is there a list of DVD-A and SACD disks that are available now?

[Mega2000]

Like is there a master list or anything. I am all getting into the home theater deal and was looking into a universal but I dont want to dish out $400+ for a player if they dont even have a good selection.

 

[Rob Babcock]

I don't know about a master list, but Music Direct stocks more SACD & DVD-A than anyplace else I know of. IMO there's plenty of material to justify buying a universal player. But I'm not sure it would be wise to buy a super expensive one. Neither format is burning up the marketplace, and with a new Hi Def DVD format right around the corner, spending a lot on a current model might not be wise.

 

[Mega2000]

thanks... i just talked myself out of getting a universal player for now and put the extra cash towards a receiver. i am seconds away from getting a v2500

 

[Colonel_Tomb]

with a new Hi Def DVD format right around the corner, spending a lot on a current model might not be wise.

I've thought about this, and I don't really agree. HD-DVD or Blu-Ray primarily allow more storage on a 5-inch optical disk, same as DVD versus CD. But what can a new disk format give music that SACD and DVD-A don't give us already? More resolution? We don't need that. More channels? We already have six, and I don't think 7.1 or 9.1 would make any difference. More running time? That's a good idea, but if we're gonna get several hours on one disk, we need to be able to customize the content.

The only value I could see, audio-wise, from HD-DVD, would be for the extra space to be used to include a CD mix (which has been what's wrong with DVD-A all along), then DVD-A could go anywhere. But . . . hey . . . hybrid SACD already does that. So what does it get me?

Finally, could they be so cynical as to introduce yet another all-new music format? I'm part of the high-resolution niche market for now (I have 76 SACDs and DVD-A disks, which is more than most), and if they "go off in a new direction," I'm done. I'll cut them off and start downloading MP3s.

 

[Rob Babcock]

It won't give you more on the music end, but it can give you the same sound as the current formats alongside a hi def picture. That's a pretty potent combo.

The real issue is how long Sony & the DVD-A guys can flog the current formats. Even the rosiest figures I've seen don't paint a very optimistic story concerning either one. So it's more the issue of whether or not it's worth getting too much invested in hardware if the software dries up. Supposedly both Blu-ray & HD DVD will play old DVDs, but who knows if they'll play SACDs or DVD-A.

To turn your question around, why would a manufacturer support an "obsolete" format with 5 GB of storage (and it's own transport) when he's got a nice new 25 GB disc that can not only do everything the old one can, but add HD video? Why keep the pressing & manufacturing going for 100,000 copies per year?

I'll readily admit I could be barking up the wrong tree, but no one in the industry has shown a lick of common sense where DVD-A/SACD is concerned. They sure don't seem to mind cutting off their noses to spite their face. You're damned right the consumers won't buy into replacing their library every 5 years, but no one has replaced their CDs with SACD. How could you if you wanted to? Take away 40 year old Stones discs, 30 year old Floyd discs, 20 year old Elton John- what do you have left? How much top tier (popularity wise) pop/rock is there to buy? Diana Krall, John Mayer, Beck, Mark Knopfler, Steely Dan, Alison Krauss...we probably have 40 of the same discs!

You do have a few more discs than I do (I've got maybe 50-60 by now). I love them, too! Don't get me wrong- I really doubt high resolution MC will perish from the earth, but I do wonder if it might change carriers. Aside from a few early adopters like us, it would be travelling pretty light!

 

[Colonel_Tomb]

This is a really tough subject, but I suspect, from an audio perspective, it just doesn't matter. I think the market falls into two segments -- the 1 percent or so that cares what music sounds like, and the 99 percent that doesn't give a damn as long it's reasonably good and the medium is portable and flexible. We get a million times more buzz about iPod than SACD or DVD-A for those very reasons.

It won't give you more on the music end, but it can give you the same sound as the current formats alongside a hi def picture. That's a pretty potent combo.

If you're referring to concert videos, you make a good point. Live shows will look great in HD, and if they can package them with uncompressed audio, all the better. (But the 99 percent I referred to above can't tell DD/DTS from uncompressed 16/44.1 PCM from DSD or LPCM . . . and they don't care.)

On the music side, I've been hearing the "audio meets video" vision for a long time, and I'm still waiting for the market to bear it. I can remember reading, when MTV debuted so successfully, that "the album as we know it will disappear . . . in the future, audio-only won't cut it. Every song will include its own video." Well, we've been able to do that for a while with DVD and DD/DTS, and it hasn't exactly taken the market by storm. As best I can tell, the number of music videos that accompany songs is no greater than it was 20 years ago. I'm not so sure that market has ever existed.

The real issue is how long Sony & the DVD-A guys can flog the current formats. Even the rosiest figures I've seen don't paint a very optimistic story concerning either one. So it's more the issue of whether or not it's worth getting too much invested in hardware if the software dries up. Supposedly both Blu-ray & HD DVD will play old DVDs, but who knows if they'll play SACDs or DVD-A. To turn your question around, why would a manufacturer support an "obsolete" format with 5 GB of storage (and it's own transport) when he's got a nice new 25 GB disc that can not only do everything the old one can, but add HD video? Why keep the pressing & manufacturing going for 100,000 copies per year?

Yeah, that's the rub. The key is whether the new format will "do everything the old one can." If the industry abandons high-resolution and surround-sound audio altogether, then fine. Guys like you and me weren't enough to support it, even as a niche. I'm versed in economics. But if they concoct another format without backward compatibility, then they're not getting my support this time. Even I can be pushed into that other 99 percent.

