| Author |
Thread: What does "DVD-audio" mean here? |
    
John Allen |
| Posted on Saturday, August 30, 2003 - 12:57 am: |
|
Post here mention "DVD-audio" as something exotic and untried, or a narrow, specialist niche like SACD.
You probably already have DVD-audio. A Digital Versatile Disk (DVD) with 5.1 sound is a "DVD-audio". It will play on any DVD-video player.
http://www.51entertainmentgroup.com/dvd.php
http://www.disctronics.co.uk/technology/dvdaudio/dvdaud_intro.htm
A good DVD player (e.g. NAD T532) gives amazing and wonderful 96/24 sound, a whole step ahead of CD (44/16). Plus six channels instead of two, of course.
DVD-audio disks of this sort are readily available. For instance look at the DTS catalogue.
http://www.disctronics.co.uk/technology/dvdaudio/dvdaud_intro.htm
For cheap, stunning classical music disks, look up DVD-audio on www.naxos.com
Of course there are new formats ahead. But 5.1 DVD-audio is here, now.
Or have I misunderstood something? |
|
Relevant Product Info
|
|
John Allen |
| Posted on Saturday, August 30, 2003 - 12:59 am: |
|
Sorry, wrong link pasted in above.
DTS catalogue:-
http://www.dtsentertainment.com/dvdaudio.php |
Anonymous |
| Posted on Saturday, August 30, 2003 - 01:07 am: |
|
http://www.digitalaudioguide.com/faq/dvd-audio/faq_intro.htm
I am not sure any DVD-A disk would play on normal DVD players. Is that right? |
Anonymous |
| Posted on Saturday, August 30, 2003 - 01:13 am: |
|
Can my DVD-Video player, CD player or PC play DVD-Audio discs?
DVD-Video Player
Most DVD-audio discs are compatible with DVD-Video players. To provide compatibility, most DVD-Audio discs are including Dolby Digital (some also include DTS) audio tracks that satisfy the DVD-Video specification. These tracks are playable on DVD-Video players. A DVD album which includes these features will carry the DVD-Audio and DVD-Video logo.
However, a DVD-Video player will not recognize and play the ultra-high fidelity PCM and MLP encoded audio tracks on a DVD-Audio disk. To play these tracks, a DVD player is required that meets the DVD-Audio specification. These players can be identified by the DVD-Audio logo.
CD Player
Unfortunately, a DVD-Audio disc is NOT playable on a CD player.
PC
At present PC's do not support the DVD-Audio standard. Therefore, a PC player will not recognize and play the ultra-high fidelity PCM and MLP encoded audio tracks on a DVD-Audio disk. However, most PC's can recognize and play DVD-Video compatible material on a DVD-Audio disc
http://www.digitalaudioguide.com/faq/dvd-audio/faq_3.htm#Can%20my%20DVD-Video%20player%20or%20my%20CD%20player%20play%20DVD-Audio%20discs? |
John Allen |
| Posted on Saturday, August 30, 2003 - 03:12 am: |
|
Thanks. So we are talking about two different things. Anon seems to be saying you have DVD-audio if the DVD has a PCM audio track and the player will read it.
However, from that link, the DVD-audio multichannel max sampling rate is given as 96 kHz, and the sampling max size 24 bit. Now my NAD T732 does that, on DTS. The effect is incredible. If that does not qualify as DVD-audio then we need a another name.
The same DVD player happily plays DTS or DD on a DVD-audio disk such as:-
Naxos 5.110004 Holst, The Planets etc. Royal Scottish National Orchestra. The label says "DVD AUDIO" and has the logo, also those of DTS and DD. It also says "plays on all DVD-Audio and DVD-Video machines". So I am not sure what I am missing here.
I get the impression that many people do not know their DVD players will already play DVD-Audio disks, and they don't know the sound quality is fantastic.
Any views? |
John Allen |
| Posted on Sunday, August 31, 2003 - 06:00 am: |
|
You can certainly play DVD-Audio disks on a DVD-video player.
I can't say "any" DVD-video player. But if you have one, give it a try. It is worth it.
Anon wrote, or pasted:-
"However, a DVD-Video player will not recognize and play the ultra-high fidelity PCM and MLP encoded audio tracks on a DVD-Audio disk".
Well, mine does exactly that. NADT532. Choose settings/digital audio out/PCM. From the DVD-Audio disk, DD is no longer available (though DTS is), and, instead, the receiver gets stereo though the digital optical interconnect. Great stereo, in fact.
This DVD player meets all the DVD-A spec for multichannel, and fails for two-channel because it delivers at "Only" 96 kHz sampling frequency. According to anon's link (http://www.digitalaudioguide.com/faq/dvd-audio/faq_intro.htm) , you need 192 KHz for two-channel. This is counting angels on pinheads. The industry once wished us to believe there was no possible audible improvement on 44 kHz.
The quote continues, and here I get suspicious:-
"To play these tracks, a DVD player is required that meets the DVD-Audio specification. These players can be identified by the DVD-Audio logo".
This probably means someone wants to license use of the logo.
NAD states in its web site FAQ:-
"Will my DVD player play DVD-Audio? "
"DVD Audio has been delayed because of copyright protection issues. When it arrives, it will not be decodable by any currently available decoder, and in fact will not even allow a digital transfer of data. The only output available from DVD audio will be in a 5.1 analogue format".
