 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
212.69.45.26
In Reply to: Another red herring posted by Charles Hansen on February 28, 2007 at 20:13:40:
Never implemented.
As you well know.
Plus 16 bit audio is far more fragile compared to 24 bits.
Finally, using 6.144 MB/sec for audio leaves around 3.7Mbits for the video, and that will be very dependant on programme length. Quality is unacceptable to Video heads. Go try encoding a video stream with full motion using those data rates and then come back & tell me it is acceptable, because all you will get at those bitrates is still encoded as MPEG-2. Anything under 4.5Mb/sec is going to be as blocky as the day is long.
The reason DVD-A did not go mass market was because the mass market did not get told about it. I remember buying my first DVD-A player to be told in the retail store that "I didn't need this, because the other player had dolby digital which was better."Correctly authored DVD-A with a companion Video_TS IS the universal format everyone has been looking for. You get full motion video for those that want it, and high resolution audio for those who prefer that. Telling us surround fans to be happy with DD is like telling you video heads & vinyl heads to be happy with VHS & Compact cassette.
Let me put it this way: What do you think about HD video? Good or bad?
Follow Ups:
< < What do you think about HD video? Good or bad? > >As an audiophile and videophile, of course I think it would be nice to have higher quality whenever possible.
But we have to live in the real world. And in the real world, people will not adopt a new format just because the Japanese majors are trying some desperate measure to boost their stock prices. So let's recap:
a) The needs of the consumers and software companies are aligned. But the desires of the hardware companies are diametrically opposed. In other words, the hardware companies make boatloads of money when a *successful* new format is introduced -- nobody has the hardware yet, but they all end up buying it, and millions of players are sold. At this point, the hardware companies sales dwindle to a small fraction of what they were as people are only buying replacement players when their old machines fail.
But this is now the glory days for the software companies. When 90% of all households have a DVD player, their potential market is huge and they can make lots of money releasing even relatively obscure titles. This is great for the consumer, as they can find anything they want -- readily available and at low prices.
b) The Japanese majors made a killing from CD in the early '80s. They were able to repeat their success on a grander scale with DVD in the late '90s. But then things shifted as the manufacturing base moved to China -- DVD players became a commodity and no significant profits could be made. So of course, they are trying to introduce another format so they can try and make another boatload of money.
c) The problem is that the general public doesn't give a rat's ass about incremental improvements. Nor do they care about higher performance at higher prices. (If they did, Ferrari would be the world's largest car company.) So trying to launch a new format right now is doomed to failure. The only way a format can succeed is if the chicken (the hardware) and the egg (the software) are both born at the same time. This is a difficult trick to pull off.
So where that leaves performance-oriented people like you and I is to face the facts. Simply put, we are much better off to try and create products (both hardware and software) that produce improved performance from an existing successful format than to daydream about what the ultimate format should be (according to our narrow, performance-oriented definitions that most people don't care about). Some successful examples on the software side are:
- Superbit DVD's
- Gold-plated CD's
- Re-mastered CD's
- Direct-to-disk LP's
- Half-speed-mastered LP'sAnd on the hardware side are the hundreds of specialty companies making high performance products that serve the existing formats.
So like I said, DVD-Audio certainly offered a (relatively small) performance improvement over DVD-Video. But only for a *very* small target audience. It was doomed to failure before it started, as there was absolutely no compelling reason for the average person to switch from DVD-Video.
And there was a brief moment in time when it actually was possible for us all to get higher audio quality. By 2000, millions of people already owned DVD players. The patents on CD were expiring and so the royalties paid to Sony and Philips were going away. DVD-Video offered much more robust copy protection than CD did, which would have been a blessing for the software companies. Plus the option for allowing videos along with the music existed. All of these benefits were there on a well-established format that was on its way to becoming a smash success.
So if there had been a focus on making music available on DVD-V, it could have worked. But instead both the hardware and software companies shot themselves in the foot by focusing on trying to introduce not one, but *two* new formats that never really stood a chance. So now we are stuck with CD.
And guess what? They are doing the same stupid thing all over again with HD-DVD and Blu-ray. They just never learn...
Okay. I understand know. We should settle for less and never dream that anything will be better. That's me, that's the way I want to live.
< < We should settle for less and never dream that anything will be better. > >Sometimes it's hard to tell with internet postings, but I assume that you are being facetious.
Please note that there's a difference between wanting something better and smoking opium and having pipedreams.
It would be great if we could all listen to first-generation copies of 30 ips master tapes. But it ain't gonna happen.
We could invent a new format for turntables that spun at 100 rpm. The frequency response and dynamic range would be incredible. To overcome the playing time, we would need to make the discs 30" in diameter. But it ain't gonna happen.
I could put downloadable files of 352 kHz at 24 bits on a server that would offer incredible fidelity. They would be playable on a handful of professional editing suites. If I were lucky, I might be able to get a handful recordings of the local youth symphony. But it ain't gonna happen.
In the real world, we need to temper high-minded goals with a dash of realism.
For a brief moment there existed a chance to replace 44/16 CD format with 96/24 on DVD-Video format. And Dolby Digital (essentially five channels of MP3) could have been replaced with 6 discrete channels of 48/20. The format was set. Everybody owned the hardware. The copy protection was quite robust, especially in contrast to the non-existent copy protection of CD. It was all there, just waiting for someone to buy it. No buttons to push, and it didn't even rain.
And it all got pissed away for what, exactly?
Yes, a little facetious, but I love your description of Dolby Digital a five channels of MP3. Bravo.
< < I love your description of Dolby Digital a five channels of MP3 > >Unfortunately, this is *not* a joke or an exaggeration. From the official DVD FAQ, by Jim Taylor, author of "DVD Demystified":
"Dolby Digital is multi-channel digital audio, using lossy AC-3 coding technology from PCM source with a sample rate of 48 kHz at up to 24 bits. The bitrate is 64 kbps to 448 kbps, with 384 or 448 being the normal rate for 5.1 channels and 192 being the typical rate for stereo"
If you do the math, you will see that the audio data rate is exactly in the same range as MP3 files -- between 128 and 192 kbps for stereo music.
It kind of makes you wonder why a market even exists for expensive surround-sound processors. Would you be willing to pay (say)$5000 for a multi-channel MP3 player?
Universal will at least go neutral by Q1 2008 (maybe before that, but I'm not holding my breath). They'll get a tremendous surge in High Definition sales from the Blu-ray supporters who have been waiting for them to do the inevitable. Once that happens, every movie studio will support Blu-ray (Weinstein is too little to be meaningful) and HD DVD will not see 2009, despite what Microsoft wants.So that will leave Blu-ray as the sole High Definition audio/video format and the war will be over. Personally, I think when Sony releases the PS3 in Europe the HD DVD house will begin its implosion. Combine that with the June release of Sony's $599 Blu-ray player and there's really no reason to keep HD DVD around.
The High Definition audio/video music releases will replace the DVD concerts and videos.
< < The High Definition audio/video music releases will replace the DVD concerts and videos. > >Please don't hold your breath.
| ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
