Is DVD-Audio or Super Audio CD (SACD) In Your Future?
 by Alan Lofft, (bio), Axiom Audio When you look at the excitement that Dolby Digital and dts 5.1-channel soundtracks from DVDs can generate played over a good home theater system, it's not surprising that Sony/Philips and the DVD developers decided that an upgraded multichannel audio format was overdue. After all, the CD is stereo, limited to two channels. And despite Sony's original claim, in 1983, of CD's "Perfect Sound Forever," complaints have surfaced over the years about certain limitations in the CD's technical standards. For example, some audiophiles grumbled about the 44.1-kHz CD sampling frequency, which limits its high-frequency response to 22 kHz (the assumption being that we humans can hear beyond 22 kHz, a dubious claim at best and not supported by any scientific data). Others complained that the CD's 16-bit digital "words" (which yield 6 dB of dynamic range for each bit, for a total of 96 dB), don't capture the dynamic range of human hearing, which can extend to 130 dB or higher. Consumer electronics is nothing if not a history of overcoming technical challenges, so the digital engineers got busy and emerged from their respective camps with two new multichannel formats: DVD-Audio and Super Audio CD (SACD), each of which boasts technical standards beyond reproach. DVD-Audio lets recording producers choose any of several sampling rates and word sizes: 44.1, 48, 88.2, 96, 176.4 or 192 kHz, coupled with 16-, 20- or 24-bit words. By using Meridian Lossless Packing (MLP), a "lossless" compression algorithm that does not discard data (it's like zipping a PC file or stuffing a Mac file), all DVD-A's can deliver six full-bandwidth audio channels sampled at 96 kHz with 24-bit words. Do the math and you'll find that yields an upper frequency limit of 48 kHz (high enough for your family dog, cat or bat), and a dynamic range of 144 dB (24 x 6 dB = 144 dB). But (and this is a big "but"), can you play it on your CD player? Nope, you cannot. It will only play on a new DVD player that has a DVD-Audio decoder. And because there are currently 500 million CD players worldwide, that may be a huge impediment to the success of DVD-Audio. However, the good news is that virtually all DVD-Audio discs carry a duplicate Dolby Digital 5.1-channel mix, which means that DVD-A's will play on any DVD player. This will let you sample multichannel music through your existing DVD player and Dolby Digital/DTS A/V receiver, albeit without the 96-kHz sampling rates and 24-bit word lengths that DVD-Audio delivers. What about Sony's Super Audio CD (SACD)? Launched by Sony and Philips in 1999, SACD uses Direct Stream Digital (DSD), a 1-bit system with a sampling rate of 2.8 million times a second, about 64 times the sampling rate of conventional CDs. This 2.8-MHz rate yields a frequency response of 1 Hz to 100 kHz, far beyond the response limits of human hearing, and a 120-dB dynamic range that is roughly equivalent to our ears' dynamic range. SACD is now capable of delivering six full-bandwidth DSD channels that encompass those extraordinary standards. But can you play SACD on a CD player? Yes--and no. An SACD isn't playable on a standard CD player unless it's a hybrid two-layer disc with a CD-compatible second layer. And then you'll only hear it in stereo with CD standards. Oddly, most of Sony Music's own SACD releases are not hybrid discs, and will play only in an SACD machine. But some other labels are now releasing hybrid SACDs, and many of those do take advantage of SACD's multichannel capabilities. As to how the two formats sound, both are superb; neither has "better" sound than the other, based on my listening tests. Is either better than CD sound or Dolby Digital 5.1? So far, in my judgment the differences are a matter of nuances. It's not dramatic. Of course, when the musical multichannel mix of an album is done with restraint and invention, the multiple channels can be a huge enhancement, as anyone experienced with Dolby Digital 5.1 can attest. But whether consumers will go for a new format that is essentially high-resolution audio (with a few video extras tossed in) remains to be seen. I've left the philosophical/musical controversy of whether listeners want to feel in the middle of a band, with instruments mixed to the sides and rear, or prefer the perspective of the band and performers in front, for another