Will SACD die?

Will SACD die?

Will SACD die?

OK, 1st off i'm *not* trying to start a war!

anyhow, i just got my 1st HD player (a 3rd gen
Toshiba A35), and the HD sound isn't bad
(based so far only the included 300 movie disk)

given that there are probably already many
more HD players out there than there are
SACD players, will that cause hi-end audio
multichannel sound to switch away from SACD?

all ears. :)

bill

Re: Will SACD die?

"willbill" <trek@worldwide,net > wrote in message
news:fjn7q00hnn@news4.newsguy,com
> Will SACD die?
>
> OK, 1st off i'm *not* trying to start a war!
>
> anyhow, i just got my 1st HD player (a 3rd gen
> Toshiba A35), and the HD sound isn't bad
> (based so far only the included 300 movie disk)
>
> given that there are probably already many
> more HD players out there than there are
> SACD players, will that cause hi-end audio
> multichannel sound to switch away from SACD?

I think that DVD-A formats may turn up as compatibilty formats for HD
and/or Blu Ray players. It would just be a matter of relatively simple
decoding in signal processing units that are already pretty complicated.

SACD could get pretty dead pretty fast because it requires special laser
pickup assemblies because the initial content protection security is
implemented there.

Re: Will SACD die?

Arny Krueger wrote:
> "willbill" <trek@worldwide,net > wrote in message
> news:fjn7q00hnn@news4.newsguy,com
>> Will SACD die?
>>
>> OK, 1st off i'm *not* trying to start a war!
>>
>> anyhow, i just got my 1st HD player (a 3rd gen
>> Toshiba A35), and the HD sound isn't bad
>> (based so far only the included 300 movie disk)
>>
>> given that there are probably already many
>> more HD players out there than there are
>> SACD players, will that cause hi-end audio
>> multichannel sound to switch away from SACD?
>
> I think that DVD-A formats may turn up as compatibilty formats for HD
> and/or Blu Ray players. It would just be a matter of relatively simple
> decoding in signal processing units that are already pretty complicated.
>
> SACD could get pretty dead pretty fast because it requires special laser
> pickup assemblies because the initial content protection security is
> implemented there.

assuming you already have either a Blu-ray player
or a HD-DVD player, one other question: is the
HD multichannel sound on those disks (either
Dolby TrueHD, or DTS high def, or "lossless"
5.1 PCM) comparable to SACD?

bill

Re: Will SACD die?

On 13 Dec 2007 00:32:19 GMT, willbill <trek@worldwide,net > wrote:

>assuming you already have either a Blu-ray player
>or a HD-DVD player, one other question: is the
>HD multichannel sound on those disks (either
>Dolby TrueHD, or DTS high def, or "lossless"
>5.1 PCM) comparable to SACD?

Yeah but what are the odds that there will be pure music audio discs
of any consequence on those media?

Re: Will SACD die?

Kalman Rubinson <kr4@nyu.edu> wrote:
> On 13 Dec 2007 00:32:19 GMT, willbill <trek@worldwide,net > wrote:

> >assuming you already have either a Blu-ray player
> >or a HD-DVD player, one other question: is the
> >HD multichannel sound on those disks (either
> >Dolby TrueHD, or DTS high def, or "lossless"
> >5.1 PCM) comparable to SACD?

> Yeah but what are the odds that there will be pure music audio discs
> of any consequence on those media?

*IF* the music industry is at all interested in selling multichannel
music, it would be insane of them NOT to move to these formats, since
in a relatively few years, everyone will have DVD players that can play them
(unlike SACD and DVD-A).

___
-S
"As human beings, we understand the world through simile, analogy,
metaphor, narrative and, sometimes, claymation." - B. Mason

Re: Will SACD die?

On 14 Dec 2007 03:11:12 GMT, Steven Sullivan <ssully@panix,com > wrote:

>*IF* the music industry is at all interested in selling multichannel
>music, it would be insane of them NOT to move to these formats, since
>in a relatively few years, everyone will have DVD players that can play them
>(unlike SACD and DVD-A).

Mebbe. That's a big IF. I hope we will see some action soon but,
more likely, there will be nothing until/unless the HD players become
common. By then, audio in a physical medium will probably be gone.

Kal

Re: Will SACD die?

