SACD or Blu Ray Audio?

I'm not sure why folks prefer SACD over DVD-A or BD-A considering all three formats can sound really good, DVD-A and BD-A can be backed up unlike an SACD.

 

You stole what I was gonna say. Agree 100%.

 

I think the preference is because:
1. SACD doesn't need a TV or monitor to navigate a menu; and
2. Hybrid SACDs are backward compatible with CD players.

 

This is probably more my system or my room but for the most part, leaving mastering aside, DVD-A has a thicker air about it, an enveloping pillow-y quality comes with it much of the time, like its own compression that is not on the master, it is a more fatiguing experience; plus my player, at least, treats songs like chapters so segues get broken—although I can usually overlook that. SACD for my setup never seems to introduce its own system quality beyond what the master is. One of my better sounding discs is Neil Young Greatest on DVD-V however.

I know I talked about DVD-A and not Blu Ray, but I would be curious what peoples’ opinions are about the similarity—in sound only—between DVD-A and Blu Ray; are they similar to you guys? I am pretty sure I am staying away from Blu Ray so far because if my DVD-A experiences.

 

I think the back-up issue is a lower priority for many people than the two things I mentioned. I'm sure that many of this forum have not backed up their disc collections, whether they are high resolution or not.

 

I only have The Dark Side Of The Moon on DVD-Video and BD that came with the 2011 Immersion Box Set. So far, I have not noticed what you're describing. But my system is also not really high end. I usually just play the rips on my Fiio X1 and X3.

 

Right I am not so sure I would hear it unless I played both SACD and DVD-A,V over many years like I have. My statement was over scores of discs although I shy away from DVD-A now. I should of said I have a Universal player so that should take out cables, different brand qualities; but as I connoted, I fully recognize a universal player can be better at one thing vs. another. I would also not discount my rather small room, maybe more upper and lower frequencies are just getting caught for the one vs. the other.

 

The back up issue is huge for me. The back up can also be played anywhere in my house.

 

You don't need a monitor for most Blu-Ray Audio discs

 

Blu-Ray audio for me.

 

Dolby Atmos looks interesting. In theory it would be something like distributing the actual multitracks themselves, and you (or your system) could fiddle with the eq & mix of each element as desired. Also, individual elements can be placed anywhere in space.

 

I am not able to listen to the Blu-Ray Audio disc without turning my plasma TV on. When I turn TV off, the sound disappears. I have Sony BDP-S300 player.

 

I had never heard of that thanks.

 

Blu-Ray Audio would be just fine if one major thing was eliminated. Mandated HDMI outputs only. Allow hi res BR-A on RCA outputs on all subsequent Blu-Ray players. This way the 2 channel purists can easily adopt it and make it a viable standard. Include a CD in the package for single inventory. And everybody's happy.

 

Are you saying that when I play any hi res BR-A on my Oppo 105 through the analog
outputs I am not getting the 96/24 res? That doesn't sound right.

 

Do you mean to say that a Blu-ray audio disc will NOT play on a Blu-ray disc player (for example, Oppo BDP-105) if the player is hooked up to a 2-channel stereo system that does not have a receiver or pre-amp with HDMI connections?

 

I mean all Blu-Ray players have RCA analog outputs, not just Oppos. Cheap BR-A capable players with RCA outs to get the masses hooked on the format and lead to better releases on the format and more buyers. This would get the older gear owners on the BR-A fun too. Open it up. Critical mass to get Blu-Ray audio out there for everyone. And why not BR-A capable car players too. And PC playback options or on Macs. '67 Chevy, a lot of new Blu-Ray players lack RCA outputs and only have HDMI. This and HDCP protection DRM stupidity is how BR-A will have a lesser audience. Gotta have RCA analog and other output options for every user.

 

Is that a fact that PCs that can read blu ray do not read blu ray audio?

Also MACs aren't made w/ disc drives anymore. So that's hardly anyone's fault but MAC.

 

PC can play BR-A on some laptops with Blu-Ray drives if built in and HDCP enabled. External drive users on either format get into the HDCP mess easily. I have an external burner with Blu-Ray and non HDMI/HDCP laptops won't play a HDCP protected Blu-Ray disc on said laptop. My Dell Latitude E 5510 is such an example as are many other business class laptops in wide use. HDMI outputs are really barely getting common on such machines.

 

Thanks for the reply, I have been thinking about getting the Oppo BDP-105 for a while now (not sure at this point if I should just wait for the next new model), and wanted to be sure I could play Blu-ray audio on my non-HDMI two-channel stereo system

I will have the HDMI connected to the TV for movie viewing, but I don't have surround speakers or a surround receiver at this time.

 

Wrong, not all Blu-Ray players have analog audio outputs.

Bill

 

That was exactly what I was trying to say. All Blu-Ray players should have analog audio outputs. For Blu-Ray Audio to be a mainstream format, a necessity. Simply put.

 

They are not mandated in the Blu-ray specifications.

 

True, but for Blu-Ray Audio use a necessity for many audiophiles to accept the format.

 

How do you play a disc without accessing the menu first? I have two players and the disc just sits there spinning in menu land. Will some players automatically start playing?