There is a big difference between this statement and the stuff on anon's link. Perhaps DVD-A is being hyped in advance of the spec for a player which qualifies for the badge for which someone has an exclusive right to collect a license fee? From NAD's comment it looks like a badged "DVD-Audio" player will need analogue 5.1 out to qualify for a license. When you probably have the processor already in your receiver, this all looks a bit like the industry clearing the way once again to sell us things we already have. If that is what it all turns on, then there is no difference between this con and the SACD con.
Meanwhile, play any DVD-Audio disk on any DVD player such as the T532. What you get is DVD-Audio, badge or not.
And it gives tremendous sound.
The Naxos DVD-As are cheap. Try one. If you hate classical then try any disk with the DVD-A logo and "plays on all DVD players". If your DVD-player doesn't deliver the "high-definition" two-channel PCM track you will still be blown away by the DTS, I guarantee. Surround sound is the big advantage, in fact. The recoding engineers KandA Associates hired by Naxos even make Dolby Digital sound OK. |
confused |
| Posted on Wednesday, September 10, 2003 - 01:32 am: |
|
i'm confused. is it worth it to buy a system with the dvd-audio label on it or not? Some of the midrange home theater systems play dvd-video but not audio...what's up with that? i'd rather not pay ~$350 more for a system with a DVD-audio tag if it's not worth it. |
John A. |
| Posted on Wednesday, September 10, 2003 - 01:57 am: |
|
I wrote too much!
No, confused, it is not worth it. Get a DVD-audio disc (see link), take it along to the shop, and see if the player will play it. If it does, forget about whether the player has the label. DVD-audio is a small market at the moment, and not a selling point for most consumers, so another label probably makes the player's front panel look cluttered. It could be that simple. |
G-Man |
| Posted on Wednesday, September 10, 2003 - 02:50 pm: |
|
DVD-Audio is not DVD-Video. DVD or DVD Video is the regular DVD disc you play on any DVD player. Unless a player says it plays SACD or DVD-Audio--it doesn't. Simple as that. DVD-Audio is the competing audio surround format to the SONY/Philips SACD surround audio format. Hence, you will generally find SACD on most Sony DVD Players and as of yet you will not find DVD-Audio on any Sony players.
DVD Audio will not play on a DVD player that doesn't specify having DVD-Audio on the front panel. Same with SACD.
Panasonic made some DVD-Audio players. Pioneer, Denon, and Yamaha make combination SACD/DVD-Audio compatibility on a couple of players. I am sure there are or will be more. |
|
|
John A. |
| Posted on Wednesday, September 10, 2003 - 03:05 pm: |
|
G-Man:-
"DVD Audio will not play on a DVD player that doesn't specify having DVD-Audio on the front panel"
Not so. I have a player without the badge, and it plays DVD-Audio disks fine. We are going round in circles.
See my post of August 31, above.
Get a DVD-Audio disk and try it. If it works, it works, whether the label on the front panel agrees or not. |
Anonymous |
| Posted on Wednesday, September 10, 2003 - 04:45 pm: |
|
Many DVD-Audio discs are dual-sided, which means they have the DVD-Audio track on one side and regular DVD tracks (DTS or DD) on the opposite side. The regular DVD side will play in all DVD players, but it will not be DVD-Audio quality. |
Anonymous |
| Posted on Wednesday, September 10, 2003 - 11:08 pm: |
|
John A.
The DVD-Audio disk is backward compatible with DVD-Video player as long as the DD and/or DTS logo are labelled on it. In other words, DVD-Audio disk still playable on DVD-Video player but
at lower sonic resulution. |
|
| Posted on Wednesday, September 10, 2003 - 11:38 pm: |
|
That is correct. If your DVD player DOES NOT say DVD audio on the front of it then when the DVD Audio disc plays it is playing the lower resolution dolby digital or DTS track. ONLY A PLAYER THAT SAYS DVD AUDIO ON THE FRONT WILL PLAY THE DVD AUDIO TRACK. |
John A. |
| Posted on Thursday, September 11, 2003 - 12:29 am: |
|
Thank you for the responses. Sorry, again, confused!
Anonymous,
As I said, set an NAD 732 DVD player "Audio out" to PCM and it delivers, by default, a digital stereo signal from a DVD-Audio disk to the receiver, through the TOS or digital audio cable. Select also 96 kHz, and you fall short of the theoretical DVD-Audio spec for two-channel only because that requires 192 kHz.
However: 1. Can anyone hear the difference? I am skeptical. In theory you can get higher frequencies of sound at higher sampling frequencies, but our speakers usually cut off miles below even what 96 kHz can supply. And our ears don't even hear that.
However: 2. The DVD-Audio disks themselves may only have 96 kHz anyway, so then you lose nothing. I have two DVD-Audio disks now that are actually specified at 44 kHz, the same as a CD.
And the big point: the surround sound spec for DVD-Audio is 96 kHz into all 5.1 channels. My player does that; it meets even the theoretical specification for DVD-Audio multi-channel, which is what I want. It is terrific sound. I have just got the Naxos Elgar/Payne Symphony No. 3. Brilliant (the music, too...). And nothing above 44 kHz on the disk itself.
Anonymous (number two?):-
The Naxos DVD-A disks are single-sided. One side contains the two-channel "hi-res" audio; DTS; and Dolby Digitial. The player selects the track according to what you tell it. If you select PCM, as above, it plays "hi-res" stereo as default in place of Dolby Digital as default. DTS is my choice, anyway.
So, another long post. Sorry. Summary:-
1. The player may play DVD-Audio even if it does not have the badge. Why? One conspiracy theory is given above. But maybe the standard is just not agreed, and no DVD player manufacturer wants to break ranks and be embarrassed by subsequent paper comparisons.