"Kalman Rubinson" <kr4@nyu.edu> wrote in message
news:fjug2j027ec@news2.newsguy,com
> On 14 Dec 2007 03:11:12 GMT, Steven Sullivan
> <ssully@panix,com > wrote:
>
>> *IF* the music industry is at all interested in selling
>> multichannel
>> music, it would be insane of them NOT to move to these
>> formats, since
>> in a relatively few years, everyone will have DVD
>> players that can play them (unlike SACD and DVD-A).
>
> Mebbe. That's a big IF. I hope we will see some action
> soon but, more likely, there will be nothing until/unless
> the HD players become common. By then, audio in a
> physical medium will probably be gone.

I think you mean to say that it is audio all by itself in a physical media
that will be disappearing.

Audio with video still requires too much data to entirely practical as
downloaded-only. The sticking point of course being the video.

OTOH, I've had a fair amount of fun at times watching downloaded TV shows
from the CBS and NBC web sites. The video quality on some shows is probably
better than NTSC.

Re: Will SACD die?

Steven Sullivan wrote:

> Kalman Rubinson <kr4@nyu.edu> wrote:

>> Yeah but what are the odds that there will be pure music audio discs
>> of any consequence on those media?

> *IF* the music industry is at all interested in selling multichannel
> music, it would be insane of them NOT to move to these formats,
> since in a relatively few years,

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

afaik, it's already true *now*

i don't know the current numbers,
but my hunch is that BD and HD-DVD
players already outnumber by at least
a 2-to-1 factor (maybe even more
than that)

> everyone will have DVD players that can play them
> (unlike SACD and DVD-A).

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

agreed

most people don't know that SACD exists,
and of course even if you tell them
about it, they're not about to spend
the typical extra 100+ dollars to get
a player that can handle something called
SACD and DVD-A

and when you ask a store sales person
if they have any SACD disks, what you
get is a blank stare

bill

Re: Will SACD die?

willbill <trek@worldwide,net > wrote:
> Steven Sullivan wrote:

> > Kalman Rubinson <kr4@nyu.edu> wrote:

> >> Yeah but what are the odds that there will be pure music audio discs
> >> of any consequence on those media?

> > *IF* the music industry is at all interested in selling multichannel
> > music, it would be insane of them NOT to move to these formats,
> > since in a relatively few years,

> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> afaik, it's already true *now*

Not in my experience. None of my acquaintances has an HD or Blu-ray DVD player...yet.

> i don't know the current numbers,
> but my hunch is that BD and HD-DVD
> players already outnumber by at least
> a 2-to-1 factor (maybe even more
> than that)

Maybe in terms of *new* sales, but currently I'm very sure that many, many more people
currently use 'SD' players than high-def players.

___
-S
"As human beings, we understand the world through simile, analogy,
metaphor, narrative and, sometimes, claymation." - B. Mason

Re: Will SACD die?

In article <fjug6l027gs@news2.newsguy,com >, trek@worldwide,net says...
>
>Steven Sullivan wrote:
>
>> Kalman Rubinson <kr4@nyu.edu> wrote:
>
>>> Yeah but what are the odds that there will be pure music audio discs
>>> of any consequence on those media?
>
>> *IF* the music industry is at all interested in selling multichannel
>> music, it would be insane of them NOT to move to these formats,
>> since in a relatively few years,
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>afaik, it's already true *now*
>
>i don't know the current numbers,
>but my hunch is that BD and HD-DVD
>players already outnumber by at least
>a 2-to-1 factor (maybe even more
>than that)
>
>> everyone will have DVD players that can play them
>> (unlike SACD and DVD-A).
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>agreed
>
>most people don't know that SACD exists,
>and of course even if you tell them
>about it, they're not about to spend
>the typical extra 100+ dollars to get
>a player that can handle something called
>SACD and DVD-A
>
>and when you ask a store sales person
>if they have any SACD disks, what you
>get is a blank stare
>
>bill

The promoters have not followed Abraham Lincolns advice:
"To win the election, impress the ignorant"

JC

Re: Will SACD die?

"willbill" <trek@worldwide,net > wrote in message
news:fjug6l027gs@news2.newsguy,com
> Steven Sullivan wrote:
>
>> Kalman Rubinson <kr4@nyu.edu> wrote:
>
>>> Yeah but what are the odds that there will be pure
>>> music audio discs of any consequence on those media?
>
>> *IF* the music industry is at all interested in selling
>> multichannel music, it would be insane of them NOT to
>> move to these formats, since in a relatively few years,
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> afaik, it's already true *now*

> i don't know the current numbers,
> but my hunch is that BD and HD-DVD
> players already outnumber by at least
> a 2-to-1 factor (maybe even more
> than that)

Absolutely not true.