time. Ultimately, the survival of DVD-A or SACD may be decided by simple economies of scale. Pioneer Electronics has introduced the Elite DV-45A, a Universal DVD-Video/DVD-Audio/SACD player that plays everything, even CD-Rs and CD-RWs recorded with MP3 files. Moreover, it has progressive-scan component-video outputs, one of the hottest new features to look for on DVD players. The suggested retail is $700 US, a big reduction from last year's universal player that was very expensive. And at a budget level ($200 or less), both Pioneer and Samsung have Universal DVD players that play everything, including SACD and DVD-Audio. If you'd like a taste of one of the new multichannel audio discs, try the SACD New Favorite, from Alison Kraus & Union Station (Rounder), which mixes the dobro guitar in front and rear channels with Kraus's vocals in all three front channels. A definite DVD-Audio winner is Buena Vista Social Club (World Circuit/Nonesuch), which has an expansive mix with the musicians surrounding the listener. And to get an idea of what an older album remixed for a new format (in this case, DVD-A), check out Neil Young's Harvest which also places the musicians around the listener, with reflections from surrounding hills included as ambience on the electric cuts, which were originally recorded in a barn.  |
||||
| Relevant Product Info | ||||
| Author | Comments | |||
     RedFalcon Unregistered guest |
I've just wanted to say that this is a very interesting article. I've never heard before about SACD. Also worth to remember is a part about DVD. But what about soundcards like Sound Blaster AUDIGY 2? With their 24bit/192KHz/6.1 or 7.1 DACs? They are great for listening to DVD-A on PC. I really would like to see maybie a next version of this article also covering sound cards for decoding DVD-A. |
|||
|
lafonta Unregistered guest |
I just tried to play Pink Floyd's remastered Dark Side of the Moon on a DVD player and I get an Error message. I did get it to play once, but I can't get it to go again. It does play on a cheap boombox style CD player. WHAT'S UP. |
|||
|
Anonymous |
@Iafonta Dark Side of the Moon is an SA-CD title. So the cheap CD player plays the CD layer from this hybrid disc. The DVD player is apparently confused because it is unable to play the SA-CD layer, and is unable to fall back to playing the CD layer. |
|||
|
Fazal Majid Unregistered guest |
SACD is the clear leader for classical music, which is the only genre where the hi-def formats have even a passing chance (the popularity of lousy lossy formats like MP3, AAC and WMA clearly shows the general public doesn't really care about quality). The DV-45A is old news - I've had one for over a year, and have decommissioned it for the much better Marantz SA-8260 (which doesn't play DVD-A, but I have two DVD-A vs. 70 SACDs). |
|||
|
Unregistered guest |
This article is posted too late. About 2 years too late. Well maybe "it is never too late". However at this point in time Sony seems to be abandoning SACD and DVD-A releases have also dwindled. Most DVD-A releases these days are released as DualDiscs and often you don't even know if there is an DVD-A track on there. I have over 300 SACD and DVD-A titles and have owned a Pioneer 45a since it came out over a year ago. There have been tons of universal players since that. You are correct about there not being much difference in the formats on well mixed titles. Both when well done are miles above CD's. However, there just seems to be something about the DSD (SACD) noiseshaping that lends itself to jazz and classical while PPCM/LPCM (DVD-A) seems to do better with rock. Anyway, more articles should have been written about these formats a few years back when they were starting out because at this point it is too little too late I fear. The focus is now on blu-ray and the question there is whether there will be DVD-A track to go with the hi-def video or whether DTS/DOLBY 5.1 will continue as the preferred audio format. SACD will not factor into blu-ray and SACD is virtually dead at this point other than for the odd release from Universal and other fringe audiophile labels like Telarc and Concord. People just didn't care. They wanted crappy MP3's instead. |
|||
|
New member Username: PetermjBirkerød Denmark Post Number: 1 Registered: Oct-04 |
