Warner's debut DualDisc

Neither would I, especially since my surround set-up is DVD-V! But my brother's set up is DVD-A stereo only.

 

At the end of the day, if there is standard CD of a title and a DualDisc of the same title having just a surround-sound hi-rez track, I'll take the standard CD. I only listen in surround sound on occasion. Stereo is my bag.

 

I'll bet since so many pop/rock recordings use the 44.1 & 48kHz formats, maybe on such titles as this one the label decided that the CD layer is the stereo option.

 

I concur with all the above.

 

I think there is a more gentle way to bring this up such as saying the above and not introducing controversial statements by Levinson...in any event if you read Stereophile and TAS there has been more acceptance of the DVDA format in recent months. I think there are some audiophiles who will not buy into PCM at all but I think even more will buy into DualDisc if the hirez layers are done well and the titles are new and interesting (no retreads please!). I think the big beef on DVDA up until now has been sloppy transfers like most of the Silverlines (there are exceptions), the lack of quality titles, and the need to have a TV on with some players. I think many audiophiles are purists in their love of music and the video features, while appealing to many, are far less important to them.

I just really like hirez and any new or future format that helps get some great albums out with faster sampling rates and quality mastering is a VERY GOOD THING.

I agree that getting more is always better, but on the other hand many do not have surround systems and have invested much cash in a quality 2 channel system. In that case, I can see the frustration for not adding in an easier to make 2 channel hirez layer.

The best way to keep everyone happy is to include the 2 channel layer. If so, I betcha big time that audio journalists will sit up and take notice and add in a few for review and this could prove valuable in generating buzz and "lift" for DualDisc.

 

What if they are the same price, and the DualDisc only ADDS features to the regular redbook release. You still get a stereo redbook layer, PLUS the added flip side of whatever DualDisc extras there are. Why would you still pick the redbook CD?

 

Mike,

I think most economists would say you would pick up the better value.

I wonder if we are focusing too much (and maybe the music industry too?) on the value proposition versus the CD and not DualDisc's true competition which I would argue is with MP3.

The labels have to improve the value for consumers so they will think MP3, while free or cheap, is not the optimal way to go...I think this is why DualDisc was developed.

 

Your next question will be, "What if the CD is $16 and the DualDisc is free?".

In the scenario you described, I'm not sure. If the DualDisc added something other than Dolby Digital and DVD-Audio 5.1, such as a video for a couple songs, concert footage, or interviews, I would probably go for the DualDisc. However, I would be concerned about using the DualDisc in the car because you have to be that much more careful in handling a two-sided disc. So, I'd probably buy the DualDisc and make a CD-R of the CD side for the car. Still, I'd have one other concern in buying the DualDisc -- spindle cracks. My DualDisc of Dave Brubeck Time Out has a crack on the CD side. It's funny, but none of my 20-year-old CDs have spindle cracks.

 

Oh boy. More threads about spindle cracking on the horizon.

 

I think it is unreasonable to expect DualDiscs to be the same price (or less!!??) than a CD. Maybe at first they will be, but they ARE supposed to provide "extras" that make them worth it, be it videos, HiRez, and/or 5.1 tracks.

I would prefer that they ALL have HiRez tracks, in 5.1 where applicable, stereo where it's not (or both! )

The current trend seems to be: Hear a song, download it, burn it - DONE! On to the next song. I may be an old fart, but this does not cut it with me. I enjoy hearing an "album" of music by an artist and usually find a song or two that I end up liking better than the "single".

If DualDisc helps keep the recorded "album" format alive in a world where the younger generation is growing up downloading single songs for compilations, then GO DUALDISC!

 

Just give me a "Hi-Rez" 5:1 mix and I'll be happy.
I still think they should have stuck with the Flaming Lips
package one DVD-A disc one redbook disc.....

 

Well, if Jean Michel Jarre's "Aero" can be taken as a guideline for things to come (at least in Spain, I don't know about other European countries) there will be no DualDiscs published here anytime soon. In fact, there has been no word about any Dualdisc launches in Spain from anybody.

After all the 5.1 hype Jean Michel has been trying to generate in his Aero presentations (See this interview: http://www.jeanmicheljarre.com/movie.html) I was shocked to read the following text at Amazon UK:

"Aero is a double CD format, a DVD and CD in one package. The DVD is recorded in 5.1 DTS, Dolby AC3 and PCM 9624 KHz Stereo and the CD is recorded in Super Stereo. There is also an optional visual element on the DVD format, which offers an unusual visual experience. A pair of beautiful eyes, shot in high-definition cinema scope, gazing out at the listener and reacting emotionally to the music... for the entire 75 minutes of the album." (See page here: http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/B0002IVMJ8/pd_ka_0/026-8907569-9498029)

I thought Jarre was referring to the record including a hi-rez MC, not DTS or DD. And Superstereo. What's that !?!?!

