High definition audio formats

[Uilleann]

Ok, ok, I did a search on the forums here, and I didn't really find much that fit my question directly...so before I get crucified for asking *that same old question again that's already been answered a million times here before* :D if anyone can point me to a thread that answers this, I'll happily go read it.

Otherwise, I just wondered if you, my wizened brethren, could offer a quick primer on what the differences are of current high definition audio formats currently available today.

I'm aware of course of standard CDs, and I know that there are at least two other formats using higher sampling rates correct? Redbox or something like this? And SCAD or SRAD or maybe it was NORAD, or perhaps even I'MBAD. I can't remember off hand. :p Then, there are DVD's you can buy with just music - though I'm unaware if they are all recorded at a higher rate or not. Blu-ray is supposed to offer 'uncompressed' sound - or at least that's what the marketing guys would like us to believe. Is that *really* uncompressed?

And if you have a Blu-ray player, I assume you can not simply play all formats interchangeably correct? I imagine you are stuck buying some ridiculous expensive proprietary player (like what Blu-ray was a couple years ago), and that your selection of titles will be disgustingly limited (like what Blu-ray was a couple years ago), and that you'll regularly have to sell body parts to be able to afford the discs (like what Blu-ray was a couple years ago)... hehehe

Anyway, just curious as to what's out there these days, and where and how to hear it. You all is da best! Thanks for humoring me! :D:D:D

Bri~

[F1nut]

what the differences are of current high definition audio formats currently available today.

Redbook CD is just that. It is PCM based and is not a hi-rez format, although when done right and played back on good gear can sound glorious.

SACD is a DSD based hi-rez format that is basically a niche market, but oh what glorious sound.

DVD-A is a PCM based hi-rez format that is all but dead.

DualDisc (DVD-A on one side/Redbook CD on the other) is a PCM based hi-rez (DVD-A only) format that failed miserably.

Blu-ray (audio disc only), I've heard talk about it, but I do not believe any have been released. It would be PCM based.

Then you have downloads, Flac files and all that stuff that I'll never bother with. Is it really hi-rez? Some say so, others disagree.

[hearingimpared]

Don't forget about those big black disc recorded in analog!:D

[allstock]

I just picked up a Tom Petty "box set", "The live anthology". Contains five cd's,two dvd's,an lp, and an audio only blu-ray. I didn't even know there was such a thing. Quote from sleeve " This disc contains all 62 tracks from The live anthology in hi-resolution 96k 24-bit pcm stereo and dts-hd master audio 5.1 surround sound. It is an audio only disc, with basic navigation and song information displayed on-screen."
Be nice to see more released this way and finally have a decent hi-rez formula that might have some staying power.
BTW, I have a dvd-audio player,,blu-ray player,cd player,multiple dvd players, a tape deck,a turntable, two laserdisc players, and god knows what else is around here.
I've been accused of being an "early adopter".

[F1nut]

It is an audio only disc, with basic navigation and song information displayed on-screen."

Same BS as DVD-A. No thanks!

[Cpyder]

Then you have downloads, Flac files and all that stuff that I'll never bother with. Is it really hi-rez? Some say so, others disagree.

FLAC is most certainly bit-for-bit identical to WAV or whatever lossless format it was converted from.

[F1nut]

Keep telling yourself that when your hard drive crashes. Me? I'll be pushing play on my SACD/CD player remote while reading the liner notes and enjoying the cover art.

[Cpyder]

Evidence if you're in disagreement:

[Cpyder]

Keep telling yourself that when your hard drive crashes. Me? I'll be pushing play on my SACD/CD player remote while reading the liner notes and enjoying the cover art.

Are you assuming I pirate all my music and don't have the liner notes and cover art? And even if I was, any good downloads include scans of those things.

[F1nut]

Hmmmm........"Nothing selected."

[headrott]

Same BS as DVD-A. No thanks!

There is also Neil Young's Blu-Rays. I personally have not heard them.

http://www.amazon.com/Neil-Young-Arc...6643472&sr=8-1

Greg

[F1nut]

I was assuming no such thing, not even that your hard drive will crash.