2. The real question is not whether the badge is on the player, but whether the badge is on the disk. If it is, try it. If it plays, it plays.
3. DVD-Audio reproduced as above is amazing and wonderful sound. The only real advance in sound (not convenience) over vinyl LP if you want all my prejudices out in the open (No, I haven't heard SACD; sorry, but before buying an licensed player I will first have to overcome my feeling that manufacturers should not lie to customers).
4. DVD-Audio gives the recording engineers a lot to think about. What do they use the surround channels for? There is a Vivaldi DVD-Audio in the Naxos series which has incredible sound (96 kHz, if you can tell). For the good ol' Four Seasons they have the orchestra at the front, then ambient sounds and reflections from the surrounds. Then they switch to a big operation where you hear two orchestras, one in front, one behind. The violin soloist said it is the nearest he has ever heard to the sound he hears whilst performing. Whether that is what you want in your room is a different question! The recording company by the way is here:-
http://www.kaproductions.co.uk/
Final comment. I am a cynical old "serious" music listener, sometime amateur musician, and hi-fi person for 25 years, "Been there, done that". BUT:-
Muti-channel DVD-Audio is utterly amazing sound. Try it. Please.
And tell me if I am wrong. |
John A. |
| Posted on Thursday, September 11, 2003 - 12:41 am: |
|
rydogg sc2:-
You are wrong, sorry. See above.
I don't mind the occasional conspiracy theory. Here is is: you believe what "they" (who...?) want you to believe...
My list of unbadged DVD players that nevertheless play true DVD-Audio is one, the NAD T732.
Any others? |
|
| Posted on Thursday, September 11, 2003 - 12:47 am: |
|
IF THE DVD PLAYER DOES NOT HAVE THE DVD AUDIO LOGO IT DOES NOT PLAY THE DVD AUDIO TRACK. There is no getting around that. DVD audio is a different format than DVD video so the player must be able to pick it up tp play it. You talk like you think the two are interchangeable. THEY ARE NOT AT ALL. Another thing...if you are listening to the music through a digital output then it is not dvd audio ie: optical or coaxial. |
John A. |
| Posted on Thursday, September 11, 2003 - 12:54 am: |
|
Correction.
Sorry, folks, my DVD-Audio-capable DVD player is the NAD T532. There is no T732.
The T532 font panel badges are: Compact Disc; MPEG multichannel; Dolby Digital; DTS; DVD-Video is on the front of the tray.
Everything else correct as stated! |
John A. |
| Posted on Thursday, September 11, 2003 - 01:07 am: |
|
rydogg sc2
Thanks!
"IF THE DVD PLAYER DOES NOT HAVE THE DVD AUDIO LOGO IT DOES NOT PLAY THE DVD AUDIO TRACK"
Wrong. Mine does just that.
"DVD audio is a different format than DVD video..."
Not completely. It requires PCM, 96 kHz, 24 bit, same as DTS.
"... so the player must be able to pick it up tp play it."
Mine does. Honestly. I am not making this up.
"You talk like you think the two are interchangeable.."
Not at all. See my two long posts.
Have you, has anyone, actually TRIED a DVD-Audio disk in their unbadged player?
Get a Naxos (they are cheap) and see. You won't get silence, anyway; the disks are worth it for the DTS and Dolby Digital tracks they also carry. Or go to the DTS catalogue, as I said. |
|
| Posted on Thursday, September 11, 2003 - 01:34 am: |
|
I would like to know how you know yours is playing the DVD Audio track and not the DD or DTS track. |
|
| Posted on Thursday, September 11, 2003 - 01:39 am: |
|
By the way DVD audio is capable of 192khz, not 96khz as you are saying. My Eagles Hotel California DVD-Audio disk has a stereo 192khz track. |
John A. |
| Posted on Thursday, September 11, 2003 - 05:19 am: |
|
Yes, a DVD-audio disk can contain two-channel audio tracks up to 192 kHz. But it does not have to.
The surround sound spec for DVD-Audio Disks is on Anonymous's link of August 10
List DVD-Audio Disk spec, then
-"Will the NAD T532 play it?"
Audio format: PCM
-YES
Sample size:12, 16, 20, or 24 bits
-YES
Sampling frequency for two-channel, per channel:
44.1, 88.2, 176.4KHz or 48, 96, 192KHz
-YES (except 176.4 and 192 kHz are not possible BUT THEY ARE NOT USED ON THE DVD-audio disks I have, either).
Sampling frequency for multichannel, per channel:
44.1, 88.2KHz or 48, 96KHz
-YES
So an unbadged NAD T532 meets the specification to play a DVD-Audio disk.
Does it really do it? -YES. How do you get it? You choose "Digitial Audio Out" setting "PCM".
Note also that the 24bit/96 kHz spec for DTS is identical to the HIGHEST multichannel DVD-audio spec.
So you will not lose anything if you play a multi-format combined DVD-audio/DVD-video disk for audio only using DTS.
To comment on Warner Bros Hotel California I would need to see the spec on the disk and try it. I will see if I can get one, and report back.
For Hotel Caifornia, I find from a review site:-
This disc was mixed and mastered especially for DVD-Audio and plays only on players with a DVD logo.
But then the Product Information continues:-
Audio:
ENGLISH: Dolby Digital 5.1
ENGLISH: PCM 5.1
ENGLISH: PCM Stereo
ENGLISH: DTS 5.1
The product information should mean Hotel California will play on any DVD-player with Dolby Digital and DTS, and "....plays only on...." is wrong. Please try it, and let me know. If it does not play, there is some code to stop it, like the DVD "regionalisation" code - it is NOT a question of not meeting high-res sound requirements.