Some people will be happy with the 96/24 PCM stereo mix, but not me. I feel it defeats this record's announced purpose.

In any case, this type of packaging (CD + DVD) does have its advantages over DualDisc: you can have the CD in your car and keep the DVD safely ar home away from the heat in summer (not to mention how this can help avoid the problems double-sided discs present in certain car players.

Also, if some DualDiscs are to include - depending on the title - either video, 5.1 lossy mixes OR DVD-Audio stereo and/or 5.1 ones, won't that create some confusion as to what one is about to purchase? Won't this create what's called 'cognitive dissonance' in some consumers?

I don't know, I liked the idea of DualDisc when it seemed that ALL of them would include MLP stereo AND 5.1 mixes (apart from any videos DD and DTS tracks they would like to include). If this is not the case, I would not think that it is such an interesting value-added product.

 

The DVD+CD two-disc sets typically sell for $28-30. Combine the two onto one disc and throw in some hi-rez audio, and suddenly $18 doesn't look so bad.

 

I watch movies in multi channel and I listen to music in two. It must have two channel audio or I won’t even consider it.

Anyone else?

 

That's what I was essentially saying earlier in this thread. I finally conceded that I would buy a DualDisc that lacked hi-rez stereo if it added some other interesting extras such as interviews and videos and was no more expensive than the standard CD of the same title. I certainly will not, not, not pay a premium just for hi-rez surround sound.

 

I agree with Keith, but I will pay a small premium for hirez stereo + hirez surround.

While Oblio may feel otherwise, I think it is important to price these discs at the cost of a CD even though the added features may cost more money. The reason I feel this way is that the music biz must create additional value for the consumer to persuade them from going the MP3 route so often.

As a consumer I also wonder about the long term damage from a continued slide in CD sales. Artists must be compensated for their creativity and intellectual property or we will see less quality in less quantity in artist output. I would like nurture the talent and create as much of an environment that leads to original music as possible.

 

Sure, but you do realize that every DualDisc has a stereo CD side? A CD side that could sound as good as Steve's DCC discs?

I'm all for high-res stereo, but as usual, I suspect most won't sound as good as possible due to the mastering, and the resolution won't even be the biggest limiting factor.

I'm always more concerned about how well releases are mastered, then resolution. Some boy band recorded in ProTools with squashed dynamics isn't likely to sound better even if they could throw high-res stereo on the DVD-A side.

 

Lee,

Would I be happy to pay the same as a CD? SURE!
However, I am not alone in thinking that if it takes an extra buck or two to get more of this stuff out, I am willing to pay it. I am not alone. Check out the results of a poll about this topic that I posted over at QQ.

http://www.quadraphonicquad.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3261

:-jon

 

Thanks Jon but your sample is probably biased (not intentional of course) since the Quad board is oriented toward serious music people. John Q. Public may feel different about that extra price. I can imagine some thinking "Gee these guys are suing people and they want me to buy this fancy new format for even more money. They are lucky I am in the record store..."

I would maybe pay an extra buck but I again I believe this format is meant to improve the CD value proposition, not to attract a niche following among audiophiles...so price is really important.

Mike,

As I have stated before, there are three elements to great sound: (1) original recording, (2) sampling rate, and (3) great mastering.

There are too many factors involved to say that #3 is better or more important than #1 or #2 or vice versa. I feel that Steve Hoffman does such high quality work that there may be an understandable bias on this excellent forum toward thinking mastering is everything. I would never take anything away from Steve as I am a big fan but we should recognize the other elements out there affecting sound.

 

Lee,

Sure it's "biased" in that these are the "base" buyers that will seek out the product and buy it right away. If they (we) don't buy them, then who will?

As I said before, I'd be happy to pay less, but we are talking BIG BUSINESS here, and nothing, NOTHING, is done "for free".

We are still seeing $18-$19 "list" on a CD!! Yuk!

:-jon

 

Businesses will often ride the price-volume curve out for more volume at lower prices if it helps establish market share at equal profits (or even less). Establishing the format is the long term goal...think of all the "replacement" money to be earned, or in this case maybe CD sales to be saved.

 

All I can say is this.............................


BRING 'EM ON!

 

Great recorded sound is useless without something to REPRODUCE it, so I'll add:

(4) the playback system and room

 

Good call Geoff. I was assuming #4 but let's add it in for a complete list.

I think often room acoustics are tweaks like powerline conditioning and contact cleaning are very overlooked and can bias one's view on sonic quality.