[Cpyder]

This I just did for my own fun: I opened up the WAV track in Audacity and changed one sample to see if Foobar would flag it. Sure did!

[Cpyder]

There is also Neil Young's Blu-Rays. I personally have not heard them.

http://www.amazon.com/Neil-Young-Arc...6643472&sr=8-1

Greg

He's pretty good. Check him out. I really like his album Chrome Dreams II.

Keep telling yourself that when your hard drive crashes. Me? I'll be pushing play on my SACD/CD player remote while reading the liner notes and enjoying the cover art.

That's why you keep backups. Especially if your original CD copy gets damaged. Just burn another. What about when your albums get scratched?

[headrott]

He's pretty good. Check him out. I really like his album Chrome Dreams II.

I've heard of Neil Young and heard his music, just not the Blu-Rays..........

[F1nut]

There is also Neil Young's Blu-Rays. I personally have not heard them.

http://www.amazon.com/Neil-Young-Arc...6643472&sr=8-1

Greg

Greg, if you haven't yet, read the 1 star reviews......a real hoot.

[F1nut]

That's why you keep backups. Especially if your original CD copy gets damaged. Just burn another. What about when your albums get scratched?

Yeah, I know about keeping backups. I also know that the backups can fail sitting around doing nothing. Personally, I wouldn't want to take that risk however slight.

In the 27 years that I've owned CD's, I have never scratched one. I have purchased some rare used CD's that have had a scratch or two or three on them. No problem though, they play fine.

[Cpyder]

Yeah, I know about keeping backups. I also know that the backups can fail sitting around doing nothing. Personally, I wouldn't want to take that risk however slight.

In the 27 years that I've owned CD's, I have never scratched one. I have purchased some rare used CD's that have had a scratch or two or three on them. No problem though, they play fine.

I envy you then. I try to be gentle to my CDs, but it seems one always gets a scratch here and there. But that's probably because I take them in the car with me sometimes. Harsh environment for audio.

[headrott]

Greg, if you haven't yet, read the 1 star reviews......a real hoot.

Yeah Jesse, let's just say I'm glad I didn't buy it.;)

Also, I will never ever buy and store my music on a hard drive in a digital format. CD/SACD/DVD/Blu-Ray is far enough into the digital real for me, I won't be going to computers and their formats for my music. In fact, I'll take my Teac X-2000R reel to reel any day over a digital source. Anyone who stores their music on a hard drive as their primary format should be happy with an i-pod and some $19.99 samsung headphones as their primary listening source.

Greg

[comfortablycurt]

Keep telling yourself that when your hard drive crashes. Me? I'll be pushing play on my SACD/CD player remote while reading the liner notes and enjoying the cover art.

+10000


I have no desire to listen to my music on anything other than a physical medium. I have an extensive collection of CD's and I'm starting to accumulate a pretty good collection of vinyl as well.

I recently got an iPod Touch. It's a pretty neat toy.

It's also NEVER been hooked up to my stereo, and probably never will be. It's used exclusively in my car, just so I don't have to fumble around with CD's.


Blu-ray audio doesn't really seem too appealing to me. As Jesse mentioned, it sounds an awful lot like the next iteration of DVD-A, which wasn't anything to write home about.



Also, just since it got mentioned...

I love Neil Young, but I'd refuse to buy that Blu-ray set just on principle. $310!?!? I don't think so. It's not like Neil is hurtin for cash these days ya know...

[hearingimpared]

Just for the record Neil Young took great pride and went to great lengths to ensure that his music was recorded as best as can be as well as making sure it went to the medium that way for all to enjoy. I find it hard to believe he sanctioned the blu-ray set if it sounds so bad.

[hearingimpared]

Neil Young is a perfectionist when it comes to his music. I do not have the source, but I read in one of the audio magazines I subscribe to that Neil Young said BluRay was the only medium that could reproduce his music at the level of quality he wanted.

All the troglodytes who seem stuck in the past with CDs, and not BluRay or digital files, are just that: Troglodytes. Keep on whining how you are not going to listen to anything other than a CD. However, as the audio world passes you by, do not expect any sympathy for your idiotic views.