The product info I fond does not give the sampling frequency used. From your comments, there is clearly a 192 kHz stereo track.
"PCM 5.1" is missing from my player, but DTS IS PCM, so it may just be a question of the compression algorithm used.
rydogg sc2, please try Hotel California, a DVD-Audio disk, on a DVD-video player. Will it play? Y/N If N, why the DD and DTS spec?
Then try the PCM 192 kHz stereo track at 96 kHz and see if there is any difference you can hear.
Finally, it is in the interests of the DVD-Audio manufacturer (Warner; Naxos; whatever) to make the disk playable on as many machines as possible. Whereas, it is in the interests of SOME player manufacturers to make customers believe they can play certain disks (DVD-A) not playable on other machines. They can charge a premium for nothing more than a badge whose copyright they own.
What we should all be very careful of is the combination of player manufacturer AND disc manufacturer. They are in a position to con the consumer with that badge. And Sony/Philips are the guys who brought us SACD...
Thanks again.
I keep worrying about "confused". I am sure he/she has stopped reading.
Best. |
John A. |
| Posted on Thursday, September 11, 2003 - 10:06 am: |
|
Confused, and others:-
Eagles - Hotel California
London Mozart Players; David Juritz - Vivaldi: The Four Seasons
Both will be play on any DVD player. |
|
| Posted on Thursday, September 11, 2003 - 11:11 am: |
|
of course they will play on any dvd player! It had a dolby digital track. Your dvd player automatically chooses the DD track. Are you listening to your DVD Audio disk through a digital output on your DVD player?toslink optical or coaxial) |
John A. |
| Posted on Thursday, September 11, 2003 - 02:02 pm: |
|
rydogg c2:-
Yes, I can do that. With PCM for audio out. The receiver detects a digital stereo signal from the digital interconnect, not DD (it is not PCM). You can switch the receiver from stereo to DTS (which is PCM) and back on the fly, but not to DD.
"Hotel California" is a DVD-Audio disk. It plays on a DVD player that has no DVD-Audio badge. Therefore, it is wrong for the review site to say:-
"This disc was mixed and mastered especially for DVD-Audio and plays only on players with a DVD logo".
You wrote "of course they will play on any dvd player!". Why "of course"? It sure ain't obvious to that reviewer, for a start..
So my question: "What does DVD-Audio mean here?"
Common sense would say "You have DVD-Audio if you can play a DVD-Audio disk". Or am I missing something? |
Anonymous |
| Posted on Friday, September 12, 2003 - 02:49 am: |
|
John
Do your homework,... go to DVD-Audio website and
answer is there. Cheers. |
|
| Posted on Friday, September 12, 2003 - 03:39 am: |
|
You do not understand what DVD-Audio is and I am bored with trying to explain it it you when you already think you know everything. I will finish by saying that DVD-Audio is not simply audio on a DVD...it is a different format. Go on the internet and read up on it before you come to these crazy judgements and tell me I am wrong. DVD audio CAN NOT be transmitted through an optical or coaxial digital connection. It is impossible due to the fact that those types of transmission can not handle the amount of data that DVD-Audio can produce. |
John A. |
| Posted on Friday, September 12, 2003 - 11:16 am: |
|
DVD Audio is a pdf file (804 kb) of a 23-page document describing DVD-Audio and SACD. It is from a disc manufacturer, Delux Global Media Services Ltd., and dated 30 July 2003.
From page 4:-
DVD-Audio discs offer high quality surround sound using a DVD-Audio player and suitable amplifier/speakers. When played in a DVD-Video player the same surround sound experience can be obtained with some loss in quality, which most consumers may not notice.
So "will not play" is wrong.
I dug into specifications (Sept 11) because I was interested to know about "...with some loss in quality, which most consumers may not notice...". The quality is outstanding. No surprise: for multichannel, my player/receiver specification is equal to the best DVD-Audio disc specification as regards audio format (PCM), sample size (24 bit) and sampling frequency (96 kHz). There is something called Meridian Lossless Packaging (MLP) which badged DVD-Audio players have and I don't. It is an alternative to DTS and DD compression, and not required as part of the strict DVD-A specification according to the DVD-Audio FAQ linked by Anonymous on August 30. Linear PCM travels from my player to the receiver through an optical cable, true, and dedicated DVD-A players now have only analogue out. But there is talk of Firewire for higher data transfer speeds. If the DACs are in the receiver and not the player, so what?
I am interested to know what I am missing.
The bottom line is this: DVD-Video players play DVD-Audio discs.
It is that simple.
Try it and see. |
G-Man |
| Posted on Friday, September 12, 2003 - 12:15 pm: |
|
Yes, a DVD player without DVD-Audio will play the disc, with some caveats.
"DVD-Audio discs offer high quality surround sound using a DVD-Audio player and suitable amplifier/speakers. When played in a DVD-Video player the same surround sound experience can be obtained with some loss in quality, which most consumers may not notice. "
The operative word is some loss in quality. If you don't care about a loss in quality which you may or may not notice ---fine.
I care about it and I presume most people that enjoy listening carefully to music want the best they can afford.
If you don't want to buy a DVD player with specified DVD-Audio---fine. But as long as there is a distinct and measurable difference I will be far more comfortable paying for a player that has the chips for DVD-Audio and/or SACD, as I like listening to surround music that is properly encoded. I have a number of DVD-Audio discs such as:"Tiger Lily" by Natalie Merchant, Steely Dan, and 8 others.
