I Predict HD DVD Players Will Be A Failure for the first 3 Years [Archive] - Audio & Video Forums

PDA

View Full Version : I Predict HD DVD Players Will Be A Failure for the first 3 Years



EdwardGein
01-04-2006, 07:38 PM
I just read that they expect the initial HD DVD players to be above $1,000. I got to laugh at this. There is no way most middle income people or below are going to spend that kind of money on a DVD player when they can get a decent one for $50 or so that shows perfectly good pictures. I really think it is going to be a commercial disaster and until they price them below $200 which given the way electronic devices get better and progressively cheaper year in and year out, I think will be at least 4 years away. I know I initially spend about $1,000 around 1977 for one of the first VCR's but at the time it was an innovation that changed lifestyles. I also spent $650 for a HiFi VCR that one could get for $50 now. I just can't seeing laying out anything over $250 for a DVD player that plays HD given the excellent quality results of normal DVD players today.

robert393
01-04-2006, 08:06 PM
I just read that they expect the initial HD DVD players to be above $1,000.Expected rollout price for PS3 (with Blu-Ray) is $500.

There is no way most middle income people or below are going to spend that kind of money on a DVD player when they can get a decent one for $50 or so that shows perfectly good pictures. They can't get an HD DVD player for $50, so you are not comparing apples-to-apples.

I initially spend about $1,000 around 1977 for one of the first VCR's Convert that $1000 (from '77) into today's dollars and it would be a meer maybe $300. So, getting a PS3 (with Blu-Ray) for $500 doesn't sound like that much.

I just can't seeing laying out anything over $250 for a DVD player that plays HD given the excellent quality results of normal DVD players today. HD DVD has more than 2-times the resolution of DVD. A quote from this article (http://hometheater.about.com/cs/television/a/aafoxhdtv03a.htm) does a good job of explaining the difference: "The best analogy is the the comparision of 480p to HDTV to the comparison of the inferior video quality VHS to that of DVD. Or, putting it another way, VHS has half the resolution of DVD and DVD is half the resolution of HDTV."

I'm not doubting that the commercial success of HD DVD will be a bit slow in coming, but remembering that that we only have 3-yrs until the Federal mandate requiring HDTV, HD DVD will no doubt become the standard. Of course I would not be surprised to see VOD-HD getting it's share of the HD-DVD market by then too?

480i (and p) is old technology. If you think it looks great, wait 'till you see HD in all it's glory. It makes 480i (or p) look pretty disgusting.

Robert

EdwardGein
01-04-2006, 10:13 PM
If your right about the $500 price, I totally rescind what I said. However, according to USA Today or was it the LA Times, I think in an article today, they stated categorically that the lowest HD DVD player would be above $1,000 and obviously didn't mention your $500 price.
If the article was in the LA Times (I don't remember which, sorry), then I'd give it less credibility. This is the same newspaper, I kid you not, that last Friday, had a big story on the front page of the newspaper, about some Los Angeles guy who they thought might have broken a record for going to movies in a year- aproximately 175 or so, big F ing deal, I find it hard to think that someone who goes to an average of 3 movies a week for a year is setting a record!

HT BUFF
01-05-2006, 07:04 AM
Quick question here, after people spending thousands $ on building a massive DVD collection over the past 5 years do these manufacturers honestly believe we are all going to run out and replace
this collection? I can't see it happening. This is why the SACD format failed.

robert393
01-05-2006, 07:25 AM
Quick question here, after people spending thousands $ on building a massive DVD collection over the past 5 years do these manufacturers honestly believe we are all going to run out and replace
this collection? Not many are going to replace it all at one time. I'm sure not. But will I (and many others) start buying the new format with new movies and eventually replace some of our favorite movies with the new format? Sure! Did you (an deverybody else) replace your VCR collection and upgrade to DVD over time?
This is why the SACD format failed. SACD failed? Wow! Now that's news. Better tell the recording industry, because they are kicking-out more titles everday, and the consumers are enjoying the uncompressed sound.

Robert

noddin0ff
01-05-2006, 07:31 AM
Who's replacing? HD DVD will be backward compatible. Plus everything will likely scale up you DVD 480i signal so they'll look better anyway. Not HD, but still better. Win-win.

