Another DVD-A vs. SACD thread

I am still going bonkers deciding which of these two to go with. There are 2 classic (in every sense of the word) releases coming out I believe next month on DVD-A. These are Harvest and The Nightfly. I noticed that the price has come down some, as I have seen these for around $15.00 each. I have also read some recent comparisons of these formats, some which go way over my head.
Do you get all of the features of DVD-A by using them in a DVD player? Sorry, I am a little confused yet, so bear with me. I believe on Harvest there is a video to be seen, as well as extras on both.Do you get lyrics with ALL DVD-A's to be observed on the TV screen?
What are others' opinions on this? I sense there is a semi-war between the makers of there 2 formats, and I believe David Bowie has recently gone on record by stating he wishes they would lay down their 'arms' and make a player that takes care of both formats, so that the consumer can buy what they want; considering that DVD-V is here to stay awhile.
I will pick up these 2 when they become available, but please enlighten me as to what your thoughts are. I seem to be increasingly leaning toward DVD-A lately.

 

Then that's what you should get.

 

I like Steve's old idea, which I am paraphrasing. You can justify buying an SACD player if there are ten titles you want. I guess the same would apply for DVD-A.

You can't get the best DVD-A sound out of a regular DVD player. A regular machine would just play the lower resolution audio, like Dolby Digital.

Not all DVD-As have lyrics or videos. To me, those are worse than useless, but I don't mind if other people want them.

You're not risking much money either way you go, or if you buy both. DVD-A and SACD players are both available for peanuts.

 

I'm still waiting for more titles.

I will have to investigate DVD-A player prices, even though I won't like it.

What are the problems with the universal players? Anybody?

 

The short answer is no. You will get a Dolby Digital 5.1 and/or DTS mix if you have that capability and speaker set-up.

You most likely won't get the fancy menus and interactive stuff, and most importantly you won't be able to access the high-resolution mixes that most DVD-A's offer.

Right now I have several DVD-A and DTS discs, and I only have a standard DVD player. I quite enjoy the discs as-is. I'm awaiting an affordable player that will play both. Either that or I need to have a garage sale and blow out all of the players that I have and buy two affordable SACD and DVD-A units. I'm positive you could do both for under $400 right now.

 

I'm not sure where you saw that these are coming out next month, but (I hope I'm wrong) I don't think a release date has been set for either of these yet.

- Gabe

 

On DVD-A, the highest resolution is only available if it's two channels. If it's surround, the quality has to be lowered (24/192 to 24/96) because it's too much data to be read off the disc that fast.

 

Well, duh! I guess SACD does have its advantanges after all.

 

I'll be going with SACD.

 

Re: Re: Another DVD-A vs. SACD thread

Gabe: One place I noticed it was the Red Trumpet site, it states Oct. 15th., but as we all know, that is subject to change, although this date might stand because they are fighting for a piece of pie during the holiday's.

 

Re: Re: Re: Another DVD-A vs. SACD thread

Thanks!!

I hope it's true. I've been looking forward to HARVEST.

- Gabe

 

I hope they come out with dts tracks. I'm enjoying the cheap Sony SACD/DVD-V/CD player playing the dts versions of some DVD-A disks. BTW it displays some of the still graphics from DVD-A disks (but the videos require DVD-A players).

Will DVD-A players decode dts CDs? Will they play DVD-Video disks?

 

I have a combo player, and my assessment so far is this:

SACD: Great sound (on 2 channel, I don't have any MC discs)
DVD-A: Great sound on the hi-rez 2 channel layer. BUT, I don't like having to use the TV and wade through the menus. I know there's a way to use it without the monitor, but it's just not that easy.

Bottom line: I like the 2 channel sound on both equally well, but give the edge to SACD for convenience.

A word about surround sound: BAD IDEA! While multi-channel surround works great for movies to envelope you, there's just something unnatural about it for music. It would be interesting to try a multi-channel mix with all the speakers in FRONT...maybe this would result in a more natural listening experience. But I'm not about to reconfigure my home theatre surround speakers to experiment. Also, I really hate MC mixes that put the vocal in the center channel...this isolates the vocal too much and just sounds off-kilter.

I did somewhat enjoy the surround mix of Hotel California as an interesting diversion. And it is also kinda cool to hear Riders On The Storm with the rain effects in the surround channels. But overall, I'm sticking with 2 channel.

 

Yes!

 

Yes. And yes, if you mean normal DVD's like movies.

 

I know my Panny RP91 plays DTS Cd's, DVD-Videos, Video-CD's (from Asia) and DVD-RAM discs.

This is the best DVDA player let alone DVD player in the world right now. I bought mine at ECost.com for around $450 a year ago.

If you want it all.....especially great Video presentation plus the ability to play anything cept SACD discs, the RP91 is for you.

My Sony 775 handles the SACD side of my system at this time.

 

Surround sound! DoH! Too right it's a bad idea! Totally unnatural!
Only for movies..NOT for dedicated music!

 

For those of you who have both DVD-A and SACD--How do you 'handle' the 6-channel RCA-plug output for 2 separate players? Is there a cost-effective solution that avoids having to buy an expensive receiver that has 2 full sets of 6-ch external inputs? Like a high-end "switch box?"

 

I find its up to what I'm listening to.

Sounds great on Queen's A Night At The Opera and
Pink Floyd's Dark Side Of The Moon for example.

To me it's just another way to enjoy music. It's not the end-all but can be a lot of fun with the right material.

 

Sometimes I will use the 5 Channel Stereo option on my Receiver to make a thin recording sound fat. Some say that would be cheating but oh well......

DVD-A and SACD will be more interesting when they have digital interfaces like the one between the Denon AVR5803 and DVD9000 as well as the Accuphase. Utimately surround sound(,6, 7) will be the forward going technology but I am turning around and going vinyl. There is only so much time left to listen to good music.


Ferg

 

Dan said yes. I say no.

The Super Audio CD standard requires that a stereo hirez track must exist. I don't believe that the DVD-Audio spec stipulates this at all. On some DVD-A discs there is no two channel track and the player will construct a stereo track on the fly from the multichannel source (a "fold down") if that's needed.

Regards,
Geoff

 

I am worried the Japanese and Americans want this 'surround Sound' thing. If it takes off you can kiss 'Audiophile' goodbye....your heading for different territory. Stuff mastered with boomtastic bass etc.

 

Hi,
I was afraid to choose either format- as I had not seen much activity in DVD-A, and they aren't available at any B & M Store in my area.

SACD at least had the visibility of a few big catalogue issues coming, such as Creedence and the Stones. At least these helped augment what appeared to be Sony only releases(at least thats all my local Circuit City carries).

Anyway- I saw a sweet deal on an open box Sony 775 carousel CD/SACD changer, for only $100. My dedicated CD player(1988 Yamaha CDX-810) just couldn't keep up anymore not playing CD-R's, making startup noises and skips. For the $100 price- that's almost throwaway category!

I only have 1 SACD so far, and its not even multi-channel(Stones Hot Rocks).

Seems a no-brainer for me anyway- given title availabilty, and initial price and needs.

Chris