I can definitely hear a difference when I play these discs through my Pioneer Elite 47ti with SACD/DVD-Audio player and then switch out the player to an older Sony player that doesn't support this format. The depth, richness, and finely placed directionality are mostly absent. It doesn't sound bad--but it doesn't sound as good.
That said, there aren't many well-engineered DVD-Audio discs yet. Most recording engineers aren't familiar enough with the format presently--but I am sure the engineers will catch up to the differences in recording a straight CD and a DVD-Audio disc with distinct multi-channels. There is a big learning curve in getting the balance right. It is like the first CD's were mostly worse than their analogue LP relatives. That hasn't been the case for a long time now. Engineers now know that they don't have to compress the range in digital recording like they did with analogue recording along with different miking techniques. |
Jean |
| Posted on Friday, September 12, 2003 - 12:16 pm: |
|
John,
Thanks for posting the pdf link, it makes things clear. Pages 13-15 are particularly interesting, and page 17 gives the conclusion to this discussion:
"Alternative coding formats
In addition to PCM audio, other optional audio formats are possible including:
• Dolby Digital (AC-3), which is the audio encoding format to accompany the video on a DVD-Audio disc
• MPEG-1 stereo or MPEG-2 multi-channel audio
• Others such as DTS, SDDS etc
Audio using any of these coding formats must be in addition to not instead of the normal PCM audio on a DVD-Audio disc."
So... most DVD Audio disk producers decide to sell DVD Audio disks on which the same tunes are coded not only in *one* of the *numerous* DVD Audio formats (see all sampling rates, numbers of channels, and loss-less encoding algorithms), but also in additional formats (such as the DTS-encoded format, which is *not* lossless).
The catch is that the additional formats such as DTS can end up giving the same quality as the lossless DVD Audio format...
Now I guess that the redundant formats will disappear progressively so that a DVD Audio will ultimately bear only the DVD Audio signal in the highest quality (192kHz/24bits in stereo, and 96kHz/24bits in 6-channel).
Hope *I* got it right and I am not confusing everyone ;-)
Jean. |
|
| Posted on Friday, September 12, 2003 - 12:35 pm: |
|
That is what I have been saying all along John. THe disc will not play the DVD Audio track but it will play the Dolby Digital and or DTS multichannel track. So technically you are not listening to dvd audio...you are listening to a dolby digital or DTS track of the DVD audio mix on the DVD audio disc. This track will not sound as good im most cases due to it being recorded in a "lossy" format. |
John A. |
| Posted on Friday, September 19, 2003 - 07:20 am: |
|
G-Man, Jean, Rydogg:-
THANKS.
I have learned something from all this.
G-Man, I, too, care about sound quality. You write "I care about it and I presume most people that enjoy listening carefully to music want the best they can afford". That's right, but, in the real world, normal people have to ask "Does it make a difference? Is it worth it?" By the way, I think you guys in the US (correct?) are way ahead with these formats and availability of the technology, so please be patient. But it is interesting that UK recording engineers have taken it on. They seem to have almost no home market.
Having said that, "What do we mean by DVD-Audio?" is my original question. At one level you have DVD-Audio if you close your eyes, or switch off the TV. At the other end you only have DVD-Audio with the capability for 96/24 surround sound or 192/24 stereo, all with lossless packing and PCM format. And the analogue signals going to the power amp through cables (here I am still suspicious...).
All I want to repeat is that anyone with a DVD-Video player can confidently buy a DVD-Audio disc; it will play.
Few people seem to know that. And, at that level, they have DVD-Audio and probably don't know it.
G-Man, I accept your opinions, always good and informed on these threads, and I thank you. Here you can make the subjective comparison I can't. But let me say my breath is almost taken taken away by some of the DTS tracks I have on DVD-Audio discs. If the PCM surround plus MLP track really improves on that, then I will have to try it, and think again. But looking at the spec (both 96/24 and PCM, remember), I cannot see how it is done. I know I cannot hear above 12 kHz. I also know my speakers roll off at 20 kHz. And the ears and the speakers are not so bad. Whether I get an accurate sound waveform above 90 kHz is like lying awake worrying about continental drift. I am not going to re-mortgage the house to please passing bats.
Let me try to explain a perspective. It will take some more paragraphs. I can just remember stereo coming in to replace mono: the present step to surround sound is that big, in my view.
Now there were audiophiles in the 1960s who insisted mono was always better value: they would argue you should get the best single channel amp and one great speaker, instead of compromising with weaker components to get the illusion of separation of sound sources at the expense of sound quality. In mono, they might say, you will get full frequency response, accurate and neutral sound, all for the same money, much better. (A famous mono evangelist was Phil Spector; anyone remember that name, he knew some things...).
And, you know, the LP manufacturers helped the mono argument, by producing gimmicks like trains (steam of course) chuffing across the sound stage. Even music: listen to early Pink Floyd or similar, when stereo was a novelty, and they have ping-pong stereo effect like kids with a new toy - that never happened in performance. Then the consumer electronics people produced things like stereo radiograms with hopeless frequency response, and crap speakers two feet apart in rattling cabinets and facing the wrong way. So stereo took years to get going and be accepted by people who loved high quality sound.
I think we are at about that same stage now with surround sound. The average music lover has a good case for thinking it is all an expensive gimmick, for rich kids with no taste, and probably spending someone else's money. They might also think stereo is the benchmark, as it always was, and if you truly love movies you should go to the cinema....
