Neil Young picks BluRay, Will BluRay replace Hi-res audio formats?

[Waveform]

http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/ptech/05/06/young.bluray.ap/index.html

 

[GlocksRock]

I think that is a great idea that could potentially help spur on the format. SACD needed players just for the format, whereas blu-ray players are mainly for movies, they can also be used for BD music discs, and the quality can be excellent and multichannel as well. As long as it isn't overpriced I think it may possibly take off, but then again it has to compete with the ever popular digital music downloads.

 

[trnqk7]

Well, shouldn't it be capable of just as good, or even better, audio than SACD or DVD Audio? It should be able to have lossless multichannel audio AND hd video at the same time...sounds superior to me...or at least, potentially so if done right.

 

[Waveform]

Dolby TrueHD is basically the same technology as DVD-Audio using Meridian Lossless Packaging (MLP) and upto 24 bit/ 192 kHZ sampling. Although not mandatory in the BluRay spec. (as it was the HD-DVD spec.) music on BluRay could/should be in Dolby TrueHD (or DTS MA - also, lossless).

 

[GlocksRock]

I can't imagine someone putting out a music album that would need more than 25 gigs of space or 50 for dual layer, even if it was uncompressed, or used TrueHD, unless it was some sort of discography.

 

[Waveform]

I suppose space would be wasted, which may not matter if production costs are low compared to selling price (same as a regular BluRay disc). At least lots more people will have the equipment to play the discs (hopefully, in a couple of years) than the few of us who had to buy specialized players for SACD/DVD-Audio multichannel.

 

[Biggiesized]

I'd love to get the LOTR re-released on BD-Audio. Although they squeezed each album onto a separate DVD-18 (DVD-9 flipper), it was at the expense of audio quality (24-bit/48 kHz) because it's mandatory to have backup Dolby Digital tracks on a DVD-Audio release. In this case they also had a Dolby Digital 5.1 track as well as a Dolby Stereo track. The music sounds fantastic already because it was mixed at Abbey Road Studios, but could sound so much better sampled at 24-bit/192 kHz or 128xDSD (if that new format was included).

Apparently, a BD-Profile 3.0 is in the works which defines standards for music on Blu-ray a la the Red Book standard for Compact Discs. I think they should strive for a lossless compression technology as the standard for storing audio on the discs, but it might not bode well for playing on regular Blu-ray players that don't support high resolution lossless audio decoding (Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio).

 

[Geno]

If you're a Pink Floyd fan...

Check out the new David Gilmour Concert Blu-Ray. Has Dolby TrueHD, $18 at Costco. I hope this is the beginning of lots of concerts to come.

 

[Beans]

I remember when HD DVD and BD were first coming to market. Half of my excitment was around the potential of hirez SACD/DVD A type disc to come out. I will say the that while the BD music sounds great the current albums that have been released really suck.

My fear is if the market for HD video is as small as it is, imagine how smal the HD audio market is on BD.

 

[BMXTRIX]

I remember when HD DVD and BD were first coming to market. Half of my excitment was around the potential of hirez SACD/DVD A type disc to come out. I will say the that while the BD music sounds great the current albums that have been released really suck.

My fear is if the market for HD video is as small as it is, imagine how smal the HD audio market is on BD.

I would say, considering how small the HD audio market is, and the built in factor of HD audio on Blu-ray - and projected growth, it is the DVD-A and SACD market that won't be around.

SACD/DVD-A are a niche market for sure, and if the shift is to a unified format with lossless via BD, and the actual selling market for HD audio discs through BD is good, better, or showing significant growth compared to DVD-A/SACD, then the studios will embrace the format.

Certainly seems to me that there is no serious authoring cost advantage to either one. And if a BD25 discs suffices, then costs can be kept fairly low across the board if studios want that.

 

[Beans]

I would say, considering how small the HD audio market is, and the built in factor of HD audio on Blu-ray - and projected growth, it is the DVD-A and SACD market that won't be around.