In terms of current sales, or in terms of units in service, there is simply
no comparison between the number of traditional DVD players, and the numbers
of Blu Ray and HD-CD players.

I know of only one Blu Ray player that any of my friends have. No HD-CD
players at all.

>> everyone will have DVD players that can play them
>> (unlike SACD and DVD-A).
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> agreed

Eventually.

> most people don't know that SACD exists,
> and of course even if you tell them
> about it, they're not about to spend
> the typical extra 100+ dollars to get
> a player that can handle something called
> SACD and DVD-A

Didn't happen.

> and when you ask a store sales person
> if they have any SACD disks, what you
> get is a blank stare

Pretty much. Or you will be directed to a single disc disply of many dozens
in the store, and that single display will be thinly stocked.

Re: Will SACD die?

On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 08:21:17 -0800, Arny Krueger wrote
(in article <fk0utt02kv6@news5.newsguy,com >):

> "willbill" <trek@worldwide,net > wrote in message
> news:fjug6l027gs@news2.newsguy,com
>> Steven Sullivan wrote:
>>
>>> Kalman Rubinson <kr4@nyu.edu> wrote:
>>
>>>> Yeah but what are the odds that there will be pure
>>>> music audio discs of any consequence on those media?
>>
>>> *IF* the music industry is at all interested in selling
>>> multichannel music, it would be insane of them NOT to
>>> move to these formats, since in a relatively few years,
>>
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>
>> afaik, it's already true *now*
>
>> i don't know the current numbers,
>> but my hunch is that BD and HD-DVD
>> players already outnumber by at least
>> a 2-to-1 factor (maybe even more
>> than that)
>
> Absolutely not true.
>
> In terms of current sales, or in terms of units in service, there is simply
> no comparison between the number of traditional DVD players, and the numbers
> of Blu Ray and HD-CD players.
>
> I know of only one Blu Ray player that any of my friends have. No HD-CD
> players at all.

According to industry sources, HD-DVD players outsold Blu-Ray players in 2007
by a more than 1/3. As far as titles are concerned, they are about neck and
neck at about 400 titles each. However, There is four times the replication
capacity online for HD-DVD as there is for Blu-Ray and Sony has only one
replication facility that can make the 50-gig discs. Blu-Ray authoring is
more difficult, more expensive and more error prone than is HD-DVD as well.

Both Dream Works and Paramount have dropped their support for both formats
and have announced that forthwith, all of their HD releases will be HD-DVD
only.

Allan Bell, Paramount's chief technical officer also said that while
Blu-Ray's higher capacity is better suited for raw data, movies need
"minutes" and due to the fact that Blu-Ray uses less efficient Codecs such as
MPEG2 video and PCM audio, the potential for greater capacity is lost.
According to Bell, using VC-1 or AVC a 30-gig HD-DVD can provide up to four
hours of HD playing time. If one needs more, one simply adds another disc to
the package, and it will still be cheaper and easier than trying to get a
50-gig Blu-Ray disc out of Sony.

Add to this the price disparity between Blu-Ray players and HD-DVD players
($499 for Blu-Ray vs $199 for HD-DVD) and the writing is clearly on the wall
for the eventual emergence of HD-DVD as the HD format of choice.

Re: Will SACD die?