Definitely the market doesn't seem to care about high-definition audio. I think the popularity of iTunes and other download services, that only offer music in MP3- and other lossy formats proves the point. I rarely listen to music in stereo anyway. Logic7 from Harman Kardon, or Dolby Prologic II makes stereo-recorded music very enjoyable to listen to indeed! |
|||
|
SpanishEar Unregistered guest |
CD: 44,1 KHz, 4 Hz to 20 KHz, 16 bit, 96 dB, 2 channels. SACD: 2,8 MHz, DC to 100 KHz, 1 bit, 120 dB, 6 channels. DVD-A: 192 KHz, 4 Hz to 88 KHz, 24 bit, 144 dB, 6 channels. Considering that the human ear does not hear below 20 Hertz nor over 20 KHz, and that is the more sensible to dynamic range, the best system without a doubt is the DVD-Audio. |
|||
|
Unregistered guest |
Does anyone know if there is a decoder to play the superaudio layers of a hybryd disc available for download? I am already playing multichannel dvd-audio discs, but have a few actual superaudio discs I would like to play thru my computer. My pc is connected via a digital output and can decode most streams from the computer. I am listening on a Bang and Olfeson home theater and would like to use the pc to listen to my superaudio cd's, not just the regular cd layer. |
|||
|
Unregistered guest |
To the poster who says "SACD is virtually dead at this point": I would take exception. There is a fairly large catalog out there for those of us who like the additional detail (and who used to purchase MoFi LPs excitedly). I also have found that I personally don't much care for DVD-A in any genre, but have noticed a marked improvement with some SACDs, less so with others. A great example of a quantum improvement via SACD is Steely Dan's "Gaucho." Of course now you can only find it by blind luck, as the DVD-A version has supplanted it, but I, being the cutting-edge kinda guy I am, copped one before they all disappeared, and it is like being in the studio. On the other hand I finally got up the nerve to try Alan Parsons' "On Air" DVD-A and find it does very little to advance the original CD except for the cool jet engine noise travelling through my listening room, which makes me feel like Donnie Darko. This is music? This is effect for the sake of effect. Bah! I don't utilize the multi-channel capabilities of my SACDs either, because I like my music to be up in front of me, on a stage, like it happened. I was not in the band, man! I'm a listener and I don't like to fantasize about being part of the act. When I get that urge I arrange a jam with my son and some friends. I look forward to finding new SACD releases in all genres and am willing to gamble because 9 times out of 10 I come out ahead sonically. I own a bunch of SACDs (not 70 like that guy up closer to the top - yet!) as well as about 1000 CDs, so I can do a lot of A/B comparisons. Nope, I didn't much care for "On Air", but I am a long-time admirer of Alan Parsons and will give it a few more listens before I dump it on eBay. (And yes, I am thoroughly pissed that Parsons was passed over for the production of DSOTMs 30th ann. goof). Anyway, as I began to say before I so rudely interrupted myself, I think SACD is here to stay, at least until Blu-ray gets established (if it does - remember mini discs and the Elcassette? The WHAT? My point exactly). Nothing personal man - I'm just one of THOSE. You know the type. |
|||
|
Unregistered guest |
SACD is virtually dead? Next week we'll get the SACD of Dire Strait's "Brothers In Arms". Genesis is remixing its entire catalog to SACD (go to their official website www.genesis-music.com for the news). According to an interview from late April, Nick Mason of Pink Floyd said that the SACD of "Wish You Were Here" is definitely happening. Did you hear the new Norah Jones SACD? The one she did with the Peter Malick Group? |
|||
|
Sir Ound Unregistered guest |
I finally got up .. to try Alan Parsons' "On Air" DVD-A and find it does very little to advance the original CD Well, "On Air" was a DTS-CD, NOT a DVD-Audio disc. As most people know DTS encoding is a lossy compression (excelent for moview BTW) so it can't be labeled "Hi-Res" This is one of the problems of DVD-Audio, the name gives confusion to many people. It's easy to mix it up with eh .. DVD audio, the sound part of the DVD-Video standard. |
|||
|
Pete S Unregistered guest |