Eric Z
01-05-2006, 08:05 AM
Interesting conversation. I somewhat agree with Ed regarding this. The great great majority are very happy with DVDs, so why change to something that is only going to increase the picture and sound. I know, I know- everyone here is going to say, "Those are the main reasons I will buy an HD-DVD player!" The jump from VHS to SD DVD I feel is bigger than the jump from SD DVD to HD DVD. I'm not talking about the pic/sound quality; I'm talking about the disc vs tape format and the convenience of skipping chapters with a click of a button and not needing to rewind/fast forward a darn tape. Also, the durability of a disc vs a tape.

I'm very interested to see how well HD DVDs will be marketed and how the general public responds. Even though SD DVD players dropped in price much much faster than VCRs back in the day, it still took some time for it to be affordable to the general public. And I feel affordable for the general public is less than $250.

recoveryone
01-05-2006, 08:23 AM
whats all this sound upgrade stuff, the PQ will increse but I haven't heard anything above DTS/DD yet so what is this higher level sound format you guys are refering too.

Eric Z
01-05-2006, 08:33 AM
good point, recoveryone- that's my fault. i was actually thinking about the sound quality of HDTV vs just watching the TV- like how you can get 5.1 with HD watching football, but with my SDTV, it's just basic sound for me. you're right, same sound as my current DVDs now.

I wonder what's next after DD/DTS- something else that would cause us to spend more, :D

edtyct
01-05-2006, 08:36 AM
Both Dolby and DTS have hi res, nonlossy formats waiting in the wings for hi def video disks to arrive. I won't rehash them. They provide yet another opportunity for those who are happy with the current versions to stand their ground. I hate to say it, but history is littered with people who have thought, for better or worse, that a particular instantiation of "progress" was a waste of their time and/or money. For better or worse, they have the footprints on their backs to show just how deterred progress was by their staunch resistance. Regardless of how long any of us may hold out, change will come. Early adopters always seem to crawl out of the wordwork, regardless of how strong the opposition is, and manufacturers count on them. They know, as well as we do, that not everyone has the same attitude toward innovation. Personally, if most of my current music collection were available in SA-CD, I'd jump at the chance to replace it--even if resources forced me to pace myself. I'd be more selective about films, but certain ones positively scream to me for higher resolution. I enjoy the rush of seeing and hearing my favorite things (pun with Coltrane happily acknowledged) presented in better form.

Ed

Eric Z
01-05-2006, 08:50 AM
Good points, Ed! I know I will eventually not be able to avoid the HD world as much as I am now. It's odd because I have the money in the bank waiting for an HDTV, but it's just too early for me to get on the boat. I think this is why my wife if always frustrated when it takes me so long to make a purchase- she says I comparison shop too much :)

recoveryone
01-05-2006, 08:55 AM
good point, recoveryone- that's my fault. i was actually thinking about the sound quality of HDTV vs just watching the TV- like how you can get 5.1 with HD watching football, but with my SDTV, it's just basic sound for me. you're right, same sound as my current DVDs now.

I wonder what's next after DD/DTS- something else that would cause us to spend more, :D

No problem Z, I thought maybe I may have missed somthing new coming out. But I assumed that you had HD, so when you get it you'll know the great sound you get watching a live game, I feel football is the best in 5.1 as you can hear the crowd the stadium announcer and the commentators coming from all around you. Primetime shows are ok, but they are not produce to fully use surround sound. Now if the SciFi channel came in HD 5.1 that would be awesome due that they show they kind of shows that would benefit from that format. The new DVD format would be very successful if it would be backwards compatible, so there would be no need to replace a nice collection of DVD's

Eric Z
01-05-2006, 09:05 AM
I think I would most enjoy sports in HD- that's especially what I'm looking forward to. I heard football (as you said) is great and even baseball in HD 5.1 is fantastic.

I look forward to it sometime in the future. I first have to rearrange my furniture where I want the HD- I bought a huge sectional for my family room (where we watch all of the movies) that only fits one way in that room- it works well for a 32" SDTV, but not sure how it will be with a widescreen. Then, I'm thinking about getting one in the main living room (where everyone congregates)- I can do that, but then I need to do something with my big entertainment center that only fits SDTVs- decisions, decisions.

recoveryone
01-05-2006, 09:18 AM
I think I would most enjoy sports in HD- that's especially what I'm looking forward to. I heard football (as you said) is great and even baseball in HD 5.1 is fantastic.

