DVD-A / SACD comparison

You may not like what you read here.....


http://sound.westhost.com/cd-sacd-dvda.htm

 

mikey, it's always a thrill to have another DVD-A vs SACD thread!



mud-

 

Mud...what ELSE have we got to do?

 

True.

mud-

 

Did anyone scroll down and see the rebuttal? If not, here's the link:
http://www.fivechannels.com/artiklar/CDvsSACDvsDVD-A-followup.htm

I agree it is partially in the ears, but like anything else, bad DVD-As and SACDs can sound like crap compared to a good redbook CD. It's like beta vs. VHS, DCC vs. Minidisc vs. DAT vs. CD-R, etc. EVERYTHING can be based on numbers, but when it comes down to it, it's what your ears prefer. Remember, that in the grand scheme of things, most people listen to MP3 & MP4 and do not care. So to argue SACD vs. DVD-A now is kinda funny, considering most people here are in the minority, as are the people saying which one of the hi rez formats is better.

In the end, the consumer is king, and they will decide the fate of the two. SACD I think will hopefully win out; music buyers shop for music, not for DVDs. And yes, there is a larger install base of DVD players, but you can't play DVDs on a boombox. Hybrid SACDs you can. Now, DVD-A with DD and DTS backwards compatible mixes is a good idea, but you still can't beat redbook compatibility. There's a reason DSOTM sold like a half million copies. Did the Pet Sounds DVD-A sell a half mil? I doubt it.

Price point is another issue. Generally, SACDs (not in all cases a la MoFi) are cheaper, and as more hybrids appear, costs will hopefully go down.

Also, see my post in the SACD dedicated player thread just started ...I just got a dedicated SACD player and definitely notice a difference in quality for SACDs.

Bring on the war and the flames!

 

I've been having a good time with my Pioneer DV-45A...I can clearly hear the difference between SACD and CD, as well as DVD-A and CD. On the five Police titles, they sound very much like the vinyl copies I got rid of many years ago. In fact, I remember my Nautilus-pressed dbx-encoded copy of Zenyatta seemed just a little bit dull on the high end, and the SACD is very close to that...my ears just tell me that SACD sounds closer to analog than CDs did on the title *I* have heard. DVD-A? I don't own enough to draw a conclusion...the titles I own sound a bit sterile to me, but still seem to have a clarity that CD didn't have.

I like both formats. And with universal players available (with improvements in the pipeline, no doubt, for future years), there shouldn't be a reason one format should win out over another. But economics being what they are....

Now if A&M would get off their **** and put some of those long-neglected Styx albums onto hybrid SACDs...

 

Tell me about it! Actually, the 1995 Greatest Hits was supposed to kick off a remasters series which never happened. Through other compilations like GH2 and the new Rockers, many of the tracks have been released in one form or another (i.e. you have most of Grand Illusion, Cornerstore, and PT).

When I interviewed James Young (audio on my site) about the back catalog, he didn't seem so into dealing with past stuff.

I'm more interested in seeing what they do rarity wise for the supposed box set that is much delayed. I have some stuff I'd loan them!

 

Uh-oh another DVD-A versus SACD- and I am on the fence!!!

Someone please pass the beer and popcorn...


Chris

 

My ears tell me that certain CD's, SACD's and DVD-A's can sound truly superior. I have heard SACD's that take my breath away. I have heard some DVD-A's that sound better to me than most CD's I have in my collection. With rapid changes in digital to analog converters, mastering tools, etc., is is difficult if not impossible to attribute differences in sonic quality to the basic underlying high resolution technology being used.

Richard.

 

If I only had a dollar for every time that link has been posted. . .

 

Re: Re: DVD-A / SACD comparison

Oh dear.

 

I can't just let it go at that. I don't know why this guy's opinion is held above anyone else's. For every anti-DSD opinion I can find several opposite opinions from people that have actually worked with DSD. Consider this, the recording community is going ahead with DSD whether consumers buy high-res PCM or SACD's. It's going to be a major format in recording studios in the future.

I'm backing out now. Bye.

 

Re: Re: DVD-A / SACD comparison

I'd pay you, but I don't have that kind of disposable income.