SACD/DVD-A are a niche market for sure, and if the shift is to a unified format with lossless via BD, and the actual selling market for HD audio discs through BD is good, better, or showing significant growth compared to DVD-A/SACD, then the studios will embrace the format.

Certainly seems to me that there is no serious authoring cost advantage to either one. And if a BD25 discs suffices, then costs can be kept fairly low across the board if studios want that.

I agee, but utlimately it comes down to if people care about HD audio (music) and not how well BD does or sells in general.

In my opinion one of the main reasons SACD and DVD A didnt take off was the confusion and difficulty in getting a player and proper set up for the hirez portion. Honestly BD isnt much better in that regard for the average consumer.

Ill be the first in line to buy BD audio if/when they start to release some decient content, but as big as BD becomes I dont think that will have much if anything to due with people buying into hirez music let alone buying into the equipment needed to listen to anything other then DD or DTS.


My closest friend has a 90k B&O home theater setup and even with the ability to switch from DD to lossless PCM when watching BD he doesnt because he is to lazy and thinks DD is just good enough. LOL

 

[Pyrrho]

I would say, considering how small the HD audio market is, and the built in factor of HD audio on Blu-ray - and projected growth, it is the DVD-A and SACD market that won't be around.

SACD/DVD-A are a niche market for sure, and if the shift is to a unified format with lossless via BD, and the actual selling market for HD audio discs through BD is good, better, or showing significant growth compared to DVD-A/SACD, then the studios will embrace the format.

Certainly seems to me that there is no serious authoring cost advantage to either one. And if a BD25 discs suffices, then costs can be kept fairly low across the board if studios want that.

The thing is, hybrid SACDs can play in anything that plays a CD. True, it is only the CD layer one can play in a CD player, and not the multi-channel high resolution portion of the disc, but one can still play it on almost anything. No Blu-Ray disc is likely to have that kind of compatibility.

If a major recording company truly wanted SACD to take off, all they would have to do is release everything only on hybrid SACD instead of also on CD. It would play just as well in a CD player, and would have the multi-channel audio just waiting for people to be curious enough to buy a player to access it. And when one had a few dozen discs with the multi-channel audio on them, it would get a lot of people to seek out an SACD player, which can be had for under $100 these days.

Anyway, if I can get something on hybrid SACD, I buy it that way, and never consider anything else. It will play on my systems without an SACD player (like in my car), and I can play the multi-channel version of the music on my surround system. It is a great way to buy music.

 

[BMXTRIX]

I agee, but utlimately it comes down to if people care about HD audio (music) and not how well BD does or sells in general.

In my opinion one of the main reasons SACD and DVD A didnt take off was the confusion and difficulty in getting a player and proper set up for the hirez portion. Honestly BD isnt much better in that regard for the average consumer.

It definitely is not a 'primary' selling point for BD, but as an incorporated feature it should strike a good nerve with Audioholics around the world as the audio is definitely touted as one of the great things about the format.

Yet, it will hopefully be HDMI which plays a big roll in making things work right by allowing for automatic setup of avalable audio formats. Set the receiver to 'Auto' and let the devices set themselves up.

We can only hope that things actually work nicely in upcoming years and HD audio is used more and more often.

 

[GlocksRock]

Car audio manufacturers need to start implementing dvd or blu ray drives into car stereo headunits so that we can burn dvds instead of cds. Think of how many .mp3s or even regular .wav files could fit onto a 9 gig disc compared to a 700 megabyte cd, and we would also have the ability to play those blu ray audio discs.

 

[Pyrrho]

Car audio manufacturers need to start implementing dvd or blu ray drives into car stereo headunits so that we can burn dvds instead of cds. Think of how many .mp3s or even regular .wav files could fit onto a 9 gig disc compared to a 700 megabyte cd, and we would also have the ability to play those blu ray audio discs.

You can get a head unit with a DVD drive. But probably most people will just use their Ipod connection for taking massive quantities of music into their cars with them.