I look forward to it sometime in the future. I first have to rearrange my furniture where I want the HD- I bought a huge sectional for my family room (where we watch all of the movies) that only fits one way in that room- it works well for a 32" SDTV, but not sure how it will be with a widescreen. Then, I'm thinking about getting one in the main living room (where everyone congregates)- I can do that, but then I need to do something with my big entertainment center that only fits SDTVs- decisions, decisions.
Don't forget you can go with a LCD/DLP and hang it on the wall to save space

L.J.
01-05-2006, 09:24 AM
I think I would most enjoy sports in HD- that's especially what I'm looking forward to. I heard football (as you said) is great and even baseball in HD 5.1 is fantastic.

It is!! I have a very hard time watching a game in SD. As a matter of fact, I can't remember the last time I watched a game in SD. The word spoiled comes to mind. :D

Sir Terrence the Terrible
01-05-2006, 09:34 AM
Hey Rob,
SACD and DVD-A are a complete failure. They may still be turning out titles, but they are at a rate that is 1/10 of what it used to be. DSD(the bitstream of SACD) is not even in the spec's for BluRay.

When DVD players first came out, they were over a $1000. My toshiba costs about $1100. The price rapidly came down over the years as DVD became widely except by everyone.

The new HD format have bigger issues. There was no competition to the DVD, but there will be between these two formats. As long as they both go at it, prices will remain very high for both players. Sony may have a price advantage if they include BluRay in PS3. However it is VERY likely that HD-DVD will end up in the next version of Xbox

The copy protection schemes, and lack of HD output on the component video input has completely freaked out early adopters. Talk of having to hook your player to a phone line or internet to "confirm authenticity" of the disc, and having the ability to defeat your players ability to play a disc is a MAJOR turn off, at least for me.

On a technical basis I think Sony has beat out Toshiba. But they have done this before with beta. However the studio are really turned on with the potential capacity of BluRay at 200G for a four layer disc, that is something that HD-DVD cannot touch. Toshiba is already talking about compressing video more to increase capacity, Sony has no such issues.

I have heard both new audio formats, but I question the need for either except as backward compatibility with regular DVD. With the space available you can put 8 channels of PCM tracks on each movie and skip DD and Dts altogether. Don't get me wrong, both of the lossless formats sound terrific, but if they are loseless, then why not just use the PCM encoding instead? I know alot of people that will be sitting on the fence for a while to see were this dogfight goes before investing a dime into either format.

kexodusc
01-05-2006, 09:56 AM
Hey Rob,
I know alot of people that will be sitting on the fence for a while to see were this dogfight goes before investing a dime into either format.
I for one intend to build a giant fence and hide behind it. If one doesn't come crashing violently through with overwhelming momentum, I don't think I'll be buying either.

Format wars = stupid

EdwardGein
01-05-2006, 10:49 AM
In regards to what happened to people with VHS Collections, for me personally, I converted my VHS Tapes to DVD+R discs via a DVD Recorder at a pretty inexpensive amount.

In fairness to this argument, I spent way over $10,000 over time, replacing my then vinyl collection with new CD's.

EdwardGein
01-05-2006, 10:55 AM
I may be misinterpreting something here but HDTV has nothing to do with 5.1 sound. As long as your getting digital TV as opposed to HDTV from you cable or Satellite company and have an optical cable & a receiver, you can get 5.1 sound.

HT BUFF
01-05-2006, 10:59 AM
I couldn't agree with you more regarding the failure of SACD & DVD-A, When I go into a store and ask the clerk where the SACD'S are they say "what the hell is that"?
These formats have been on the market for 3-4 years and still nothing.

Eric Z
01-05-2006, 01:21 PM
EG- I didn't know you can get DD or DTS 5.1 through digital cable or satellite. I don't have dig cable so that why I probably didn't know. What programs are in 5.1? A lot? Does ESPN come in 5.1 without HDTV?

