labels at about CD pricing. On the DVD-A side as far as pricing of such things, only Warner has committed to price them in the CD ballpark. The depressed music industry will not get less depressed with $25 list price DVD-As from EMI or BMG that will basically be sold to fanatics of the particular artist vs. the mass market. With DSOTM coming to DVD-A, if it will be $25 list from EMI, someone being partial to surround sound can enjoy the CD layer on the hybrid in DPLII or Neo6 or any of the modern surround modes built into modern processor for about $10 less per piece of software. The other part of the problem as pointed out by Warner in the recent stereophile article is minimal retailer support, and, little wonder without even a std. size case for all releases and retailers' primarily set up to stock CD or DVD-V sized software.
but repeated exposition to SACD will affect your social life and inhibit your sex drive in the long run.There is increasing evidence of this, but we cannot publish it here for obvious reasons.
Best
nt
Now, now, I may be a troll here, but I've been into DVD-A for a little over two years now and feel like I have given it an opportunity to prove itself. I also agree with everyone else that you can have both, I can't only because I have to sell the DVD-A in order to get the SACD player. Another issue that someone else brought up is the cost. How long are the DVD-A titles going to sit at Best Buy for 17.99-24.99? Yes I know the Warner stuff is at $14.99, but come on, I got DSOTM for $11.99 and the Police Greatest Hits for $13.99. Another nice thing about both of those is that I can play them in my car as well. I had read that DVD-A was working on something similar, and hope they succeed. Honestly, I'll probably still by DVD-A titles when they come out, especially if they are from artists I'm interested in. I'll just have to listen to them in Dolby Digital or DTS.
40% more software.
asdfffff
Hi,
I've got entry level players of both and i don't care who wins as long as they come out with decent titles.But not all at once. I can't afford it!!
Hey, Jimmy,You should be pleased that people still post here.
Don't go scaring off all the trolls or it's gonna be a lonely place.
nt
Actually, I was able to get a Pioneer 45a, rather than a single format SACD player. So now I can hang out here for a little while longer and irritate a few more of you with just how bad the selection of DVD-A titles is ;-) BTW, has anyone hear ever listened to the Bjork DVD-A? Any comments? I do hope more "electronic" type music manages to make its way out into either DVD-A or SACD multichannel. This kind of music would lend itself real well to a multichannel format.
"BTW, has anyone hear ever listened to the Bjork DVD-A? Any comments?"Yes, Vespertine is a really cool DVD-A. The best 24/48 recording yet IMO.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: