Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Will SACD die?
Will SACD die?
OK, 1st off i'm *not* trying to start a war! anyhow, i just got my 1st HD player (a 3rd gen Toshiba A35), and the HD sound isn't bad (based so far only the included 300 movie disk) given that there are probably already many more HD players out there than there are SACD players, will that cause hi-end audio multichannel sound to switch away from SACD? all ears. bill |
#2
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Will SACD die?
"willbill" wrote in message
Will SACD die? OK, 1st off i'm *not* trying to start a war! anyhow, i just got my 1st HD player (a 3rd gen Toshiba A35), and the HD sound isn't bad (based so far only the included 300 movie disk) given that there are probably already many more HD players out there than there are SACD players, will that cause hi-end audio multichannel sound to switch away from SACD? I think that DVD-A formats may turn up as compatibilty formats for HD and/or Blu Ray players. It would just be a matter of relatively simple decoding in signal processing units that are already pretty complicated. SACD could get pretty dead pretty fast because it requires special laser pickup assemblies because the initial content protection security is implemented there. |
#3
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Will SACD die?
Arny Krueger wrote:
"willbill" wrote in message Will SACD die? OK, 1st off i'm *not* trying to start a war! anyhow, i just got my 1st HD player (a 3rd gen Toshiba A35), and the HD sound isn't bad (based so far only the included 300 movie disk) given that there are probably already many more HD players out there than there are SACD players, will that cause hi-end audio multichannel sound to switch away from SACD? I think that DVD-A formats may turn up as compatibilty formats for HD and/or Blu Ray players. It would just be a matter of relatively simple decoding in signal processing units that are already pretty complicated. SACD could get pretty dead pretty fast because it requires special laser pickup assemblies because the initial content protection security is implemented there. assuming you already have either a Blu-ray player or a HD-DVD player, one other question: is the HD multichannel sound on those disks (either Dolby TrueHD, or DTS high def, or "lossless" 5.1 PCM) comparable to SACD? bill |
#4
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Will SACD die?
On Dec 11, 7:22 pm, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"willbill" wrote in message Will SACD die? OK, 1st off i'm *not* trying to start a war! anyhow, i just got my 1st HD player (a 3rd gen Toshiba A35), and the HD sound isn't bad (based so far only the included 300 movie disk) given that there are probably already many more HD players out there than there are SACD players, will that cause hi-end audio multichannel sound to switch away from SACD? I think that DVD-A formats may turn up as compatibilty formats for HD and/or Blu Ray players. It would just be a matter of relatively simple decoding in signal processing units that are already pretty complicated. SACD could get pretty dead pretty fast because it requires special laser pickup assemblies because the initial content protection security is implemented there. I think it's more likely in the short to medium term that audiophiles will buy an SACD player separate from their HD/BluRay video disk player, and continue to buy SACDs just as they do now. The question is, once the HD/BluRay war is settled, will the big boys try to relaunch a multichannel PCM audio-only format for the masses? And will it catch on? I have my doubts, given the SACD/DVD-A experience. If it did, however, that might reopen the question for the audiophile set. So, no, I think SACD is it, such as "it" is. bob |
#5
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Will SACD die?
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 15:51:28 -0800, willbill wrote
(in article ): Will SACD die? OK, 1st off i'm *not* trying to start a war! anyhow, i just got my 1st HD player (a 3rd gen Toshiba A35), and the HD sound isn't bad (based so far only the included 300 movie disk) given that there are probably already many more HD players out there than there are SACD players, will that cause hi-end audio multichannel sound to switch away from SACD? all ears. bill I don't think that SACD will die. There are lots of players and lots of titles out there. |
#6
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Will SACD die?
On 13 Dec 2007 00:32:19 GMT, willbill wrote:
assuming you already have either a Blu-ray player or a HD-DVD player, one other question: is the HD multichannel sound on those disks (either Dolby TrueHD, or DTS high def, or "lossless" 5.1 PCM) comparable to SACD? Yeah but what are the odds that there will be pure music audio discs of any consequence on those media? |
#7
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Will SACD die?
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 16:22:53 -0800, Arny Krueger wrote
(in article ): "willbill" wrote in message Will SACD die? OK, 1st off i'm *not* trying to start a war! anyhow, i just got my 1st HD player (a 3rd gen Toshiba A35), and the HD sound isn't bad (based so far only the included 300 movie disk) given that there are probably already many more HD players out there than there are SACD players, will that cause hi-end audio multichannel sound to switch away from SACD? I think that DVD-A formats may turn up as compatibilty formats for HD and/or Blu Ray players. It would just be a matter of relatively simple decoding in signal processing units that are already pretty complicated. SACD could get pretty dead pretty fast because it requires special laser pickup assemblies because the initial content protection security is implemented there. Not according to a friend of mine who is an engineer for Oppo. Their players are pretty cheap ($149 for the cheapest) and will support/play SACD, and in fact will play just about any 12 cm optical disc format. He says that the Oppo transport is a general purpose chinese OEM. |
#8
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Will SACD die?
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 16:32:19 -0800, willbill wrote
(in article ): Arny Krueger wrote: "willbill" wrote in message Will SACD die? OK, 1st off i'm *not* trying to start a war! anyhow, i just got my 1st HD player (a 3rd gen Toshiba A35), and the HD sound isn't bad (based so far only the included 300 movie disk) given that there are probably already many more HD players out there than there are SACD players, will that cause hi-end audio multichannel sound to switch away from SACD? I think that DVD-A formats may turn up as compatibilty formats for HD and/or Blu Ray players. It would just be a matter of relatively simple decoding in signal processing units that are already pretty complicated. SACD could get pretty dead pretty fast because it requires special laser pickup assemblies because the initial content protection security is implemented there. assuming you already have either a Blu-ray player or a HD-DVD player, one other question: is the HD multichannel sound on those disks (either Dolby TrueHD, or DTS high def, or "lossless" 5.1 PCM) comparable to SACD? bill I think I read somewhere that its comparable to 5.1 channels of Redbook PCM. |
#9
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Will SACD die?
"willbill" wrote in message
Arny Krueger wrote: "willbill" wrote in message Will SACD die? OK, 1st off i'm *not* trying to start a war! anyhow, i just got my 1st HD player (a 3rd gen Toshiba A35), and the HD sound isn't bad (based so far only the included 300 movie disk) given that there are probably already many more HD players out there than there are SACD players, will that cause hi-end audio multichannel sound to switch away from SACD? I think that DVD-A formats may turn up as compatibilty formats for HD and/or Blu Ray players. It would just be a matter of relatively simple decoding in signal processing units that are already pretty complicated. SACD could get pretty dead pretty fast because it requires special laser pickup assemblies because the initial content protection security is implemented there. assuming you already have either a Blu-ray player or a HD-DVD player, one other question: is the HD multichannel sound on those disks (either Dolby TrueHD, or DTS high def, or "lossless" 5.1 PCM) comparable to SACD? I don't have either a Blu Ray or DVD HD player. |
#10
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Will SACD die?
"bob" wrote in message
The question is, once the HD/BluRay war is settled, will the big boys try to relaunch a multichannel PCM audio-only format for the masses? Dolby TrueHD wants to be that format. And will it catch on? Time will tell. I have my doubts, given the SACD/DVD-A experience. If it did, however, that might reopen the question for the audiophile set. AFAIK, the market penetration of SACD and DVD-A were not all that great, even among audiophiles. |
#11
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Will SACD die?
Kalman Rubinson wrote:
On 13 Dec 2007 00:32:19 GMT, willbill wrote: assuming you already have either a Blu-ray player or a HD-DVD player, one other question: is the HD multichannel sound on those disks (either Dolby TrueHD, or DTS high def, or "lossless" 5.1 PCM) comparable to SACD? Yeah but what are the odds that there will be pure music audio discs of any consequence on those media? *IF* the music industry is at all interested in selling multichannel music, it would be insane of them NOT to move to these formats, since in a relatively few years, everyone will have DVD players that can play them (unlike SACD and DVD-A). ___ -S "As human beings, we understand the world through simile, analogy, metaphor, narrative and, sometimes, claymation." - B. Mason |
#12
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Will SACD die?
Sonnova wrote:
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 16:32:19 -0800, willbill wrote (in article ): Arny Krueger wrote: "willbill" wrote in message Will SACD die? OK, 1st off i'm *not* trying to start a war! anyhow, i just got my 1st HD player (a 3rd gen Toshiba A35), and the HD sound isn't bad (based so far only the included 300 movie disk) given that there are probably already many more HD players out there than there are SACD players, will that cause hi-end audio multichannel sound to switch away from SACD? I think that DVD-A formats may turn up as compatibilty formats for HD and/or Blu Ray players. It would just be a matter of relatively simple decoding in signal processing units that are already pretty complicated. SACD could get pretty dead pretty fast because it requires special laser pickup assemblies because the initial content protection security is implemented there. assuming you already have either a Blu-ray player or a HD-DVD player, one other question: is the HD multichannel sound on those disks (either Dolby TrueHD, or DTS high def, or "lossless" 5.1 PCM) comparable to SACD? bill I think I read somewhere that its comparable to 5.1 channels of Redbook PCM. Dolby TrueHD supports up to 14 channels of 24-bit 192kHz SR audio. DTS-HD Master Audio supports up to 8 channels of 24/96 audio ___ -S "As human beings, we understand the world through simile, analogy, metaphor, narrative and, sometimes, claymation." - B. Mason |
#13
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Will SACD die?
On 13 Dec 2007 23:49:26 GMT, Sonnova
wrote: On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 16:22:53 -0800, Arny Krueger wrote (in article ): "willbill" wrote in message Will SACD die? OK, 1st off i'm *not* trying to start a war! anyhow, i just got my 1st HD player (a 3rd gen Toshiba A35), and the HD sound isn't bad (based so far only the included 300 movie disk) given that there are probably already many more HD players out there than there are SACD players, will that cause hi-end audio multichannel sound to switch away from SACD? I think that DVD-A formats may turn up as compatibilty formats for HD and/or Blu Ray players. It would just be a matter of relatively simple decoding in signal processing units that are already pretty complicated. SACD could get pretty dead pretty fast because it requires special laser pickup assemblies because the initial content protection security is implemented there. Not according to a friend of mine who is an engineer for Oppo. Their players are pretty cheap ($149 for the cheapest) and will support/play SACD, and in fact will play just about any 12 cm optical disc format. He says that the Oppo transport is a general purpose chinese OEM. Yup, The DV-980H will play CD, DVD, DVD-A and SACD. It will upconvert video up to 1080p. It will output full-bandwidth DVD-A, DSD and, optionally, DSD-converted-to-PCM via HDMI. It has multichannel analog outputs as well as coax and TOSlink digital outputs. It sells for $170. And it works. Kal |
#14
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Will SACD die?
On 13 Dec 2007 23:49:54 GMT, Sonnova
wrote: On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 16:32:19 -0800, willbill wrote (in article ): assuming you already have either a Blu-ray player or a HD-DVD player, one other question: is the HD multichannel sound on those disks (either Dolby TrueHD, or DTS high def, or "lossless" 5.1 PCM) comparable to SACD? bill I think I read somewhere that its comparable to 5.1 channels of Redbook PCM. More. It is capable of up to 24/96 multichannel although what you get varies from disc to disc. Kal |
#15
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Will SACD die?
On 14 Dec 2007 03:11:12 GMT, Steven Sullivan wrote:
*IF* the music industry is at all interested in selling multichannel music, it would be insane of them NOT to move to these formats, since in a relatively few years, everyone will have DVD players that can play them (unlike SACD and DVD-A). Mebbe. That's a big IF. I hope we will see some action soon but, more likely, there will be nothing until/unless the HD players become common. By then, audio in a physical medium will probably be gone. Kal |
#16
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Will SACD die?
Kalman Rubinson writes:
Yup, The DV-980H will play CD, DVD, DVD-A and SACD. It will upconvert video up to 1080p. It will output full-bandwidth DVD-A, DSD and, optionally, DSD-converted-to-PCM via HDMI. It has multichannel analog outputs as well as coax and TOSlink digital outputs. It sells for $170. And it works. If only it offered HD as well... -- % Randy Yates % "She tells me that she likes me very much, %% Fuquay-Varina, NC % but when I try to touch, she makes it %%% 919-577-9882 % all too clear." %%%% % 'Yours Truly, 2095', *Time*, ELO http://www.digitalsignallabs.com |
#17
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Will SACD die?
Steven Sullivan wrote:
Kalman Rubinson wrote: Yeah but what are the odds that there will be pure music audio discs of any consequence on those media? *IF* the music industry is at all interested in selling multichannel music, it would be insane of them NOT to move to these formats, since in a relatively few years, ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ afaik, it's already true *now* i don't know the current numbers, but my hunch is that BD and HD-DVD players already outnumber by at least a 2-to-1 factor (maybe even more than that) everyone will have DVD players that can play them (unlike SACD and DVD-A). ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ agreed most people don't know that SACD exists, and of course even if you tell them about it, they're not about to spend the typical extra 100+ dollars to get a player that can handle something called SACD and DVD-A and when you ask a store sales person if they have any SACD disks, what you get is a blank stare bill |
#18
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Will SACD die?
willbill wrote:
Steven Sullivan wrote: Kalman Rubinson wrote: Yeah but what are the odds that there will be pure music audio discs of any consequence on those media? *IF* the music industry is at all interested in selling multichannel music, it would be insane of them NOT to move to these formats, since in a relatively few years, ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ afaik, it's already true *now* Not in my experience. None of my acquaintances has an HD or Blu-ray DVD player...yet. i don't know the current numbers, but my hunch is that BD and HD-DVD players already outnumber by at least a 2-to-1 factor (maybe even more than that) Maybe in terms of *new* sales, but currently I'm very sure that many, many more people currently use 'SD' players than high-def players. ___ -S "As human beings, we understand the world through simile, analogy, metaphor, narrative and, sometimes, claymation." - B. Mason |
#19
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Will SACD die?
"Kalman Rubinson" wrote in message
On 14 Dec 2007 03:11:12 GMT, Steven Sullivan wrote: *IF* the music industry is at all interested in selling multichannel music, it would be insane of them NOT to move to these formats, since in a relatively few years, everyone will have DVD players that can play them (unlike SACD and DVD-A). Mebbe. That's a big IF. I hope we will see some action soon but, more likely, there will be nothing until/unless the HD players become common. By then, audio in a physical medium will probably be gone. I think you mean to say that it is audio all by itself in a physical media that will be disappearing. Audio with video still requires too much data to entirely practical as downloaded-only. The sticking point of course being the video. OTOH, I've had a fair amount of fun at times watching downloaded TV shows from the CBS and NBC web sites. The video quality on some shows is probably better than NTSC. |
#20
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Will SACD die?
On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 09:56:01 -0800, Randy Yates wrote
(in article ): Kalman Rubinson writes: Yup, The DV-980H will play CD, DVD, DVD-A and SACD. It will upconvert video up to 1080p. It will output full-bandwidth DVD-A, DSD and, optionally, DSD-converted-to-PCM via HDMI. It has multichannel analog outputs as well as coax and TOSlink digital outputs. It sells for $170. And it works. If only it offered HD as well... The the question becomes which one? Blu-Ray or HD-DVD? As long as Blu-Ray players remain at the $500 price-point and the combo players are $1000, I suspect that HD-DVD will remain the leader in sales. |
#21
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Will SACD die?
|
#22
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Will SACD die?
"willbill" wrote in message
Steven Sullivan wrote: Kalman Rubinson wrote: Yeah but what are the odds that there will be pure music audio discs of any consequence on those media? *IF* the music industry is at all interested in selling multichannel music, it would be insane of them NOT to move to these formats, since in a relatively few years, ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ afaik, it's already true *now* i don't know the current numbers, but my hunch is that BD and HD-DVD players already outnumber by at least a 2-to-1 factor (maybe even more than that) Absolutely not true. In terms of current sales, or in terms of units in service, there is simply no comparison between the number of traditional DVD players, and the numbers of Blu Ray and HD-CD players. I know of only one Blu Ray player that any of my friends have. No HD-CD players at all. everyone will have DVD players that can play them (unlike SACD and DVD-A). ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ agreed Eventually. most people don't know that SACD exists, and of course even if you tell them about it, they're not about to spend the typical extra 100+ dollars to get a player that can handle something called SACD and DVD-A Didn't happen. and when you ask a store sales person if they have any SACD disks, what you get is a blank stare Pretty much. Or you will be directed to a single disc disply of many dozens in the store, and that single display will be thinly stocked. |
#23
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Will SACD die?
"Sonnova" wrote in message
On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 09:56:01 -0800, Randy Yates wrote (in article ): Kalman Rubinson writes: Yup, The DV-980H will play CD, DVD, DVD-A and SACD. It will upconvert video up to 1080p. It will output full-bandwidth DVD-A, DSD and, optionally, DSD-converted-to-PCM via HDMI. It has multichannel analog outputs as well as coax and TOSlink digital outputs. It sells for $170. And it works. If only it offered HD as well... The the question becomes which one? Blu-Ray or HD-DVD? As long as Blu-Ray players remain at the $500 price-point and the combo players are $1000, I suspect that HD-DVD will remain the leader in sales. There are about 5 million Blu Ray players already sold, in the form of PS-3 game units. |
#24
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Will SACD die?
"Sonnova" schreef in bericht
... On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 15:51:28 -0800, willbill wrote (in article ): Will SACD die? OK, 1st off i'm *not* trying to start a war! anyhow, i just got my 1st HD player (a 3rd gen Toshiba A35), and the HD sound isn't bad (based so far only the included 300 movie disk) given that there are probably already many more HD players out there than there are SACD players, will that cause hi-end audio multichannel sound to switch away from SACD? all ears. bill I don't think that SACD will die. There are lots of players and lots of titles out there. When I look at the commercials of classical music labels, almost a quarter of their new releases are SACD. So, SACD is very clearly not dead. Regards, Gijs |
#25
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Will SACD die?
On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 08:21:17 -0800, Arny Krueger wrote
(in article ): "willbill" wrote in message Steven Sullivan wrote: Kalman Rubinson wrote: Yeah but what are the odds that there will be pure music audio discs of any consequence on those media? *IF* the music industry is at all interested in selling multichannel music, it would be insane of them NOT to move to these formats, since in a relatively few years, ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ afaik, it's already true *now* i don't know the current numbers, but my hunch is that BD and HD-DVD players already outnumber by at least a 2-to-1 factor (maybe even more than that) Absolutely not true. In terms of current sales, or in terms of units in service, there is simply no comparison between the number of traditional DVD players, and the numbers of Blu Ray and HD-CD players. I know of only one Blu Ray player that any of my friends have. No HD-CD players at all. According to industry sources, HD-DVD players outsold Blu-Ray players in 2007 by a more than 1/3. As far as titles are concerned, they are about neck and neck at about 400 titles each. However, There is four times the replication capacity online for HD-DVD as there is for Blu-Ray and Sony has only one replication facility that can make the 50-gig discs. Blu-Ray authoring is more difficult, more expensive and more error prone than is HD-DVD as well. Both Dream Works and Paramount have dropped their support for both formats and have announced that forthwith, all of their HD releases will be HD-DVD only. Allan Bell, Paramount's chief technical officer also said that while Blu-Ray's higher capacity is better suited for raw data, movies need "minutes" and due to the fact that Blu-Ray uses less efficient Codecs such as MPEG2 video and PCM audio, the potential for greater capacity is lost. According to Bell, using VC-1 or AVC a 30-gig HD-DVD can provide up to four hours of HD playing time. If one needs more, one simply adds another disc to the package, and it will still be cheaper and easier than trying to get a 50-gig Blu-Ray disc out of Sony. Add to this the price disparity between Blu-Ray players and HD-DVD players ($499 for Blu-Ray vs $199 for HD-DVD) and the writing is clearly on the wall for the eventual emergence of HD-DVD as the HD format of choice. |
#26
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Will SACD die?
On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 08:24:28 -0800, Arny Krueger wrote
(in article ): "Sonnova" wrote in message On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 09:56:01 -0800, Randy Yates wrote (in article ): Kalman Rubinson writes: Yup, The DV-980H will play CD, DVD, DVD-A and SACD. It will upconvert video up to 1080p. It will output full-bandwidth DVD-A, DSD and, optionally, DSD-converted-to-PCM via HDMI. It has multichannel analog outputs as well as coax and TOSlink digital outputs. It sells for $170. And it works. If only it offered HD as well... The the question becomes which one? Blu-Ray or HD-DVD? As long as Blu-Ray players remain at the $500 price-point and the combo players are $1000, I suspect that HD-DVD will remain the leader in sales. There are about 5 million Blu Ray players already sold, in the form of PS-3 game units. Yet, HD-DVD players outsold Blu-Ray in 2007 by more than 1/3. There are fewer replication plants for Blu-Ray discs by about 4 to 1 and Sony has only one facility that can make the 50-gig discs and that plant is experiencing poor yields. Blu-ray is more error prone, and more difficult (read that expensive) to master. Add to that the fact that the cheapest HD-DVD player is only $199 while the cheapest Blu-Ray is $499, and I think the outcome is clear. |
#27
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Will SACD die?
"Sonnova" wrote in message
... On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 08:21:17 -0800, Arny Krueger wrote (in article ): "willbill" wrote in message Steven Sullivan wrote: Kalman Rubinson wrote: Yeah but what are the odds that there will be pure music audio discs of any consequence on those media? *IF* the music industry is at all interested in selling multichannel music, it would be insane of them NOT to move to these formats, since in a relatively few years, ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ afaik, it's already true *now* i don't know the current numbers, but my hunch is that BD and HD-DVD players already outnumber by at least a 2-to-1 factor (maybe even more than that) Absolutely not true. In terms of current sales, or in terms of units in service, there is simply no comparison between the number of traditional DVD players, and the numbers of Blu Ray and HD-CD players. I know of only one Blu Ray player that any of my friends have. No HD-CD players at all. According to industry sources, HD-DVD players outsold Blu-Ray players in 2007 by a more than 1/3. As far as titles are concerned, they are about neck and neck at about 400 titles each. However, There is four times the replication capacity online for HD-DVD as there is for Blu-Ray and Sony has only one replication facility that can make the 50-gig discs. Blu-Ray authoring is more difficult, more expensive and more error prone than is HD-DVD as well. Both Dream Works and Paramount have dropped their support for both formats and have announced that forthwith, all of their HD releases will be HD-DVD only. Allan Bell, Paramount's chief technical officer also said that while Blu-Ray's higher capacity is better suited for raw data, movies need "minutes" and due to the fact that Blu-Ray uses less efficient Codecs such as MPEG2 video and PCM audio, the potential for greater capacity is lost. According to Bell, using VC-1 or AVC a 30-gig HD-DVD can provide up to four hours of HD playing time. If one needs more, one simply adds another disc to the package, and it will still be cheaper and easier than trying to get a 50-gig Blu-Ray disc out of Sony. Add to this the price disparity between Blu-Ray players and HD-DVD players ($499 for Blu-Ray vs $199 for HD-DVD) and the writing is clearly on the wall for the eventual emergence of HD-DVD as the HD format of choice. Logical as that is, it is an engineering argument, not a marketing argument. And so far Sony seems to be further ahead in the marketing arena (must have added some replacment staff since their SACD debacle.) |
#28
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Will SACD die?
"Sonnova" wrote in message
According to industry sources, HD-DVD players outsold Blu-Ray players in 2007 by a more than 1/3. .... not including the fraction of 5 million Blu Ray players in PS3s that were sold in 2007. As far as titles are concerned, they are about neck and neck at about 400 titles each. However, There is four times the replication capacity online for HD-DVD as there is for Blu-Ray and Sony has only one replication facility that can make the 50-gig discs. http://www.electronista.com/articles...eating.hd.dvd/ "Sales of Blu-Ray movies in 2007 have nearly crushed those of HD DVD so far, Reuters reports. According to data from Home Media Research, 2.6 million Blu-Ray titles were sold between January 1st and September 30th, while only 1.4 million HD DVD titles were bought in the same timeframe." Blu-Ray authoring is more difficult, more expensive and more error prone than is HD-DVD as well. That is hard to believe, because digital authoring is largely medium independent. Both Dream Works and Paramount have dropped their support for both formats and have announced that forthwith, all of their HD releases will be HD-DVD only. Politics. Allan Bell, Paramount's chief technical officer also said that while Blu-Ray's higher capacity is better suited for raw data, movies need "minutes" and due to the fact that Blu-Ray uses less efficient Codecs such as MPEG2 video and PCM audio, the potential for greater capacity is lost. Wrong. Blu Ray is not limited to MPEG2 video and PCM audio: http://www.blu-ray.com/faq/#bluray_video_codecs What video codecs will Blu-ray support? MPEG-2 - enhanced for HD, also used for playback of DVDs and HDTV recordings. MPEG-4 AVC - part of the MPEG-4 standard also known as H.264 (High Profile and Main Profile). SMPTE VC-1 - standard based on Microsoft's Windows Media Video (WMV) technology. What audio codecs will Blu-ray support? Linear PCM (LPCM) - up to 8 channels of uncompressed audio. (mandatory) Dolby Digital (DD) - format used for DVDs, 5.1-channel surround sound. (mandatory) Dolby Digital Plus (DD+) - extension of Dolby Digital, 7.1-channel surround sound. (optional) Dolby TrueHD - lossless encoding of up to 8 channels of audio. (optional) DTS Digital Surround - format used for DVDs, 5.1-channel surround sound. (mandatory) DTS-HD High Resolution Audio - extension of DTS, 7.1-channel surround sound. (optional) DTS-HD Master Audio - lossless encoding of up to 8 channels of audio. (optional) Confirmed by: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray_Disc#Codecs http://www.videohelp.com/hd etc. According to Bell, using VC-1 or AVC a 30-gig HD-DVD can provide up to four hours of HD playing time. Blu Ray supports both codecs - see above. If one needs more, one simply adds another disc to the package, and it will still be cheaper and easier than trying to get a 50-gig Blu-Ray disc out of Sony. Wrong. Add to this the price disparity between Blu-Ray players and HD-DVD players ($499 for Blu-Ray vs $199 for HD-DVD) This weekend's newspaper flyers show Blu Ray players being sold this weekend by several retailers at a regular price of $299. Same lowest price as they are selling HD DVD players. and the writing is clearly on the wall for the eventual emergence of HD-DVD as the HD format of choice. |
#29
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Will SACD die?
"Sonnova" wrote in message
On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 08:24:28 -0800, Arny Krueger wrote (in article ): "Sonnova" wrote in message On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 09:56:01 -0800, Randy Yates wrote (in article ): Kalman Rubinson writes: Yup, The DV-980H will play CD, DVD, DVD-A and SACD. It will upconvert video up to 1080p. It will output full-bandwidth DVD-A, DSD and, optionally, DSD-converted-to-PCM via HDMI. It has multichannel analog outputs as well as coax and TOSlink digital outputs. It sells for $170. And it works. If only it offered HD as well... The the question becomes which one? Blu-Ray or HD-DVD? As long as Blu-Ray players remain at the $500 price-point and the combo players are $1000, I suspect that HD-DVD will remain the leader in sales. There are about 5 million Blu Ray players already sold, in the form of PS-3 game units. Yet, HD-DVD players outsold Blu-Ray in 2007 by more than 1/3. Nope, not including the 5+ million PS/3s. The biggest number I've seen to date for HD DVD players is 750,000 including the add-on HD DVD for the XBOX 360. |
#30
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Will SACD die?
On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 16:33:23 -0800, Harry Lavo wrote
(in article ): "Sonnova" wrote in message ... On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 08:21:17 -0800, Arny Krueger wrote (in article ): "willbill" wrote in message Steven Sullivan wrote: Kalman Rubinson wrote: Yeah but what are the odds that there will be pure music audio discs of any consequence on those media? *IF* the music industry is at all interested in selling multichannel music, it would be insane of them NOT to move to these formats, since in a relatively few years, ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ afaik, it's already true *now* i don't know the current numbers, but my hunch is that BD and HD-DVD players already outnumber by at least a 2-to-1 factor (maybe even more than that) Absolutely not true. In terms of current sales, or in terms of units in service, there is simply no comparison between the number of traditional DVD players, and the numbers of Blu Ray and HD-CD players. I know of only one Blu Ray player that any of my friends have. No HD-CD players at all. According to industry sources, HD-DVD players outsold Blu-Ray players in 2007 by a more than 1/3. As far as titles are concerned, they are about neck and neck at about 400 titles each. However, There is four times the replication capacity online for HD-DVD as there is for Blu-Ray and Sony has only one replication facility that can make the 50-gig discs. Blu-Ray authoring is more difficult, more expensive and more error prone than is HD-DVD as well. Both Dream Works and Paramount have dropped their support for both formats and have announced that forthwith, all of their HD releases will be HD-DVD only. Allan Bell, Paramount's chief technical officer also said that while Blu-Ray's higher capacity is better suited for raw data, movies need "minutes" and due to the fact that Blu-Ray uses less efficient Codecs such as MPEG2 video and PCM audio, the potential for greater capacity is lost. According to Bell, using VC-1 or AVC a 30-gig HD-DVD can provide up to four hours of HD playing time. If one needs more, one simply adds another disc to the package, and it will still be cheaper and easier than trying to get a 50-gig Blu-Ray disc out of Sony. Add to this the price disparity between Blu-Ray players and HD-DVD players ($499 for Blu-Ray vs $199 for HD-DVD) and the writing is clearly on the wall for the eventual emergence of HD-DVD as the HD format of choice. Logical as that is, it is an engineering argument, not a marketing argument. And so far Sony seems to be further ahead in the marketing arena (must have added some replacment staff since their SACD debacle.) I've read your comment over several times and I still can't make much sense from it. If mine is an engineering argument, then how come the sales figures and prices? People always go for the cheaper machines and HD-DVD has more production capacity, and more big movie studios behind it than does Blu-Ray. But yes, on the engineering side and the marketing side, HD-DVD is ahead. I have no real preference as I own both a Blu-Ray and an HD-DVD player (two are still much cheaper than any of the combo units) so whichever wins is a matter of complete indifference to me. |
#31
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Will SACD die?
Arny Krueger wrote:
Wrong. Blu Ray is not limited to MPEG2 video and PCM audio: http://www.blu-ray.com/faq/#bluray_video_codecs What video codecs will Blu-ray support? MPEG-2 - enhanced for HD, also used for playback of DVDs and HDTV recordings. MPEG-4 AVC - part of the MPEG-4 standard also known as H.264 (High Profile and Main Profile). SMPTE VC-1 - standard based on Microsoft's Windows Media Video (WMV) technology. What audio codecs will Blu-ray support? Linear PCM (LPCM) - up to 8 channels of uncompressed audio. (mandatory) Dolby Digital (DD) - format used for DVDs, 5.1-channel surround sound. (mandatory) Dolby Digital Plus (DD+) - extension of Dolby Digital, 7.1-channel surround sound. (optional) Dolby TrueHD - lossless encoding of up to 8 channels of audio. (optional) DTS Digital Surround - format used for DVDs, 5.1-channel surround sound. (mandatory) DTS-HD High Resolution Audio - extension of DTS, 7.1-channel surround sound. (optional) DTS-HD Master Audio - lossless encoding of up to 8 channels of audio. (optional) Confirmed by: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray_Disc#Codecs http://www.videohelp.com/hd above is misleading see comment: "Mandatory codecs must be supported by the player. Each disc must use one or more of the mandatory codecs." at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compari...l_disc_formats bill |
#32
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Will SACD die?
On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 07:59:13 -0800, Arny Krueger wrote
(in article ): "Sonnova" wrote in message According to industry sources, HD-DVD players outsold Blu-Ray players in 2007 by a more than 1/3. ... not including the fraction of 5 million Blu Ray players in PS3s that were sold in 2007. As far as titles are concerned, they are about neck and neck at about 400 titles each. However, There is four times the replication capacity online for HD-DVD as there is for Blu-Ray and Sony has only one replication facility that can make the 50-gig discs. http://www.electronista.com/articles...eating.hd.dvd/ "Sales of Blu-Ray movies in 2007 have nearly crushed those of HD DVD so far, Reuters reports. According to data from Home Media Research, 2.6 million Blu-Ray titles were sold between January 1st and September 30th, while only 1.4 million HD DVD titles were bought in the same timeframe." I've read that things have changed since then, But I cannot find a recent citation. Everything I can find on the web is at least 3-4 months old. Blu-Ray authoring is more difficult, more expensive and more error prone than is HD-DVD as well. That is hard to believe, because digital authoring is largely medium independent. The tracks for Blu-Ray are smaller and closer together than HD-DVD. This makes them harder to master. It also makes both mastering and playback more error-prone. While both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray use the same wavelength laser, Sony uses a proprietary lens system to focus the beanm even sharper and thus makes a smaller track. One of the results of this is that for over a year the Blue-Ray camp was releasing nothing but MPEG-2 encoded discs at a lower bit-rate mastered as single layer. Both Dream Works and Paramount have dropped their support for both formats and have announced that forthwith, all of their HD releases will be HD-DVD only. Politics. Production bottlenecks. Allan Bell, Paramount's chief technical officer also said that while Blu-Ray's higher capacity is better suited for raw data, movies need "minutes" and due to the fact that Blu-Ray uses less efficient Codecs such as MPEG2 video and PCM audio, the potential for greater capacity is lost. Wrong. Blu Ray is not limited to MPEG2 video and PCM audio: Who said that Blu-Ray was LIMITED to MPEG2 video? They can both use the same codecs, but for manufacturing yield issues most Blu-Ray discs sold in 2006/2007 were MPEG2 and single layer. http://www.blu-ray.com/faq/#bluray_video_codecs What video codecs will Blu-ray support? MPEG-2 - enhanced for HD, also used for playback of DVDs and HDTV recordings. MPEG-4 AVC - part of the MPEG-4 standard also known as H.264 (High Profile and Main Profile). SMPTE VC-1 - standard based on Microsoft's Windows Media Video (WMV) technology. What audio codecs will Blu-ray support? Linear PCM (LPCM) - up to 8 channels of uncompressed audio. (mandatory) Dolby Digital (DD) - format used for DVDs, 5.1-channel surround sound. (mandatory) Dolby Digital Plus (DD+) - extension of Dolby Digital, 7.1-channel surround sound. (optional) Dolby TrueHD - lossless encoding of up to 8 channels of audio. (optional) DTS Digital Surround - format used for DVDs, 5.1-channel surround sound. (mandatory) DTS-HD High Resolution Audio - extension of DTS, 7.1-channel surround sound. (optional) DTS-HD Master Audio - lossless encoding of up to 8 channels of audio. (optional) Confirmed by: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray_Disc#Codecs http://www.videohelp.com/hd etc. Nobody has said that Blu-Ray doesn't support these standards. The fact that they haven't been using anything other MPEG2 and single layer discs for most of their releases is mostly due to manufacturing problems, not lack of standards supports. According to Bell, using VC-1 or AVC a 30-gig HD-DVD can provide up to four hours of HD playing time. Blu Ray supports both codecs - see above. If one needs more, one simply adds another disc to the package, and it will still be cheaper and easier than trying to get a 50-gig Blu-Ray disc out of Sony. Wrong. Take it up with Alan Bell of Paramount. I'm merely reporting here. But one would think that if Sony has only one facility for producing 50-Gig discs, that this would be a bottleneck as would the fact that there are 32 replication facilities available to make HD-DVD discs and only 8 that can make Blue-Ray discs. Seems like a no-brainer to me. Read the Alan Bell interview in the latest TPV. http://www.avguide.com/the-perfect-vision/ Add to this the price disparity between Blu-Ray players and HD-DVD players ($499 for Blu-Ray vs $199 for HD-DVD) This weekend's newspaper flyers show Blu Ray players being sold this weekend by several retailers at a regular price of $299. Same lowest price as they are selling HD DVD players. About time. However, the Venturer SHD7000 HD-DVD player (a repackaged Toshiba) LISTS for $199 and is cheaper than that on the street. ($190 this weekend at Walmart). For my own edification, the HD-DVD movies that I have look better than the Blu-Ray discs that I own and it's especially telling on movies that I have in BOTH formats. There is, however no specification-driven reason why this should be so and I suspect that its merely the aforementioned teething problems on the Blu-Ray side. My money TODAY is on HD-DVD to be the winning format in this struggle, though. Tomorrow might change my mind, but for the here and now, I'll stick with HD-DVD. Whoever wins I hope its soon. These two competing camps must realize that having two incompatible formats for what is, essentially, the same set of standards, is holding both back. The High-Definition Digital Disc will only take off when there is one and only one format. |
#33
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Will SACD die?
[Moderator's note: Some audio content is needed if this or related
subthreads are to continue. -- deb ] "Sonnova" wrote in message On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 07:59:13 -0800, Arny Krueger wrote (in article ): "Sonnova" wrote in message According to industry sources, HD-DVD players outsold Blu-Ray players in 2007 by a more than 1/3. ... not including the fraction of 5 million Blu Ray players in PS3s that were sold in 2007. As far as titles are concerned, they are about neck and neck at about 400 titles each. However, There is four times the replication capacity online for HD-DVD as there is for Blu-Ray and Sony has only one replication facility that can make the 50-gig discs. http://www.electronista.com/articles...eating.hd.dvd/ "Sales of Blu-Ray movies in 2007 have nearly crushed those of HD DVD so far, Reuters reports. According to data from Home Media Research, 2.6 million Blu-Ray titles were sold between January 1st and September 30th, while only 1.4 million HD DVD titles were bought in the same timeframe." I've read that things have changed since then, But I cannot find a recent citation. Everything I can find on the web is at least 3-4 months old. Blu-Ray authoring is more difficult, more expensive and more error prone than is HD-DVD as well. That is hard to believe, because digital authoring is largely medium independent. The tracks for Blu-Ray are smaller and closer together than HD-DVD. This makes them harder to master. I guess you don't understand mastering. Mastering is, as I said largely medium-independent. Any problems due track spacing would relate to duplication. It also makes both mastering and playback more error-prone. No, if anything it makes the discs harder to duplicate. While both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray use the same wavelength laser, Sony uses a proprietary lens system to focus the beanm even sharper and thus makes a smaller track. There are actually about 5 or more million Blu Ray disc players in the hands of consumers. Since they exist, there are proof that there are no serious unresolved significant problems with making Blu Ray disc players. One of the results of this is that for over a year the Blue-Ray camp was releasing nothing but MPEG-2 encoded discs at a lower bit-rate mastered as single layer. This claim also doesn't hold water. Those most significant disadvantage of MPEG-2 as compared to more modern codecs, is that it requires more data be recorded in order to produce a given level of visual quality. If there were problems with making high-capacity discs, then using more modern coding techniques than MPEG-2 would be a potential problem solver. It appears that some early PS-3 players were shipped with down-level firmware, that did not include a full complement of codecs. Around the middle of the year there was a downloadable public update to PS-3 firmware that added more codecs. Both Dream Works and Paramount have dropped their support for both formats and have announced that forthwith, all of their HD releases will be HD-DVD only. Politics. Production bottlenecks. Mere talk. Allan Bell, Paramount's chief technical officer also said that while Blu-Ray's higher capacity is better suited for raw data, movies need "minutes" and due to the fact that Blu-Ray uses less efficient Codecs such as MPEG2 video and PCM audio, the potential for greater capacity is lost. Wrong. Blu Ray is not limited to MPEG2 video and PCM audio: Who said that Blu-Ray was LIMITED to MPEG2 video? They can both use the same codecs, but for manufacturing yield issues most Blu-Ray discs sold in 2006/2007 were MPEG2 and single layer. Mere talk. As shown above, talk that doesn't make sense. I did provide a reasonable explanation for the early use of MPEG, which I can document. http://www.blu-ray.com/faq/#bluray_video_codecs What video codecs will Blu-ray support? MPEG-2 - enhanced for HD, also used for playback of DVDs and HDTV recordings. MPEG-4 AVC - part of the MPEG-4 standard also known as H.264 (High Profile and Main Profile). SMPTE VC-1 - standard based on Microsoft's Windows Media Video (WMV) technology. What audio codecs will Blu-ray support? Linear PCM (LPCM) - up to 8 channels of uncompressed audio. (mandatory) Dolby Digital (DD) - format used for DVDs, 5.1-channel surround sound. (mandatory) Dolby Digital Plus (DD+) - extension of Dolby Digital, 7.1-channel surround sound. (optional) Dolby TrueHD - lossless encoding of up to 8 channels of audio. (optional) DTS Digital Surround - format used for DVDs, 5.1-channel surround sound. (mandatory) DTS-HD High Resolution Audio - extension of DTS, 7.1-channel surround sound. (optional) DTS-HD Master Audio - lossless encoding of up to 8 channels of audio. (optional) Confirmed by: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray_Disc#Codecs http://www.videohelp.com/hd etc. Nobody has said that Blu-Ray doesn't support these standards. Actually, I just did say something similar - that a significant number of the early players did not have a full complement of codecs, but that problem was addressed about 6 months ago. That was then, this is now. The fact that they haven't been using anything other MPEG2 and single layer discs for most of their releases is mostly due to manufacturing problems, not lack of standards supports. According to Bell, using VC-1 or AVC a 30-gig HD-DVD can provide up to four hours of HD playing time. Blu Ray supports both codecs - see above. If one needs more, one simply adds another disc to the package, and it will still be cheaper and easier than trying to get a 50-gig Blu-Ray disc out of Sony. Wrong. Take it up with Alan Bell of Paramount. I'm merely reporting here. You admit that your data is like 4 months out of data. Looks to me like its more like 6 months out of date. But one would think that if Sony has only one facility for producing 50-Gig discs, that this would be a bottleneck as would the fact that there are 32 replication facilities available to make HD-DVD discs and only 8 that can make Blue-Ray discs. Seems like a no-brainer to me. Read the Alan Bell interview in the latest TPV. http://www.avguide.com/the-perfect-vision/ I don't chase incomplete URLs. If you've got something that is more complete and relevant, please post it. Add to this the price disparity between Blu-Ray players and HD-DVD players ($499 for Blu-Ray vs $199 for HD-DVD) This weekend's newspaper flyers show Blu Ray players being sold this weekend by several retailers at a regular price of $299. Same lowest price as they are selling HD DVD players. About time. However, the Venturer SHD7000 HD-DVD player (a repackaged Toshiba) LISTS for $199 and is cheaper than that on the street. ($190 this weekend at Walmart). Press releases and ads for non-stock items are a dime a dozen. From the Wal-Mart web site a few seconds ago: "We found no stores within 100 miles of 48236 that carry this product. Please try a new search. (In-stock status is approximate and was last updated on 12/17/2007 at 3:59 AM, E.T.)" For my own edification, the HD-DVD movies that I have look better than the Blu-Ray discs that I own and it's especially telling on movies that I have in BOTH formats. Might be implementation difficulties that relate to the specific titles that you have. In the long run, its the capability of the medium that matters. HD-DVD media can hold less data. More data, more resolution. "Ye canna change the laws of physics, laws of physics" said Scotty on the origional star trek series. There is, however no specification-driven reason why this should be so and I suspect that its merely the aforementioned teething problems on the Blu-Ray side. My money TODAY is on HD-DVD to be the winning format in this struggle, though. Tomorrow might change my mind, but for the here and now, I'll stick with HD-DVD. Whoever wins I hope its soon. It looks to me like the market split will not put either side out of business in the short term. These two competing camps must realize that having two incompatible formats for what is, essentially, the same set of standards, is holding both back. The High-Definition Digital Disc will only take off when there is one and only one format. Now that we can agree on! |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
SACD & DSD | Tech | |||
SACD | High End Audio | |||
CD vs. SACD | Tech | |||
SACD | General |