DVD-A WIZ-Bang-Boom

Aroc, you make a valid point -- 24/96 PCM is really good enough (more than good enough) for the typical mass-market consumer and even from an audiophile perspective. For that matter, DVD concerts in Dolby or DTS 5.1 are quite good also, so what is the big attraction of DVD-A?

As I've said before in this forum, my biggest wish is for the music industry to get off its collective butt and adopt one of these new higher resolution formats that are available to them. There's no reason to continue with the 44.1kHz/16-bit dinosaur any longer. At this point it's an insult to the consumer's intelligence.

How would those of you in this forum that own a DVD-A player rate DVD-A performance compared to DD or DTS 5.1??? I realize that at present DVD-A is an immature format, but from the software titles currently available, what are your candid impressions?

Rcp,

Thanks for your thoughts. I think it's interesting, if true, that the recording engineers are backing the PCM format, in effect choosing "none of the above." This still appears to be far from a done deal.

Sony has a strong selection of SACD titles remastered mainly from their 2-channel classical archives, as I understand it. So the real race will be to see which format(s) will be used for current and new music releases (and new multichannel recordings). I think that whichever format dominates the new release market will ultimately win the war. Yes, Sony has come way down on the prices of its SACD players, but even $400 is too high a price for real mass-market proliferation, in my view. Plus, there is no SACD player that presently sports a digital output. Personally, to have to use 3 pairs of analog interconnects to implement DVD-A and/or SACD, is really idiotic -- especially to high-enders who pay quite a bit for high-quality interconnects. Hooking up 3 pairs of the average "Phat-boy" interconnects to my surround receiver to accommodate a single source component is not an experience I will enjoy. So at present, my audio and video systems are still separate entities, with Dolby and DTS 5.1 being the sources of choice for my video applications, and my trusty analog TT and digital upsampling gear reserved for audio-only.

At this time of crisis in the USA, there ought to be a little more unity and agreement among the various formats. If folks knew which way to turn I'd bet there would be a lot more buying going on, and a lot less fence sitting. You know, the other day I broke out my old reel to reel tape deck and started playing through some of my old recordings and it was great fun. I also attended a record show recently, and bought a lot of great vinyl LPs for shamefully low prices. I can certainly find ways to amuse myself for as long as it takes the powers-that-be to sort this thing out. Who knows, by the time they finally reach a decision I may lose interest. Take care, my friend. :)

First, to answer Natalie's question, no, I wasn't in Toronto, I attended the record show in Edison, NJ at the Raritan Center last Sunday. Some vendors were really overpricing their offerings, but others had a nice selection of classical and popular music, many for $1 per album. I actually picked up 4 or 5 classical boxed sets for $1 per set, on London, RCA (Red Seal), and Columbia -- all in very nice condition. :)

Rcp, as yet my HT system pales in comparison to my 2-channel systems. Yet, considering that I only have about 1/25th of the money invested in HT that I do in 2-channel gear, I am quite pleased and intrigued at the level of performance my HT provides. I can't help being a little curious about how it would sound if I added better quality speakers, amps, and maybe some tubes in the signal path. In spite of the digital processing going on I get very clean and detailed reproduction with amazing dynamic range, no doubt due to the higher resolution that DVDs provide. If more high-quality software becomes available it will be interesting to see the potential that the multi-channel approach offers. Here and now, it's a real kick for watching movies. That much is undeniable.

I think you are right that there should be more hybrid discs released on SACD and that this could ease the transition to that format for the masses. The only catch is that the dual-layer hybrids cost more to produce than the SACD-only discs and would drive up costs to the consumer -- which would deter sales. So that may be a double-edged sword. Basically, if the prices of the players come down just a bit more (I'm sure they will) and the list of available titles starts to blossom, then SACD could succeed.

By the same token, it has been proven time and again, that the mass market cares more about low prices than it does about the quality of reproduction. So, the appearance of $200 DVD-A players could spark buying if software titles become more abundant. Unfortunately, I think that in the long run, whatever format offers the lower-priced software will dominate the mass market. My guess is that the competing camps know this and will make every effort to keep the prices of their available software very similar. In the future we will probably see universal players that will play discs of all formats, with the various formats coexisting, each having its respective share of the marketplace. I don't know if that's good or bad, but it appears to be the way that we're headed.