EdwardGein
01-05-2006, 02:43 PM
I get my cable TV service through Time Warner & I'm assuming everything I get from Time Warner is applicable through other Cable & Satellite companies as well. In regards to 5.1 sound, you just need to have digital service to get it for which HD is not required (if you get HD your getting digital service anyway). To get 5.1 sound through your Digital Cable Service, all you need is a fiber optics cable & a 5.1 receiver & either a plain digital cable box or an (HD) DVR that includes a built in digital cable box (I'm not wording this last part that well). Shows like CSI, Medium, Without A trace & HBO & Showtime movies broadcast in 5.1, usually a show will say at the beginning of the episode if its in 5.1. Obviously movies and TV shows that were filmed before 5.1 sound came into existence are not broadcast in 5.1 sound (unless & I doubt this, they were rechanneled into "phoney 5.1 sound" the way mono records were rechanneled into stereo). I'm pretty sure ESPN broadcasts their games in 5.1 but you'll have to verify that from someone else. I will say, if you're a sports freak, you definately should get HD (ESPN is broadcast in HD but through a slightly more expensive HD package on cable). I'd also recommend for around $25 on Ebay, getting a glass fiber optics cable as from my personal experience it produces better & strong TV audio, but only use this for your TV, do not use a Glass Optics cable for your DVD or CD, as the sound is too strong.

recoveryone
01-05-2006, 02:51 PM
EG- I didn't know you can get DD or DTS 5.1 through digital cable or satellite. I don't have dig cable so that why I probably didn't know. What programs are in 5.1? A lot? Does ESPN come in 5.1 without HDTV?Part of what HDTV is, is the sound. True HD is suppose to be supported by 5.1 sound but many slide around that by just providing a digital sound format that could be anything from 5.1 to 1.0 most newer cable/sat boxes have either a toslink or coax output on the back but you need to find out if your provider is sending out a digital sound signal. ESPN by my provider (Aldelphia) comes HD/DD Stereo. Which is funny cuz that many of my normal SD channels are now being broadcast w/DD surround (L/R/SR). Go figure that one. Most of your primetime shows that are HD are 5.1. Most of all this comes down to what your provder is offering. Just about every Channel out there is being broadcast in either HD or Digital (EDTV) but your provider chooses to offer what they feel is best for your area. EG gets TNT in HD from his provider, but I do not. Mine offers the Discovery channel in HD, but not in my area?????? so its a mix bag of good and so so stuff you can get from any provider out there, even sat.

EdwardGein
01-05-2006, 04:32 PM
TNT is a joke in HD because the older shows looked distorted as they're horribly stretched. I don't get UPN & WB in HD but apparently alot of people on Cable & Satellite don't get those as well. I'd double check with your cable or satellite company as to 5.1 sound, HD & other things, as half the people at these places don't have the right info and are hopelessly unaware. IE, the Scientific Atlanta 8000 DVR doesn not get 5.1 sound and does not let you make external DVD & VHS copies because Time Warner or someone never programmed them to do so but the 8300 model does. Unless you specifically demand the 8300 model they'll dump the 8000 model on you, etc. The point is don't take just one person's statement on services/features as gospal, and that includes mine too, but verify things with serveral people at these companies and/or who get the service.

paul_pci
01-05-2006, 05:17 PM
EG- I didn't know you can get DD or DTS 5.1 through digital cable or satellite. I don't have dig cable so that why I probably didn't know. What programs are in 5.1? A lot? Does ESPN come in 5.1 without HDTV?

I have Direct TV with a digital connection, non HD service, and two HBO, two Starz, and a few Showtime channels carry 5.1 audio. And from what I've read, some, but not all, HD programming is 5.1, but since we don't have HD direct tv (yet), I cannot comment further.

SlumpBuster
01-05-2006, 07:26 PM
Interesting thread. But in reading through, I see alot of confusion and misinformation followed by correction and debate. Despite some of the goofy arguments that erupt on this board, most any of us are vastly more knowledgable regarding AV than your average schlub. So here we are, a group of well informed hobbyists and we can't even get the details and pros/cons straight. Now dump that sort of format war confusion into the $30 Walmart DVD player crowd and ask them to pay $300 to $500 for it? I make no prediction, but I won't be surprised if we see some real beta-max style losers in the next decade. And I say that as a proud MiniDisk owner... Boy I picked the wrong one there :D What a boob :D

westcott
01-05-2006, 09:01 PM
The reason I am so excited about HD video disk technolgy is because I am tired of the junk Directv puts out and calls it HD. My DVD player looks better than most of the movies presented as HD. Only those programs filmed with real HD cameras like football games and other digital programs do you really get to see what HD can truly be.