Why the poor reviews on the blu-ray set? I find it hard to believe that Neil Young would allow any of his music to be distributed that has not met with his "seal" of excellence. It seems to me that the reviews showed either the reviewers loved it or hated it. I have several of his LPs especially the Classic 200 gm vinyl double LP set of "Greatest Hits" and it is nothing short of astounding.

Also, do you consider us vinyl lovers Troglodytes?

Why a Troglodyte if I don't want to go through the expense of buying a music server and associated equipment, plus the time it takes to place all my music on said server, if I am satisfied with the high end TT and high end CD/SACD player that I have and am very happy to use the discs, especially LPs while reading the liner notes in hand without having to use a computer to do it?

[comfortablycurt]

All the troglodytes who seem stuck in the past with CDs, and not BluRay or digital files, are just that: Troglodytes. Keep on whining how you are not going to listen to anything other than a CD. However, as the audio world passes you by, do not expect any sympathy for your idiotic views.

So, are you saying that Blu-ray Audio is going to surpass CD's? Maybe from a purely technoligical standpoint, but the fact remains that average joe blow music buyer doesn't give a rats ass about sound quality, and isn't going to spend the extra money on a Blu-ray Audio disc. Most people probably wouldn't even realize that it was a Blu-ray Audio disc.

People can say that CD's are obsolete all they want, but the CD is going to be the dominant musical medium for many years to come. Downloading is obviously coming into it's own, but it is BY NO MEANS the new standard. The audio world won't be passing us by any time soon. I think it's actually starting to kind of move in reverse, with the massive resurgence that tubes and vinyl have been having.

We have idiotic views for wanting to listen to a CD? Sorry.

I'm a musician. I appreciate the work and time that goes into creating music. An ALBUM is a physical thing. It's not only music, but art work, lyric sheets etc. You don't get that with downloaded files. Yes, I know that you can "get" those things with your downloaded files, but it's not the same at all. Don't even try to tell me that looking at the art work on your iPod/TV/computer etc. is the same. There is no screen out there that is going to look as convincingly real as the actual artwork, on real paper. You can have 50 billion albums on your ipod, and it's still not a collection. It's a file. A collection involves multiple things that you can pick up and look at. Not an ipod that you scroll through.


Scratched CD's? Not an issue for me. That's why they have cases. It's the idiots that leave their CD's sitting in stacks on top of their TV's that have to deal with scratches. Also, the people that use CD binders. CD's are meant to be kept in jewel cases...which is why they come packaged in them. When taken care of properly, there is no reason that a CD should ever get scratched with normal use.

What's that? Was that the sound of your hard drive crashing? Whoops, looks like you lost your entire music collection.:p

I'm gonna go fire up this ancient CD player now...I hope these things are still compatible with todays advanced electricity.

[hearingimpared]

Keep on whining. :)

Who's whining, I'm asking you legitimate questions.

[comfortablycurt]

Keep on whining. :)

Whining? Because I feel no need to buy something that I wouldn't even use? I have no desire to use a digital media server or anything like that. I enjoy playing CD's and LP's. The ritual of brushing off my records before giving them a good spin is satisfying. What do you do with an ipod? Wipe the screen off with the back of your shirt every now and then?

I'm not being some stubborn hold out. I'm not some old man stuck in his ways...I'm only 23. I own an iPod...and it will most likely never be hooked up to my home stereo. I have enough music on hard copy to keep me busy for the next couple years. I got the ipod to use in my car...and honestly, most of the time I forget to even grab it on my way out. I generally just grab a few CD's, and forget that I even own the ipod.

In hindsight, I really wish I hadn't even bought it, and might be selling it soon. It just isn't appealing to me at all.

Is it so hard to understand that some people might just simply not be interested in digital music servers? There is a reason that most audiophiles use CD players and turntables rather than ipods.

[hearingimpared]

Whining? Because I feel no need to buy something that I wouldn't even use? I have no desire to use a digital media server or anything like that. I enjoy playing CD's and LP's. The ritual of brushing off my records before giving them a good spin is satisfying. What do you do with an ipod? Wipe the screen off with the back of your shirt every now and then?