 

[DD66000]

I think that is a great idea that could potentially help spur on the format. SACD needed players just for the format, whereas blu-ray players are mainly for movies, they can also be used for BD music discs, and the quality can be excellent and multichannel as well. As long as it isn't overpriced I think it may possibly take off, but then again it has to compete with the ever popular digital music downloads.

At the point in time when DVD-A and SACD came out there was no BR or HD-DVD. DVD-V was and still is the fastest selling technology in CE history.

So if someone wanted either of the new hi-rez audio formats they had to buy a new dual player, but they could still watch DVD movies on it. But both audio formats are still only a nich market.

Fast forward to today, We still have DVD-V, but now we also have high def format, in BR. So the senerio is still the same, to get the hi-rez movies or audio the consumer still has to buy a new player. And BR isn't selling much faster than DVD-A/SACD. So having hi-rez audio on BR doesn't mean any higher sales than DVD-A/SACD.
I do have a DVD-A/SACD player and buy those discs, but still haven't bought a Blue Ray player.

 

[Waveform]

I think it is very likely that BR will take over from DVD the same way that DVD replaced VHS, which took a fairly long time and was crucially dependent on DVD player prices coming down to the $250 range in the late nineties. With all the hi-def capable flat screens being sold today, the only thing holding back BR player sales are the high prices. This is different from SACD/DVD-A where there was very limited awareness of the formats as well as very limited payback for the expense of a new player because of limited software availability. As the penetration of BR players becomes much higher (inevitable, I think) music publishers will not have to worry that the potential audience for multi-channel high resolution music on Blu-Ray will be tiny as is the case for SACD/DVD-A.

 

[DD66000]

True, the dvd-a/sacd have limited availability, but I don't think that is the main reason the sales of both are small.
In the world of CE, the big focus on HT is the video. Most people would rather spend big bucks on a large flat panel and then buy a HTiB for the sound, or at the most, a system not much better.
The number of people interested in hi-res audio, in any format, is quite a small percentage, by comparision.

 

[mr-ben]

I'm rather unhappy about these Neil Young discs, and "audio" BR discs in general. Here's why:

- The high-resolution audio world doesn't need yet another audio format, especially one that doesn't offer any advantages over the existing formats. We already have surround sound and resolution beyond what we can hear with SACD/DVD-A. Assuming I have a player for everything, what will I hear on BR that I won't hear in the existing formats? What's the benefit to me over what I have already? Even the music studio doesn't have any advantage - the DRM of BR has been broken and can be copied, but a SACD can not. A BR disc must cost more to manufacture too.

- Anyone who is interested in high resolution audio, probably already owns a SACD/DVD-Audio player. These players aren't any more expensive than a standard CD player of comparable quality - yes you can buy a CD player for $20, but if you do that then you're probably not in the target audience for these BR discs.

- It's incompatible with all my existing players. At least I can play my hybrid SACDs in regular CD players when I want to. I can't play a BR disc in anything but a BR player. BR players can play DVD-video discs - it seems they should be able to play SACD/DVD-A discs as the players improve (I think the PS3 plays SACD already).

The BR format itself is already a niche market. This is a niche inside a niche. I suspect that BR audio discs won't have much of a lifetime.

 

[GlocksRock]

You can get a head unit with a DVD drive. But probably most people will just use their Ipod connection for taking massive quantities of music into their cars with them.

I tried a dvd-r full of .mp3s in my friends Pioneer touchscreen headunit and it didn't play, but it does play dvd movies just fine.

As far as ipods, I agree, but I hate ipods, and don't want to have to carry around my .mp3 player with me everywhere, or leave it in the car to be stolen. Plus I hate that so many headunits have actual ipod connections, and not regular auxilary input jacks. But I have seen some headunits that have USB connections so you can use a flash drive. I may look for one of those for my next headunit, but hopefully my alpine won't die any time soon.