Give me a HD disc without all the compression artifacts found on sat\cable and true 720p\1080i video quality! Thats what I want. And I do not want to have to buy the programming. I want to rent it like I currently do with NetFlix or BlockBuster. In that respect, I agree it may be two or three years before we see true HD programming on disc in every segment of the existing market. It is hard to imagine the existing capital investment in recording and editing equipment. To change this all out is a MAJOR hurdle, even when the hardware is technically available.

As far as the demise of SACD and DVD Audio. These technologies never provided a real increase in sound quality because few players provided digital connections, and even fewer have decent bass management. I won't even get into the lack of material or the premium you pay for a perceived better resolution.

drseid
01-06-2006, 02:31 AM
TNT is a joke in HD because the older shows looked distorted as they're horribly stretched. I don't get UPN & WB in HD but apparently alot of people on Cable & Satellite don't get those as well. I'd double check with your cable or satellite company as to 5.1 sound, HD & other things, as half the people at these places don't have the right info and are hopelessly unaware. IE, the Scientific Atlanta 8000 DVR doesn not get 5.1 sound and does not let you make external DVD & VHS copies because Time Warner or someone never programmed them to do so but the 8300 model does. Unless you specifically demand the 8300 model they'll dump the 8000 model on you, etc. The point is don't take just one person's statement on services/features as gospal, and that includes mine too, but verify things with serveral people at these companies and/or who get the service.
This may be true in your area, but not in mine. The Scientific Atlanta 8000HD-DVR model absolutely has the capability to send out 5.1 DD signals (and mine does). It also can copy to a DVD-R (and mine also does). I use Cox Communications, BTW.

As for the price issue of HD-DVD and Blu-Ray with respect to your original post... I don't think there is a pricing problem at all... The first HD-DVD player was just announced at CES yesterday at a MSRP of $499. This seems hardly super-expensive for a 1st gen player in my book... Within a year or so, the next gen player could sell for half of that. In the case of Blu-Ray, the format will indeed be in the PS3, and that is indeed supposed to sell for $500 or less, so again, no problem in my book. The larger problem is the two competing formats are incompatible, not their respective prices IMO.

In my case, I plan on getting on the Blu-Ray bandwagon as soon as they come out on the PS3. Pretty good value for $500... I spent more than that on my first gen Toshiba DVD player when they came out (and even my current Denon player 3 years ago).

As for sound, the new DD++ HD lossless sound format for both new HD disc formats is interesting. I am eager to try it out, as my preamp already has the decoding ability for that particular signal on the new discs. I wonder if there will be a good music application for the format as well? Maybe that is why SACD is not on the Blu-Ray specs?

---Dave

EdwardGein
01-06-2006, 02:53 AM
[QUOTE=drseid]This may be true in your area, but not in mine. The Scientific Atlanta 8000HD-DVR model absolutely has the capability to send out 5.1 DD signals (and mine does). It also can copy to a DVD-R (and mine also does). I use Cox Communications, BTW.

All I can say is Time Warner apparently did not program the Scientific Atlanta 8000 to do this for God knows what reason which they don't seem to know- I think the customer service people are alumni of Best Buy, lol. Good for you that you didn't have this problem. The most irritating thing about Time Warner in LA is 9 out of 10 customer service people don't know about this stuff when they should. Like finding out about sex in the schoolyard, I find out about Time Warner on this site, from my man in Hawai who is up on things. The good things about Time Warner here are the installation people are very good & if you schedule things with Time Warner my experience is they're very reliable and show up as scheduled. Their prices are reasonable as well.