"Sonnova" <sonnova@audiosanatorium,com > wrote in message
news:fk1gop01vub@news4.newsguy,com ...
> On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 08:21:17 -0800, Arny Krueger wrote
> (in article <fk0utt02kv6@news5.newsguy,com >):
>
>> "willbill" <trek@worldwide,net > wrote in message
>> news:fjug6l027gs@news2.newsguy,com
>>> Steven Sullivan wrote:
>>>
>>>> Kalman Rubinson <kr4@nyu.edu> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Yeah but what are the odds that there will be pure
>>>>> music audio discs of any consequence on those media?
>>>
>>>> *IF* the music industry is at all interested in selling
>>>> multichannel music, it would be insane of them NOT to
>>>> move to these formats, since in a relatively few years,
>>>
>>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>
>>> afaik, it's already true *now*
>>
>>> i don't know the current numbers,
>>> but my hunch is that BD and HD-DVD
>>> players already outnumber by at least
>>> a 2-to-1 factor (maybe even more
>>> than that)
>>
>> Absolutely not true.
>>
>> In terms of current sales, or in terms of units in service, there is
>> simply
>> no comparison between the number of traditional DVD players, and the
>> numbers
>> of Blu Ray and HD-CD players.
>>
>> I know of only one Blu Ray player that any of my friends have. No HD-CD
>> players at all.
>
> According to industry sources, HD-DVD players outsold Blu-Ray players in
> 2007
> by a more than 1/3. As far as titles are concerned, they are about neck
> and
> neck at about 400 titles each. However, There is four times the
> replication
> capacity online for HD-DVD as there is for Blu-Ray and Sony has only one
> replication facility that can make the 50-gig discs. Blu-Ray authoring is
> more difficult, more expensive and more error prone than is HD-DVD as
> well.
>
> Both Dream Works and Paramount have dropped their support for both formats
> and have announced that forthwith, all of their HD releases will be HD-DVD
> only.
>
> Allan Bell, Paramount's chief technical officer also said that while
> Blu-Ray's higher capacity is better suited for raw data, movies need
> "minutes" and due to the fact that Blu-Ray uses less efficient Codecs such
> as
> MPEG2 video and PCM audio, the potential for greater capacity is lost.
> According to Bell, using VC-1 or AVC a 30-gig HD-DVD can provide up to
> four
> hours of HD playing time. If one needs more, one simply adds another disc
> to
> the package, and it will still be cheaper and easier than trying to get a
> 50-gig Blu-Ray disc out of Sony.
>
> Add to this the price disparity between Blu-Ray players and HD-DVD players
> ($499 for Blu-Ray vs $199 for HD-DVD) and the writing is clearly on the
> wall
> for the eventual emergence of HD-DVD as the HD format of choice.

Logical as that is, it is an engineering argument, not a marketing argument.
And so far Sony seems to be further ahead in the marketing arena (must have
added some replacment staff since their SACD debacle.)

Re: Will SACD die?

On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 16:33:23 -0800, Harry Lavo wrote
(in article <fk1roj0qcq@news1.newsguy,com >):

> "Sonnova" <sonnova@audiosanatorium,com > wrote in message
> news:fk1gop01vub@news4.newsguy,com ...
>> On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 08:21:17 -0800, Arny Krueger wrote
>> (in article <fk0utt02kv6@news5.newsguy,com >):
>>
>>> "willbill" <trek@worldwide,net > wrote in message
>>> news:fjug6l027gs@news2.newsguy,com
>>>> Steven Sullivan wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Kalman Rubinson <kr4@nyu.edu> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Yeah but what are the odds that there will be pure
>>>>>> music audio discs of any consequence on those media?
>>>>
>>>>> *IF* the music industry is at all interested in selling
>>>>> multichannel music, it would be insane of them NOT to
>>>>> move to these formats, since in a relatively few years,
>>>>
>>>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>>
>>>> afaik, it's already true *now*
>>>
>>>> i don't know the current numbers,
>>>> but my hunch is that BD and HD-DVD
>>>> players already outnumber by at least
>>>> a 2-to-1 factor (maybe even more
>>>> than that)
>>>
>>> Absolutely not true.
>>>
>>> In terms of current sales, or in terms of units in service, there is
>>> simply
>>> no comparison between the number of traditional DVD players, and the
>>> numbers
>>> of Blu Ray and HD-CD players.
>>>
>>> I know of only one Blu Ray player that any of my friends have. No HD-CD
>>> players at all.
>>
>> According to industry sources, HD-DVD players outsold Blu-Ray players in
>> 2007
>> by a more than 1/3. As far as titles are concerned, they are about neck
>> and
>> neck at about 400 titles each. However, There is four times the
>> replication
>> capacity online for HD-DVD as there is for Blu-Ray and Sony has only one
>> replication facility that can make the 50-gig discs. Blu-Ray authoring is
>> more difficult, more expensive and more error prone than is HD-DVD as
>> well.
>>
>> Both Dream Works and Paramount have dropped their support for both formats
>> and have announced that forthwith, all of their HD releases will be HD-DVD
>> only.
>>
>> Allan Bell, Paramount's chief technical officer also said that while
>> Blu-Ray's higher capacity is better suited for raw data, movies need
>> "minutes" and due to the fact that Blu-Ray uses less efficient Codecs such
>> as
>> MPEG2 video and PCM audio, the potential for greater capacity is lost.
>> According to Bell, using VC-1 or AVC a 30-gig HD-DVD can provide up to
>> four
>> hours of HD playing time. If one needs more, one simply adds another disc
>> to
>> the package, and it will still be cheaper and easier than trying to get a
>> 50-gig Blu-Ray disc out of Sony.
>>
>> Add to this the price disparity between Blu-Ray players and HD-DVD players
>> ($499 for Blu-Ray vs $199 for HD-DVD) and the writing is clearly on the
>> wall
>> for the eventual emergence of HD-DVD as the HD format of choice.
>
> Logical as that is, it is an engineering argument, not a marketing argument.
> And so far Sony seems to be further ahead in the marketing arena (must have
> added some replacment staff since their SACD debacle.)
>

