[
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2007, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]
67.150.252.160
In Reply to: RE: No. MLP is compressed. posted by Kal Rubinson on December 27, 2007 at 14:32:30
I hope this reply is not redundant. I posted a reply but it seems to have gotten lost. Maybe I wasn’t logged in.
At any rate, my confusion may be some indication of why DVD-A doesn’t seem to have caught on.
As to my original question, why not 96 24 as a generally accessible medium with every DVD player so that the discs would be more attractive in the marketplace with a few higher resolution discs for DVD-A audiophiles? I just don’t get it! This would give us something superior to Redbook and probably SACD that was readily available. Is there something in the audio layer of a DVD disc which prevents a standard DVD player playing back a 96 24 disc in stereo format. Is there some sort of compression which is mandatory for a DVD player to play back 96 24 which degrades the audio layer? And while I am at it, some of the Silverline discs advertise a “CD” layer and a “5.1" layer at a higher resolution. Where’s the stereo layer at a higher resolution? Is it on the disc or isn’t it?
I am a music lover who updates his relatively high-end system once ever decade and a half. I am playing back Redbook, SACD and DVD-A discs on an Ayre 5. I am not an audiophile as such but just want to enjoy music above and beyond what is available via the usually musically challenged Redbook. I would suggest that my confusion may be one of the reasons that DVD-A has generally not caught on.
Again, what am I missing? Is there perhaps a book available that would answer my questions? I’m just a music lover — HELP!!
Thanks for the patience,
Richard
Follow Ups:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2007, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]