In regards to $500 HD DVD players, I hope that's true. I still won't get one at that price but it is bizarre that a major newspaper (either LA Times or USA Today, I don't remember which) would state that these players would hit the market at over $1,000 each. I think alot of people based on price drops of things like VCR's, DVD players, Computers, etc., have kind of figured out a pattern now & won't rush into first line high priced products if they're not loaded & its something they can live without- i.e. like DVD-A's & SACD's. If I see an HD DVD and it really does look great, I'll probably get one in the $250 range, no higher.

shokhead
01-06-2006, 07:16 AM
Interesting conversation. I somewhat agree with Ed regarding this. The great great majority are very happy with DVDs, so why change to something that is only going to increase the picture and sound. I know, I know- everyone here is going to say, "Those are the main reasons I will buy an HD-DVD player!" The jump from VHS to SD DVD I feel is bigger than the jump from SD DVD to HD DVD. I'm not talking about the pic/sound quality; I'm talking about the disc vs tape format and the convenience of skipping chapters with a click of a button and not needing to rewind/fast forward a darn tape. Also, the durability of a disc vs a tape.

I'm very interested to see how well HD DVDs will be marketed and how the general public responds. Even though SD DVD players dropped in price much much faster than VCRs back in the day, it still took some time for it to be affordable to the general public. And I feel affordable for the general public is less than $250.

The general public can care less just like with DVD-A and SACD. We are the ones supporting this stuff.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
01-06-2006, 12:30 PM
As for sound, the new DD++ HD lossless sound format for both new HD disc formats is interesting. I am eager to try it out, as my preamp already has the decoding ability for that particular signal on the new discs. I wonder if there will be a good music application for the format as well? Maybe that is why SACD is not on the Blu-Ray specs?


I just wanted to note that no processor currently on the market has no provisions for any of the new formats. Currently DD codecs do not have the processing power to handle DD HD or DD+. If an analog output is utilized for its output, then perhaps via your analog inputs you could handle the signal. However no current processor will be able to do it digitally.


As far as the demise of SACD and DVD Audio. These technologies never provided a real increase in sound quality because few players provided digital connections, and even fewer have decent bass management. I won't even get into the lack of material or the premium you pay for a perceived better resolution

Actually if you had a system consisted of 5 full range speakers and a sub, with all speakers set to large, even through the analog inputs you would hear a VERY noticeable quality different when comparing the multichannel SACD to its CD counterpart. Avoiding the conversion of the DSD bitstream to PCM is key to hearing the quality of SACD. If you have placed your speakers equidistance from the listening position, have all speakers to large, sub on, this is the only way that this is possible. When properly setup, and avoiding any uneccesary processing, SACD and DVD-A can sound absolutely glorious.

drseid
01-06-2006, 12:41 PM
I just wanted to note that no processor currently on the market has no provisions for any of the new formats. Currently DD codecs do not have the processing power to handle DD HD or DD+. If an analog output is utilized for its output, then perhaps via your analog inputs you could handle the signal. However no current processor will be able to do it digitally.

Actually, that information came directly from Cary over the phone... They said that while they do not publish the specs, their processor (in the Cinema 6) can indeed decode the DD++ signal. As for the new HD-DTS format, that is another story...

---Dave

edtyct
01-06-2006, 12:50 PM
I'm more than happy to provide testimony that SACD (and, to a lesser extent, DVD-A) via analog output can be absolutely stunning. Actually, I find it hard to listen to red book CD in the face of it.

GMichael
01-06-2006, 01:28 PM
Who's replacing? HD DVD will be backward compatible. Plus everything will likely scale up you DVD 480i signal so they'll look better anyway. Not HD, but still better. Win-win.

Is this true? Count me in then.

L.J.
01-06-2006, 01:52 PM
Is this true? Count me in then.

A point brought out earlier, and my plan, is to just buy new released movies in the new format and maybe replace some of your favorites from your collection.

GMichael
01-06-2006, 01:56 PM
A point brought out earlier, and my plan, is to just buy new released movies in the new format and maybe replace some of your favorites from your collection.

I will probably wait (with saliva dripping from my canines) to see if it takes hold before I make a purchase. If it does well, the prices will come down.

L.J.
01-06-2006, 02:04 PM
I will probably wait (with saliva dripping from my canines) to see if it takes hold before I make a purchase. If it does well, the prices will come down.