When there's new news from reliable sources on the differences between SACD and DVD-A, I'll be happy to read it. Otherwise, threads like these IMO invite pointless arguments or mindless advocacy, not a real discussion.

Please!

 

Those "Hits" sets were a tease! I never did buy any of the original CDs save for Equinox, Roboto and the Classics, since the sound didn't really thrill me that much. (Still have the vinyl, though.) I was hoping both of the hits compilations would lead to reissues myself.

Hope that box set does pan out--if it has enough rarities, I may just pick it up. But I'd still like to get the entire albums remastered...no complaints if they are hybrids, as long as they're not pressed by Crest.

 

Awww darn...just when it got interesting.

My big take on that article was some manipulation of the facts and numbers to get a desired end result. (Not so much a lie as a mis-interpretation...what little I skimmed gave me a headache!) Not to mention I've never heard of this person. There will always be anti-SACD crusaders, as there will be anti-DVD-A and anti-digital crusaders. I'll let them rant and rave and hate the new technologies, while I play the few discs I have and enjoy them.

 

Sorry guys. I'm back to say Rudy, you're my new hero. Nicely said.

I tell you what, I'd take a nice high res version (in any format) of my favorite albums and not complain one bit (or 24 bits ). Both formats are a big step in the right direction no matter which one is a bigger step. I'd love to hear Revolver or OK Computer or Jellyfish or Klaatu or Dave Clark Five or Nilsson Schmilsson, etc... in any high res form.

Now that's more like it. Peace, love and happiness to everyone.

 

Okay, but which sounds better?

 

Re: Re: DVD-A / SACD comparison

The one that doesn't sound worse.

 

You have to pay extra for the hero worship part.

I just feel it's just illogical to be hung up on one format, when you can have a universal player and not be stuck "holding the bag" if one or the other format should up and disappear. IF that ever happens, and five years later anyone wants to upgrade, the choice is a little more clear-cut.

I personally like my SACDs better than the few DVD-A titles I have. But this also depends on the master, the mastering technique, the playback equipment....and who the heck knows, biorhythms and Chinese horoscopes may also come into play for some listeners.

I'd rather keep an open mind through it all and just take whatever comes my way. Life's too short.

 

Thats very true, Rudy.

 

[SACD vs DVD-A] vs [Who's Next issues] vs [THE IGNORE THREAD]
.............which thread sounds better??????????

And the winner is.........................

http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=5775

 

Mikey,

There are several problems with this article. Here are a few from a "devil's advocate" position....

1. Ohlmann is a well-known basher of DSD technology so he definitely exhibits an agenda.

2. Noise artifacts have been proven and agreed by even Vanderkooy and Lipschitz to be not an issue following a lengthy debate over several AES conferences with James Angus and Dirk Reefman.

3. He is off the mark on his comparison of the two technologies. You cannot directly compare the bit length in PCM versus DSD. The reason for this is that PCM looks at the height of the waveform and DSD looks at changes along the waveform.

4. Many researchers feel that sampling rate is more important than bit length as it allows transient detail to be captured better.

5. It is simply not accurate to say the DSD is only as accurate as redbook CD in the high frequencies. Anyone who works on records can tell you that. The sound is more open, extended, and more natural to what goes on in the studio.

6. Newer PCM workstations do, in fact, not rely on any PCM conversions. This was an interim step from a new technology. I suspect these comments are dated.

7. SACD watermarking is not audible.

8. Stereophile did not discover ultrasonic noise that was below redbook quality. On their tests, the noise if mostly concentrated in the 20khz+ range, and as I said in another thread, Atkinson and several editors claim they have not been able to hear it. I suspect what people are hearing are ultrasonic sounds that their equipment does not adequately playback properly.

This is not to say that DVDA is not a good format: it is. It's just not fair to present one side from a DVDA proponent and not have some balanced response from the SACD project team or an engineer who really knows DSD.

I personally have heard live mic feeds and have found DSD is closer to what is being performed by DVDA sounds good too. The real key to DVDA is to sample north of 24/96, ideally 24/192 or higher. Unfortunately the DVDA discs do not have enough capacity to hold a full surround presentation at this rate.

 

Gee, how did I miss this thread?
Well, I think that th....zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

 

So Dave, you're going to ignore the ignore thread?

 

You guys are funny!!