I agree with Alan Lofft totally. Both formats are superb. Lets not get caught up in a battle between the two. For years before CD we could buy 100 gram and 200 gram Vinyl. The 200 gram vinyl sounded better. Lets not get carried away by Khz figures. Let your ears be the judge. When CD was launched in 1980 we immediately started a downward spiral in audio quality at the expense of convenience. This is why I still enjoy listening to Vinyl. But now, technology is winning in both ways and I am pleased to be part of it. I have a dual SACD / DVD-A player and plenty of examples of both formats. I also have many duplicates of the original CD. There is no comparison in sound quality. And now that the players are at last affordable, we should all be purhasing music in either format. In this way we can ensure that both formats will survive (as they should). And there is room for "portable music" and there are many in the market that do care about audio quality. And now that we have both convenience, and sound quality that rivals Vinyl. Heres to both ! |
|||
|
Unregistered guest |
Sir Ound: I stand corrected and appropriately humbled and will try to watch that stuff in the future. And speaking of future, I think "Days of Future Passed" actually is a DVD-A? No wonder the Parsons disc sucked! I still need to hear something in the actual format so I can condemn it to hell or praise it to high heaven (no middle ground for Calhoun, OH no!). But seriously, thanks for pointing out what should have been obvious to me: that I had picked up a DTS disc and it pretty much sucks. |
|||
|
The Android Unregistered guest |
Days of Future Passsed is DTS, but to me it sounds pretty good. I've only got a couple of DVD-A titles and my player won't do SACD so I'm considering getting another player to expand my hifi options. Now, as for On Air, I have not heard the the 5.1 mix, so can't comment directly. I've got the normal mix and although it's a very good concept album in that everthing ties into the main theme, it's otherwise kind of bland. If I was going to want an Alan Parsons album in 5.1, I'd want an album that was stronger to begin with - like Try Anything Once or Tales of Mystery and Imagination. |
|||
|
New member Username: PetermjBirkerød Denmark Post Number: 2 Registered: Oct-04 |
I just read on a hifi retailers website, that due to copyright limitations, it is only possible to transfer a digital signal of limited quality from a DVD-A or SACD. So in order to make it impossible to make a full quality copy, the music industry has also ensured that you can not get a digital signal in full quality from the player. In this case, you have to buy a player with a very good analog output-stage, in order to get the most out of the music. These kinds of limitations certainly does not help arouse my interest in either format! |
|||
|
Flyboy! Unregistered guest |
Sir, I have to totally disagree with your statement that SACD and DVD-A sound about the same. I have a very, very high end stereo and also wondered which format is indeed better. Well there are many titles, Like Elton John's Goodbye Yellow Brick Road, in DVD-A and SACD, and in all of them, the DVD-A smoked the SACD version. The sound was warmer, clearer in all frequencies, and had a more analog sound to it. I even compared many SACDs to thier remastered CD counterparts, and the CD counterparts even sounded better than the SACD. I just hope that the industry follows recording perfectionist, Alan Parsons, who is remastering his older LPs on DVD-A with Classic Records, in TWO CHANNEL ONLY, and goes with the DVD-A format. The proof is in the pudding and SACD is a sad representation of where high resolution audio can go. Flyboy! |
|||
|
KH Unregistered guest |
So far I have to agree with the general comments that DVD-Audio disks sound a lot warmer and more full of life compared to other releases on SACD. We only just got our multiformat DVD player so I was anxious to get a few of these new disks. Hotel California on DVD-Audio is absolutely breathtaking, and Queen's Night at the Opera is also incredibly clear. In comparision I have a TexasFlood by Stevie Ray Vaughan, and Dark SIde of the Moon on SACD. The SRV disk is not much different from the same CD that I alos own, which was a disappointment. It does have a couple of extra live tracks which sound ok, but the tracks from th original album sound much the same. I guess it depends on who did the remix/remastering? The Pink Floyd disk on SACD is ok, but still does not seem to have the depth of sound range that I'm hearing on the DVD-Audio disks. All in all tough, the move from cd toeither of these formats is much like the difference from mono to stereo. I'm pretty impressed! |
|||
|
Unregistered guest |
I own about 15 5.1 discs in different formats, (sacd, dvd-audio, dts). I love surround sound. I'm hoping this format takes off and alot more albums are remixed in 6 channel audio. The sound is amazing. The seperation is crystal clear. Audio has never sounded this good before. |
|||
|
JeffRoland Unregistered guest |
I am new to the technology and have just bought Pink Floyd's DSoM. I am still waiting on my Pioneer DVD player that plays both DVD-A and SACD but in the mean time, I'm trying to play the DSoM on my PC. I think it is quite obvious that it is only playing the normal CD layer. Is the SACD layer hardware dependent or can I use some special software to listen to it? Thanks in advance, Jeff |
|||
|
Silver Member Username: SemNew York USA Post Number: 497 Registered: Mar-04 |
AJCalhoun, Sir Ound beat me to it, Parson's On Air is a DTS disc and therefore a direct comparison to either SACD or DVD-A might seem a bit unfair. OTOH, I own several discs in each of the 3 formats and I must say, On Air in 5.1 is an amazing recording. There is much more to the surround mix than just the jet engines racing front to rear, (despite the many DVD-A's and SACD's I own, I still use Parson's agressively mixed instrumental Apollo to show others some of the capabilities of surround). However, like you've mentioned you "don't utilize the multi-channel capabilities" of your setup. That is fine, many feel the same way, and for many recordings I would agree 100%. On Air is just not one of those. Let me explain. You say that "it does very little to advance the original CD.." Actually you have it backwards, On Air 5.1 is the "original." Parsons originally recorded On Air with the intent to release it in 5.1, the recording techniques he used were used with that in mind. It was then down-mixed to stereo in order to satisfy both camps. The stereo version just happened to be released first. I feel the 5.1 version just opens up more, some of the songs really take you "on air" where as by comparison the stereo version leaves you "grounded" once you've heard it in 5.1. I have both the surround and the stereo versions. I no longer play the stereo version. Is it Parsons best release? Not to me. Not all the songs grab me in the same way as say, Tales.. I Robot, or Turn of a Friendly Card do. But its still a very fun disc. The Android, Perhaps you can buy AJCalhoun's DTS copy of On Air to compare for yourself. I do agree with you in as much as I'd also like to see the back catalog re-released in hi-res surround. Parsons has stated he would like for this to happen but a deal would need to be worked out with Arista among others. DVD-A vs. SACD? I have both, though not the same disc in both formats for a direct comparison. I would just say that both formats can sound superb. I have also heard some real clunkers in each format. IMO it mainly comes down to two things: A: the sonic quality of the original recording, and B: the care, skill, and vision of the audio engineer behind "the controls." Beyond that I think you're really splitting hairs. |
|||
|
Richard S Unregistered guest |
At this point I'm going from a 4.3 TV to a wide screen plasma, driven by a PC, and a good soundcard (M-Audio Audiophile). I want the PC to do it all. TV, DVD, CD, MP3, AAC, and .....no sorry SACD isn't a starter here. I have several SACD/CD releases that I've never heard the SACD layer off - this is why SACD will die. Keeping the PC users away stops priracy but stops a lot of users too. I will not buy a stand alone player to play a dozen discs. Another great Sony format is about to bite the dust..... |
|||
|
Unregistered guest |
Gentlemen, I have recently upgraded my entire sound and video system and found that it was easy to select all of my components except for the DVD\CD\DVDA\SACD\ player. I have listened to most of my CD's all over again and find it a fascinating process. I now have a system that really does reveal the strengths and weaknesses of the different quality recordings. Take some of my older Jethro Tull recordings. What once sounded perfectly acceptable now sounds like they were recorded using a sharp needle on a wax roll, rotated by hand. On the other hand, some new recordings I purchased by the Eagles or Santana sound incredible, albeit not of the quality of the latter formats. I would love