 

[Rob Babcock]

I just read that the HD-DVD standards forum has adopted MLP, lock stock & barrel. So it would seem it at least will be capable of sounding exactly as good as DVD-A. Just as a wav.file doesn't care if it's played back on a PC, a Zen Nomad or a CD player, the 24/96 MLP stream won't care if it's on a DVD-A or an HD-DVD (man, these acronyms are getting old! ).

My crystal ball is pretty murky, I'll admit. I base my caution not on any plans I've heard, just a suspicion. Perhaps it won't occur to the labels to use the new formats for music only.

As much as I loathe changing formats, I'd like to see a friggin' universal carrier again. We had that with CD, or damn close to it. CD works for computer data, mp3, music, photos, etc. But how wonderful would it be to have a new high definition DVD or some sorts that would replace all the media we currently use, both audio and video! I may be dreaming, though.

You very well might be right, Colonel Tomb. And I won't quit buying the current formats. My only suggestion is that this might not be the best time to buy a really expensive universal. For me, I drew the line at the Denon DVD-2200. If finances permit, I could perhaps see going up to the next rung but I'm so happy with my 2200 that I probably won't unless mine craps out. I'll probably funnel any extra $ I can scrape up into improving my Redbook CD playback. I think the rumor of CDs demise have been greatly exagerated!

 

[Colonel_Tomb]

Hahaha . . . truth be known, I sometimes wish I'd gotten a 2200 instead of a 2900. I don't think the extra $300+ got me much more than a big, beefy chassis. Wanna know what it really was? I was replacing my classic DCD-1560 CD player, and I didn't want to give up that battleship-like construction.

Meanwhile, I've thought about your arguments, and I've come to think you're correct. With DVD on the verge of transition to HD, I wouldn't recommend an expensive DVD player to anyone at this juncture either. But it has nothing to do with audio; there's just no point in dropping $1,200 on a deluxe DVD player that, a year or two hence, won't play HD DVDs that are available at Blockbuster. (Especially when your low-end buddies are watching HD on their $129 Best Buy specials . . . and it looks great!)

I took us off on the audio-only tangent (but this is Audioholics after all), and I still doubt HD-DVD/Blu-ray are gonna give us much in the way of audio that we don't already have. But maybe playing time will be the next craze . . . the more I think about it, entire artists' catalogs on a single disk might be appealing. 'Course, will long running time be contingent on 16/44.1, or will they trade space for 24/96? . . . CD backward compatibility? . . . Stereo or multi-channel? . . . It's getting to where I kinda hate this hobby.

 

[Rob Babcock]

I agree completely. Neither Hi Def format will offer better sound than SACD or DVD-A. Unfortunately, hardcore audiophools are a niche market (perhaps 'fetish' would be closer to the truth! ). The high end companies can take a format and wring all the performance out of it, but the fact is the mass market will chose what formats we get. The LP is a great example- despite many fans, the LP was on the ropes long before the CD even came along, dazed and reeling from the audio cassette! Yes, casettes outsold LPs before CD came along and eclipsed both. Sure, boutique companies still make 'tables, and you can buy some new stuff on LP, but sales account for about 1.5% of yearly music sales. Many still love the LP but the mass market selected it for extinction, so now it clings on as a marginalized fetish product.

I haven't had any cause to regret purchasing my DVD-2200. Occasionally I wonder if I shoulda ponied up another few hundred for the '2900, but mine sounds very good and has a great picture. At the time I didn't want to blow a lot of money, what with DVI/HDMI "right around the corner." But I wanted to step up from my Pioneer DV-47A (no bass management for DVD-A or SACD). The '2200 has served me very well, and I haven't decided yet whether it's going to be worth upgrading. I guess the market will tell me shortly!

 

[mitch57]

Rob and Colonel Tomb,

I agree with both of you 100%. It's so unfortunate that these two exceptional formats can't gain a partial foot hold on the market. I am so impressed with both SACD and DVD-A that I have limited all of my music purchases to these two formats alone. However, I am quickly coming to grips that in a very short period of time there will be nothing (or at least very little) for me to buy.

I do buy redbook CDs for my car but I currently only play SACD and DVD-A disks at home. I have 90 SACD and DVD-A disks presently and I buy one or two a week. But it's getting harder and harder to find anything to buy that I like.

I also bought a Dual Disk the other day and it played flawlessly on my DVD player. I haven't tried it in the car yet. I'm afraid it might get stuck in the player.

I sincerely hope that what ever comes out next will be backward compatible with both DVD-A and SACD. I suppose I could sell them along with the boxes and boxes of Beta Max tapes I have. The Beta Max tapes might be worth a plugged nickel or two.

Cheers to all and Happy New Year!!!!

 

[Colonel_Tomb]

The LP is a great example- despite many fans, the LP was on the ropes long before the CD even came along, dazed and reeling from the audio cassette! Yes, casettes outsold LPs before CD came along and eclipsed both.

This dates me a little (I'm 42), but when I was in college in the early '80s, I was in a record store one day, and I was standing next to a guy and his girlfriend, and she was shopping. She found the title she wanted, and she says to her boyfriend, "They have it. Think I should get the cassette or the 'album'?"

And the boyfriend, replies, "Get the LP."

"Why?" she askes.

"Well, for one," the guy says, kinda wearily, "It's better."