The "average music lover" is wrong about the sound. That is really what I want to say. And if he/she does not yet have a "true" DVD-Audio player, never mind. Get a DVD-Audio disc, put it in your home theatre system, and listen carefully...
Best to all.
Sorry this is so long. |
Anonymous |
| Posted on Friday, September 19, 2003 - 08:43 am: |
|
Het John A.,
Will a NAD T532 play DVD-Audio discs? I have an old 2 channel receiver at this point but plan on upgrading soon.
Thanks |
G-Man |
| Posted on Friday, September 19, 2003 - 10:58 am: |
|
A DVD-Audio DVD player will play it as encoded. A regular DVD player will play it with some loss (as it doesn't have the same encoding)--depending on the person this may or may not be audible. As long as your NAD can play DVD's in surround format it will not matter, except if it or your DVD player has no (or poor) bass management. As the DVD-Audio format gets converted to Analogue and doesn't remain in the digital realm (as DVD-Video stays in the digital realm), you need bass management to adjust your subwoofer. If you have full range speakers and no subwoofer--you don't have to worry. But then you'd need full range speakers all the way around--or you would need to cut off the bass on your surrounds at about 80 Hz.
Of course, you could always get off your chair and adjust the subwoofer, but this is far from an ideal approach. And you would have to reset it back to where it was before after you have alterred it.
But John A. has a good point. Very few recording engineers have mastered the DVD-Audio technique in recording and there isn't a lot of software out there now. Who knows if DVD-Audio or SACD will ever catch on in a bigtime way.
That said--I own a Pioneer Elite universal player (47ti) hooked up to my Pioneer Elite 49txi and downstairs a Denon 2900 universal player hooked up to Aragon separates. The Denon has a better chipset (afterall it is brand new), but the Pioneer has advantages when hooked via its firewire cable to the 49txi. It automatically adjusts for SACD and DVD-Audio which is a huge convenience. I imagine the next generation Pioneer Elite that replaces the 47ti which fix any chroma problems it has now. They aren't severe by any means, but they don't measure as good as the Denons and in a pure white shot you can notice a difference. You would never notice the difference without a good HDTV. |
John A. |
| Posted on Friday, September 19, 2003 - 11:15 am: |
|
Anonymous. It will play DVD-Audio discs. Mine does. Try it! Please confirm!
I assume your system works with DVD-video discs, and you are using an analogue two-channel output, as with a CD player.
If, instead, you want digital audio out, choose settings/digital audio out/PCM and then 96 kHz. You will get a digital stereo audio feed to the processor in the receiver (if it has one), provided of course you connect with Digital cable co-ax/optical. Contrary to my guess on Aug 31, I now think this signal is NOT the "true" DVD-Audio track, but the stereo downmix of Dolby Digital which the player puts through DACs to give analogue output for people without 5.1, Anyone know? If so, this may just be another way of getting what you are hearing already. But it will play OK. If you still worry, choose a disc which says "Plays on any DVD player". I bought some, and discovered all this by accident. |
G-Man |
| Posted on Friday, September 19, 2003 - 11:20 am: |
|
To possibly be more straightforward--While DVD-Audio discs contain high-resolution DVD-A audio, they generally also have lower resolution audio that is playable on most DVD-Video players. This allows most people with DVD-Video players to experience the surround sound audio without owning a DVD-A/V (DVD-Audio/Video) player.
Other extra features that are often included on the DVD-Audio disc often are not available to those without a DVD-Audio player. That was true when I played a Natalie Merchant "Tiger Lily" DVD-Audio disc on an older SONY DVD player (which I have since given to my niece), but when I switched out to the Pioneer DVD-A/SACD 47ti player, all the sound appeared in full richness and the extras became apparent--such as web links, lyrics--etc.
All the above being said---unless you love the new technology and have the extra cash to buy a new DVD player, I wouldn't lose sleep over not owning a DVD-Audio player. It is nowhere near the dramatic difference between stereo listening and surround listening on a CD played back with Dolby Prologic II. Not that I don't prefer the DVD-Audio, but many DVD-A discs are re-makes of CD's that were matrixed into DVD-A. I only have 3 discs that were engineered for DVD-A from the start. These are far superior and are a big difference.
Let's face it. So far the "BIG DEAL" with the surround format resides mainly in the theatre (movie) experience with the coinciding audio track. It is hard to say what will become of DVD-A and SACD.
I would only get a universal player if I was buying a new player and comfortably had the money for it. I wouldn't tell anyone that remotely has money issues to buy it. |
John A. |
| Posted on Friday, September 19, 2003 - 11:50 am: |
|
G-Man. Again, thanks. Yes, firewire will send data fast enough. I cannot see why manufacturers don't just make a DD/DTS/PCM-MLP DVD player, and a receiver with a processor to decode all three formats. This is where I get suspicious the DVD-Audio player specification is partly a marketing ploy to sell us stuff all over again.
Your recommendation to Anon is right. I play DTS in full-channel for 5.1 (all speakers assumed large) plus subwoofer. DTS is designed to work that way. The sound is really tremendous. With speakers small it is still good, but I think I hear the crossover, and can then locate the sub in the room.
You might be interested to try an A/B comparison of DTS with DVD-A through the same full-range system, using the same fine components. I find it hard to believe the data packaging technique makes a dramatic difference. DTS claim their system produces no audible losses. DD is different. I do believe and hear for myself the DD compression system degrades the sound - a lot.