I've read your comment over several times and I still can't make much sense
from it. If mine is an engineering argument, then how come the sales figures
and prices? People always go for the cheaper machines and HD-DVD has more
production capacity, and more big movie studios behind it than does Blu-Ray.
But yes, on the engineering side and the marketing side, HD-DVD is ahead. I
have no real preference as I own both a Blu-Ray and an HD-DVD player (two are
still much cheaper than any of the combo units) so whichever wins is a matter
of complete indifference to me.

Re: Will SACD die?

"Sonnova" <sonnova@audiosanatorium,com > wrote in message
news:fk1gop01vub@news4.newsguy,com

> According to industry sources, HD-DVD players outsold
> Blu-Ray players in 2007 by a more than 1/3.

... not including the fraction of 5 million Blu Ray players in PS3s that were
sold in 2007.

> As far as
> titles are concerned, they are about neck and neck at
> about 400 titles each. However, There is four times the
> replication capacity online for HD-DVD as there is for
> Blu-Ray and Sony has only one replication facility that
> can make the 50-gig discs.

http :// www .electronista,com /articles/07/10/24/blu.ray.beating.hd.dvd/

"Sales of Blu-Ray movies in 2007 have nearly crushed those of HD DVD so far,
Reuters reports. According to data from Home Media Research, 2.6 million
Blu-Ray titles were sold between January 1st and September 30th, while only
1.4 million HD DVD titles were bought in the same timeframe."

> Blu-Ray authoring is more
> difficult, more expensive and more error prone than is
> HD-DVD as well.

That is hard to believe, because digital authoring is largely medium
independent.

> Both Dream Works and Paramount have dropped their support
> for both formats and have announced that forthwith, all
> of their HD releases will be HD-DVD only.

Politics.

> Allan Bell, Paramount's chief technical officer also said
> that while Blu-Ray's higher capacity is better suited for
> raw data, movies need "minutes" and due to the fact that
> Blu-Ray uses less efficient Codecs such as MPEG2 video
> and PCM audio, the potential for greater capacity is
> lost.

Wrong. Blu Ray is not limited to MPEG2 video and PCM audio:

http :// www .blu-ray,com /faq/#bluray_video_codecs

What video codecs will Blu-ray support?
MPEG-2 - enhanced for HD, also used for playback of DVDs and HDTV
recordings.
MPEG-4 AVC - part of the MPEG-4 standard also known as H.264 (High
Profile and Main Profile).
SMPTE VC-1 - standard based on Microsoft's Windows Media Video (WMV)
technology.

What audio codecs will Blu-ray support?

Linear PCM (LPCM) - up to 8 channels of uncompressed audio. (mandatory)
Dolby Digital (DD) - format used for DVDs, 5.1-channel surround sound.
(mandatory)
Dolby Digital Plus (DD+) - extension of Dolby Digital, 7.1-channel surround
sound. (optional)
Dolby TrueHD - lossless encoding of up to 8 channels of audio. (optional)
DTS Digital Surround - format used for DVDs, 5.1-channel surround sound.
(mandatory)
DTS-HD High Resolution Audio - extension of DTS, 7.1-channel surround sound.
(optional)
DTS-HD Master Audio - lossless encoding of up to 8 channels of audio.
(optional)

Confirmed by:

http :// en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray_Disc#Codecs
http :// www .videohelp,com /hd

etc.

> According to Bell, using VC-1 or AVC a 30-gig
> HD-DVD can provide up to four hours of HD playing time.

Blu Ray supports both codecs - see above.

> If one needs more, one simply adds another disc to the
> package, and it will still be cheaper and easier than
> trying to get a 50-gig Blu-Ray disc out of Sony.

Wrong.

> Add to this the price disparity between Blu-Ray players
> and HD-DVD players ($499 for Blu-Ray vs $199 for HD-DVD)

This weekend's newspaper flyers show Blu Ray players being sold this weekend
by several retailers at a regular price of $299. Same lowest price as they
are selling HD DVD players.

> and the writing is clearly on the wall for the eventual
> emergence of HD-DVD as the HD format of choice.