to invest in a good player, but find it difficult to invest in a quality piece, only to be made extinct by Bluray or HD DVD. I tend to buy good equipment that I keep for years. The same with recordings. I do not want to invest any more than I have to or take the chance that the format will be gone in two or three years. Until the movie industry and the mfg's can get on the same page, we all lose. Sony seems to be gaining ground but it could be another year before a clear winner is established and that is a shame. I think we can all agree that the quality of recordings is only going to get better with the newer technolgies that align with the motion picture industry. I think most of us would also agree that the movie industry is the horse pulling the audio industry cart as far as determining the direction of audio\video recording technology for mass consumption. The real question is, should we support either of the two formats (SACD or DVDA) with our purchases? I guess if you have the money and think the risk is worth the short term satisfaction, you may justify your purchase but it only feeds the fight and reduces the chances of acquiring a unified standard anytime soon. Our purchasing power is the only stick we have to get the mfg's attention. I would suggest we use it to our advantage by not buying until everyone starts playing nice with one another. |
|||
|
maxx Unregistered guest |
ANY format that IS BETTER than cd is welcome!! I have a toshiba sd-4960 universal player(85$-new) and even cd's sound cleaner on it. |
|||
|
New member Username: Jeff7Oakdale, CA United States Post Number: 1 Registered: Sep-05 |
Going beyond 20 Hz - 20 KHz is very important. On the bass end, the largest Pipe Organ pipe and some drums require a good 16 Hz to be felt (not heard, but felt), and the effects like the space ships in Close Encounters require lower than 20 Hz also. On the treble end, violins, cymbals, and other instruments with complex wave forms require a range beyond human hearing to re-produce with a natural sound. So even though most people cannot actually hear much above 20 KHz, it does make an audible difference with certain musical instruments. As for which is best, or which to buy. Since so many said they are both far beyond the quality of normal CDs, how about buying the best DVD Player for the money? The Sony 80 or 90 models right now, are the best for the money. After much research, from what I have learned, only Panasonic and Sony use glass laser lenses in their DVD players. And only Sony uses two for better error correction. Plus, lots of reviews state that the Panasonic remote is not easy to use at all. And the Sony has lots of other features and qualities that comparably priced DVD Players lack, so the Sony wins, and Sony DVD Players only include SACD capability. It looks like if you want to buy the best DVD player for a good price, you will be stuck with SACD whether you like it or not. It would be nice though, if Sony would either continue producing SACD until they catch on, or add DVD Audio to their players. Pick one, Sony. Either will work. |
|||
|
Unregistered guest |
I have an Audigy 2 Value sound card on my computer that can play DVD-Audio disks. I have played the demo disk supplied by Creative and some DVD-Audio Discs that did not have any DVD Video on it. Now I have a DVD-Audio disc and I cannot play the DVD-Audio, my DVD-Video polayer come sup and starts playing the music at DVD-Video standard. Any recommendations of fixing this problem? |
|||
|
buddylee05 Unregistered guest |
Anwered my own question, To play DVD-Audio with DVD-Video on the disc, change the default player to the DVD-Audio player and it works! |
|||
|
Anonymous |
Hi everybody. I'm new to this whole suround sound system, so please try to bear with me. I just bought the SACD version of (What's the Story) Morning Glory? by Oasis. Unfourtunately, I pop the disc in my computer and sadly, it won't play. I try putting it in my DVD-RW drive and it reads as DVD-ROM. I try accessing the files in the drive, I open it up and nothing's in there. I did some research and found out that it's a single layer disc and won't play on cd players. I figure, if I upgrade my soundcard I will be able to play the disc with ease and DVD-A discs in great quality. Can anyone back me up on this decision, if not have any suggestions? (By the way, would anybody know how to rip DVD-A's on to a computer?) |
|||