I have looked again at the DVD-A discs I have. The Elgar Symphony 3 is recorded at 192 kHz, but presented on the disc at 44 kHz. The DTS sound is extraordinary, honestly. Since 44 kHz is the same sampling frequency as CD, I assume the 24-bit is doing it. But I also think those recording engineers know exactly what they are doing with mikes etc. - look at the K&A Productions link (my post Sept 11).
BTW content is taste and not the issue (I like most music), but they (Naxos and K&A) have Vaughan Williams Sea Symphony lined up for issue in Sept. That is a really massive choral and orchestral work, full of huge and beautiful sounds. If the opening brass fanfare and choral entry doesn't lift you out of your seat like a great wave, the engineers will have screwed up badly. That one was just made for surround. |
Anonymous |
| Posted on Monday, November 17, 2003 - 09:44 am: |
|
Sorry, John A., but you simply (still) didn't do your homework...
DVD Audio is LPCM with MLP (loss-less compression) compared with DD (AC3) and DTS 'lossy' compression that limits data rates per second to way less than DVD Audio bit rates (DD's data rate is perhaps as low a 7% of DVD Audio)...
For DVD Video - Audio, sampling rates and the resulting data rates are the result of either DD or DTS compression...
For DVD Audio the full sampling AND data rates use MLP lossless compression.
The difference should be like hearing the difference between a MP3 128kbps "CD Quality" sample compared to an uncompressed .wav 16 bit 44.1 kHz sample - if you can't 'hear' the difference then you either have a poor sound system/speakers or poor discrimination with you hearing I'm afraid...
The difference between 24 bit 48kHz samples is staggering compared to 'CD' quality - fact is not all sound systems can accurately reproduce the 24 bit 96kHz (not to mention 192kHz) samples of DVD audio.
Finally - yes, DVD Audio disks DO contain either a DD or DTS sample for play back/compatibility with DVD Video Players...
The other thing to take note of is that the specs for DVD Video players only require them to down sample the audio to 16 bit 48kHz! Not all DVD Video players will resolve and output the full sampling rate provided to them! |
Anonymous |
| Posted on Monday, November 17, 2003 - 10:17 am: |
|
BTW - this link might help in understanding the DVD Audio 'fruits'...
Unfortunately the graphics are poor (hey, they're poorly compressed .PDF's - seems to go in line with poor 'video'!)...
http://www.ambisonic.net/pdf/dvda.pdf |
John A. |
| Posted on Monday, November 17, 2003 - 04:39 pm: |
|
Anonymous,
Thanks. I did some homework on this, and learned some things from this thread.
The DVD Audio link (Sept 12) says MLP is allowed, but not required, for the DVD-A format. They seem to know what they are talking about, they are disc manufacturers.
If you have a sound system that will reproduce 5.1 at 24 bit and 96 kHz, then any audible difference between DTS and DVD-A (with or without MLP) must be down to the "lossy" compression of DTS, assuming the two contain the same recording mix (SACDs sound different to what you are used to because the mix is different - it is seems to be impossible to make an honest A/B conparison). I have not been able to listen to make the DVD-A/DVD-V(DTS) comparison, but I hope to. All I am saying is I need some convincing any difference will be audible; the DTS is so good already. Saying the difference is there but you can't hear it may get people to upgrade their speakers, but most people are stone deaf beyond 12 kHz, anyway. Most speakers will already go to 20 kHz. You can't upgrade your ears.
My main message is people should not hesitate to get a DVD-A disc if they are interested; their DVD-V players will play any current DVD-A disc. What I learned on this thread is that they will not play the DVD-A track, only the sound on the DVD-V track. But all DVD-A discs currently available have a DVD-V track, and DTS, at least, is really something - miles ahead of stereo.
Anonymous 10:17 am,
Thanks, also. That interesting pdf from 1999 predicts that MLP is "at the heart of" DVD-A in the "soon forthcoming" agreed DVD-A format. The document of 30 July 2003 from Delux Global Media Services Ltd. (also see Sept 12) says otherwise.
I still think it is worth asking "What do we mean by 'DVD-Audio'?", even the industry seem to be in some disagreement.
The normal user will probably think DVD-Audio is Audio on a DVD. That would seem to be a common sense point of view.
BTW The Sea Symphony release was delayed until November; mine on order. I recently nominated an even more esoteric disc on
http://www.ecoustics.com/bbs/messages/1/4745.html
It must surely be the ultimate surround test disc so far, if closeness of approach to an original sound is what we are looking for. |
John A. |
| Posted on Saturday, December 06, 2003 - 10:53 am: |
|
Again I thank G-Man and others for the education on this thread. Here are my first audio impressions of the disc I plugged on November 19. It makes most things clear to me. And I finally wish to upgrade. Preferably everything.
My high prior expectations on What's the best dvd to test out my new system? are exceeded by this disc. There is something on the content on that thread, too, but it is off topic. I have learned some things about the limitations of my system, just from this disc.
From the cover:-
CORO CORDVD1
Thomas Tallis
Spem in Alium
The Sixteen
Side 1: DVD-Video (audio tracks and video interviews)
Dolby Digital 4.0 Surround Sound
DTS 4.0 Surround Sound
Video interviews, extra features
Side 2: DVD-Audio (High definition audio)
96 kHz 24 Bit 4 Channel Surround Sound
96 kHz 24 Bit 2 Channel Stereo.
My comments, relating to discussions on this thread.
1. One disc; two sides. One side is DVD-V; the other side is DVD-A. My player tries side 2 for two seconds, then goes back to the start, and stays in that loop indefinitely. No sound there. Even with PCM. As others would predict, and tried to explain, I am not hearing DVD-A.