We'll be sitting on that fence together, along with quite a few others around here. I do plan on getting a PS3 though.

westcott
01-06-2006, 02:07 PM
[QUOTE=Actually if you had a system consisted of 5 full range speakers and a sub, with all speakers set to large, even through the analog inputs you would hear a VERY noticeable quality different when comparing the multichannel SACD to its CD counterpart.

Avoiding the conversion of the DSD bitstream to PCM is key to hearing the quality of SACD. If you have placed your speakers equidistance from the listening position, have all speakers to large, sub on, this is the only way that this is possible. When properly setup, and avoiding any uneccesary processing, SACD and DVD-A can sound absolutely glorious.[/QUOTE]


I would say very few of us have TRUE full range speakers and subwoofer sales are the proof.

"avoiding any unecessary processsing" like not converting it to analog and providing a digital link between the receiver and the player?

Here is a link(s) that I think you will find interesting.

http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/specsformats/DVD-AudioSACD12.php

http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/specsformats/DVD-AudioSACD2.php

Cheers!

GMichael
01-06-2006, 02:08 PM
Disclaimer: no factual knowledge of the future was used in the preparation of that statement.

Ah man, why do you get my hopes up like that?

noddin0ff
01-06-2006, 02:12 PM
Is this true? Count me in then.

Disclaimer: no factual knowledge of the future was used in the preparation of that statement.

edtyct
01-06-2006, 03:00 PM
Wescott,

At the risk of going hopelessly off topic, in response to your links, Gene is a really smart, well-educated guy, but I still maintain that my SA-CD disks sound worlds better than typical redbook CDs. He obviously makes some important observations, though he admits himself that work-around solutions exist for some of the drawbacks that the recording industry hasn't yet addressed, but I have found that even 16 bit recordings benefit from adaptation to SA-CD, and no amount of skeptical reasoning after the fact changes what I hear. I will easily concede that not everyone will, or should, take the time to discriminate the degree of improvement on the less refined disks. However, I'm willing to bet that anyone with even a modest interest can hear the improvement in the better ones (often of later vintage), whether in two-or multi-channel formats. And certain disks are just plain breathtaking. I don't listen to SA-CDs in PCM form derived from their DVD-A brethren, but I'm not convinced that even though this is certainly not the optimal way to hear them, they might still be a cut above the norm in many cases. It might be worth starting a new thread on the subject.

Ed

noddin0ff
01-06-2006, 03:05 PM
Ah man, why do you get my hopes up like that?

GM, Master of Time Warp, what does the future hold?

GMichael
01-06-2006, 05:16 PM
GM, Master of Time Warp, what does the future hold?

Taxes & death.

E-Stat
01-06-2006, 06:48 PM
When properly setup, and avoiding any uneccesary processing, SACD and DVD-A can sound absolutely glorious.
Agreed. The problem with Redbook is at the top, not the bottom. What does bass management have to do with the recording medium anyway?

rw

N. Abstentia
01-06-2006, 07:44 PM
Expected rollout price for PS3 (with Blu-Ray) is $500.


Robert

I don't think a PS3 will be able to play HD-DVD.

drseid
01-07-2006, 02:41 AM
I don't think a PS3 will be able to play HD-DVD.
You are correct, it won't. Blu-Ray (from a technical perspective, at least) is the superior format, so I am glad the PS3 uses it as opposed to HD-DVD. That said, it would be nice if someone came out with a reasonably priced 1st gen combo player for about $750 or so to reduce the risk as to which format wins out in the end. My bet is on Blu-Ray, but I remember the Beta vs. VHS days well... I went with Beta (big mistake on my part there)...

---Dave

edtyct
01-07-2006, 04:47 AM
Samsung already has a combo player in the works.

edtyct
01-07-2006, 05:52 AM
Rewind: I just got to thinking about this DSD (SA-CD) issue relative to PCM. In certain respects, DSD is not wholly incompatible with PCM, as we often portray it. Some people consider DSD to be essentially a PCM process because of the way that it handles pulse codes. However, even though this isn't really the case, since DSD uses a sigma-delta technique to register 1s and 0s, and PCM as we know it does not, DSD at several points along the chain appears to conform to PCM principles. One is in the recording studio, where the stream encounters 8 bit processing (DSD wide) before reverting again to a single bit, and another is in Sony's own consumer units (even the high end ones), in which SACD is converted explicitly to PCM before output--the component that does the job is even labeled PCM under the hood. I am not speaking about universal players, which are often noted to convert SACD to DVD-A-style PCM for bass management to save money, but of Sony's own processors and DVD/CD/SACD players, which don't have DVD-A capability at all.