2. No sub. The right decision by the engineers. Nevertheless my receiver gives an LFE channel signal in Dolby Digital, as in Naxos Vivaldi. This is a fault. The DSP is duplicating low frequencies intended for the main channels. It doesn't do so with DTS. This may be one reason why I dislike DD so much. I will maybe give it another chance when I get the fault fixed/another system.
3. Even allowing for DD "megabass", DTS beats Dolby Digital hands down. You would have to be deaf not to hear it. Some tracks have instruments plus voices. You can hear that in DTS, and hear which is which.
4. No centre channel. Also the right decision by the engineers. My system gets that right, both formats. The original source on the main track was 40 human voices, arranged in a circle around the listener, and divided into 8 choirs of 5. What could they possibly have put into the centre channel?
5. Listening position. You have to be right in the middle, the same distance from each of the four speakers. Move an inch and the whole sound field changes. That is not easy listening.
6. I heard a radio review of this disc last weekend. The reviewer said it was OK, but she had previously heard a genuine 40-channel surround recording, by the same people of the same piece, in The Whitechapel Gallery, London. I cannot find more on the net. I am currently looking for a 40.1 receiver.... and wondering where to put the speakers....
7. The recording. All Saints Church, Tooting, well-known location. How did they eliminate traffic noise? Single, named producer; single, named sound engineer. No company. If the Sixteen did it themselves, well... Digital Mastering: Floating Earth. DVD authoring: Freehand (as for Naxos).
8. I hope one day to hear Side 2. This must be the acid test.
9. MLP? It doesn't say. I doubt if they need any compression at all; they have spread the programme over two sides. Is this unusual? Seems like common sense.
10. It is also available as a separate SACD. Also must be the acid test.
Can anyone suggest a suitable system?
Still no Vaughan Williams. Our local dealer says Naxos says there is an unexpectedly high demand for its DVD-As.
Thanks for reading. |
New member Username: John_a
Post Number: 50
Registered: 12-2003
|
| Posted on Tuesday, December 30, 2003 - 12:01 pm: |
|
rygdogg wrote, emphatically, on Sept 12:
DVD audio CAN NOT be transmitted through an optical or coaxial digital connection. It is impossible due to the fact that those types of transmission can not handle the amount of data that DVD-Audio can produce.
Many people seem to accept this, I am sure in good faith. Can anyone supply an industry source?
I have voiced my doubts: I cannot see a bandwidth issue for any digital audio, whether over fibre-optic or electrical cables. Fibre optics are cheap and can handle GHz frequencies. Most receivers have pretty good DACs. So why can't we just buy a DVD-V/DVD-A receiver, and use the same TOS-link? PCM is PCM, and you could build MLP unpacking into the receiver's DSP.
To me, obligatory analogue interconnects for DVD-A suggest protectionism, and a cosy agreement between manufacturers and whoever licenses use of the DVD-A badge for electronics and discs.
Now I read the blurb for the NAD's first DVD-A, the T533 It states:-
Unlike all other digital formats, DVD-A can only be output as an analogue signal, due to Digital Rights Management agreements required by the format.
So I am not being paranoid about this issue!
And thanks to NAD for refreshing lack of BS.
Anyone know anything about "Digital Rights Management agreements"?
One view I have read here is that cable manufacturers exert a lot of influence, and of course they would have a lot to gain by the restriction, selling loads of new interconnects. But cables are cheap, and there is real competition between the manufacturers. So I don't see how cable makers could have enough clout, or even act together.
The hardware manufacturers themselves would make just as much from people buying new receivers as from them buying new players - probably more.
So what's this all about?
Any ideas? |
Jesse D Unregistered guest |
| Posted on Tuesday, December 30, 2003 - 02:22 pm: |
|
John A:
The problem is definitely not bandwidth. The lack of digital outs is purely because the recording industry thinks that we're all pirates. The upcoming super high end Pioneer DVD player will output the actual digital signal over firewire but to actually use that you pretty much have to hook it up to their super high end receiver (~ $4k?). |
New member Username: John_a
Post Number: 51
Registered: 12-2003
|
| Posted on Wednesday, December 31, 2003 - 02:07 am: |
|
Jesse,
Thanks. Many people believe strongly the problem is bandwidth. I don't know where they got the idea. Some people talk also of the superiority of analogue interconnects over digital for this "high-end" format: total confusion!
Firewire is now cheap, in mass-market digital video cameras - also, I have been playing with an Apple iPod recently and it includes firewire connection to the computer.
So why is firewire exotic and "high-end" in the context of audio?
As regards us all being potential pirates, I thought the copy protection in DVDs was strong, and do not see how analogue output helps. A serious pirate would simply get an A-to-D converter and make his own digital master. If a mass-producer of DVDs cannot produce a quality product that competes and has a final cost that compares favourably with an inferior pirated copy, I wonder how they stay in business in the first place. It all seems like protectionism to me. With technical BS to disguise the fact. At least NAD is doesn't do BS...
PS I saw a Thai, pirated copy of Pirates of the Caribbean recently. It was bl**dy awful. The video had obviously been made from a digital camcorder pointed at a screen: the on-screen auto-balance indicator displayed something every time the contrast changed, the colour and contrast was rubbish, and the frame rate was sampling the movie frame rate, so all movement seemed to occur in a series of jerks, like early, silent cinema. The sound was OK (DTS). Presumably whoever made it had worked out how to copy the audio track digitally, or done their own A-to-D | |