Sorry to inflict this thread with more off topic, but we did touch on it above. I would have put it elsewhere if another likely thread existed. The point is that the worlds of SACD and PCM are not so distinct that any contact between them is an obvious infection. Maybe Sir TT will have more to say about the matter. Mods, please feel free to move.

Ed

swgiust
01-07-2006, 07:15 AM
HD is like sex, untill you've done it (or seen it) nobody can explain it. There are over
10 MILLION HD tv's in america right now. Only about 25% of them actually get HD.
Once people see what an HD/Blue ray DVD looks like... Those players will fly off
the shelves. $ 500 - $ 1000 for a player (at first) who cares, it's going to be sitting
next to a $ 3500 TV.

I have my little side fund started and I am going to buy a Blue ray player as soon
as I can.

We've got to remember that Hollywood made more money off of DVD's in the last
3 or 4 years then the did off the original movies. Once these new disc hit the shelves
at Blockbuster and Bestbuy, the original DVD is DEAD.

shokhead
01-07-2006, 08:36 AM
Your fooling yourself.

N. Abstentia
01-07-2006, 10:38 AM
HD is like sex, untill you've done it (or seen it) nobody can explain it. There are over
10 MILLION HD tv's in america right now. Only about 25% of them actually get HD.
Once people see what an HD/Blue ray DVD looks like... Those players will fly off
the shelves. $ 500 - $ 1000 for a player (at first) who cares, it's going to be sitting
next to a $ 3500 TV.


Don't count on that happening.

To people like us, yes...they might fly off the shelves. But guess what? People like us (audio/videophiles) make up maybe 10% of the buying public. Joe Sixpack does not care that HD-DVD looks great, it won't make his 27" standard def TV look any better so why should he spend $1000 to buy a player that is no better than a $39 WalMart DVD player to him?

And what about video rental places? How many HD-DVD movies are they going to have? Few to none at first, that's how many.

This is going to be an uphill battle for HD-DVD..trust me. It's going to be years and years before it starts to replace DVD.

shokhead
01-07-2006, 12:13 PM
Mybe 10% and you are right on. I heard today they might try releasing movies to the theather and to rental at the same times.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
01-07-2006, 01:56 PM
[QUOTE=Actually if you had a system consisted of 5 full range speakers and a sub, with all speakers set to large, even through the analog inputs you would hear a VERY noticeable quality different when comparing the multichannel SACD to its CD counterpart.

Avoiding the conversion of the DSD bitstream to PCM is key to hearing the quality of SACD. If you have placed your speakers equidistance from the listening position, have all speakers to large, sub on, this is the only way that this is possible. When properly setup, and avoiding any uneccesary processing, SACD and DVD-A can sound absolutely glorious.


I would say very few of us have TRUE full range speakers and subwoofer sales are the proof.

"avoiding any unecessary processsing" like not converting it to analog and providing a digital link between the receiver and the player?

Here is a link(s) that I think you will find interesting.

http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/specsformats/DVD-AudioSACD12.php

http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/specsformats/DVD-AudioSACD2.php

Cheers![/QUOTE]

Actually both articles have been on the net for quite a while. The are some very important points that both articles leave out. How the mixes are actually done. What rules that most recording engineers use to mix multichannel audio(like don't put deep bass in the center channel), and if you didn't use bass use bass management at all. The article creates some scenario's that are so scares as not to be mentioned as a problem(like the LFE channel being used as a overhead channel). I still assert that if you can place your speakers equidistant, require no bass management(all speakers large with a subwoofer), and have proper volume control over all of your speakers(both of my SACD/DVD-V players have) is the only way to hear the true qualities of both high rez formats. Especially if you keep the DSD stream unprocessed until D/A conversion. If you check some of the current universal or SACD enabled DVD players now adays, they go pretty far in addressing the authors concerns.