I'm not being some stubborn hold out. I'm not some old man stuck in his ways...I'm only 23. I own an iPod...and it will most likely never be hooked up to my home stereo. I have enough music on hard copy to keep me busy for the next couple years. I got the ipod to use in my car...and honestly, most of the time I forget to even grab it on my way out. I generally just grab a few CD's, and forget that I even own the ipod.

In hindsight, I really wish I hadn't even bought it, and might be selling it soon. It just isn't appealing to me at all.

Is it so hard to understand that some people might just simply not be interested in digital music servers? There is a reason that most audiophiles use CD players and turntables rather than ipods.

Hey now, I resemble that remark! ~Curley Howard~:D

[cnh]

While I'm not going to throw out my CDs yet, and agree that SACD is the digital format of choice. And that analog is staging a comeback--at least with audiophiles--it never went away.

How can we say that a CD will sound as good as a blu-ray when the bit rate for the CD is 1.411 Mbits/Sec and bluray DTS HD Master Audio is 24.5 Mbits/Sec and claims to be fully lossless?

cnh

[hearingimpared]

While I'm not going to throw out my CDs yet, and agree that SACD is the digital format of choice. And that analog is staging a comeback--at least with audiophiles--it never went away.

How can we say that a CD will sound as good as a blu-ray when the bit rate for the CD is 1.411 Mbits/Sec and bluray DTS HD Master Audio is 24.5 Mbits/Sec and claims to be fully lossless?

cnh

I'm not arguing the merits of blu-ray. I am wondering why someone is a Troglodite because we don't use a music server, computer hard drive or whatever to listen to music.

Besides, I would have to buy a blu-ray player and hope that all the music I've collected over the years, digital and analog, would be available on blu-ray not to mention the fact that I would have to spend thousands more to re-up my collection in blu-ray.

[hearingimpared]

Personally, I get tired of all the iPod and digital file downloading bashing that occurs on this forum. If there were a valid technical reason for it then I could understand, but since there isn’t any technical reason to even imply that uncompressed iPod files or downloads are different from CD files I do not understand the hostility. The iPod bashers sound just like the cable bashers.

Maybe it is because I am an engineer and work in a field that deals with digital files, and transferring them error free, that makes it easier for me to accept alternative methods of storing, accessing, and playing digital music files. However, I appreciate the concept of having a physical backup. I have not yet downloaded a single music file for my music server (not counting my Napster days). I have only copied CDs onto it. I can honestly say that adding a music server into my system has resulted in my buying at least a thousand dollars worth of CDs over the last year just to feed this machine.

However, the future of music is with high-rez digital files on either BluRay or downloads, especially before they are compressed down to the CD standard. One of these days, I am going to get a better music server that can handle all file bit lengths and sampling rate, but of course that also means getting a better DAC. No matter what you do in this hobby, you end up spending money.

While playing with your album cover, or CD jewel case, might be fun the first one or two times you listen to the recording, to do it every time is borderline obsessive. Of course, there is nothing wrong with being obsessive, but I suspect it does not make the music sound better. Unless this also falls into the catch-all “Placebo effect” category.

I've never heard a music server nor have I ever bashed it. I don't see the need to go through the expense and effort needed to aquire this technology and waste my time placing the music on it that I currently have on LP, CD, and SACD when I am perfectly happy with my analog front end as well as my digital front end.

[Uilleann]

Ooooohhhhh kaaaaaaaayyyyy...

Well, when I posted my original question, it was in NO way meant to spark any form of controversy. It was ONLY to try and grasp a better understanding of the different audio storage and reproduction methods being explored and used *today*.

I am also a musician. And I understand very well that even the most technologically advanced studio is going to alter and color and to *some* degree, lessen the sound quality of the original source. That's inevitable.

But what I was primarily interested in learning was what new formats are closer to non-compressed or truly lossless recordings. There is a long way to go I'm sure, and vinyl - when brand new - is still the closest I expect.

I am far from impressed at the *quality* of any standard CD recording. The noise floor is, to my ear anyway, quite high and there is a notable loss in dynamic range and impact when compared to say a live performance - to put it lightly. I was curious to learn if any of the newer formats such as Blu-ray or high def downloads were making progress in that arena.

Some good information has been laid down in this thread, but I would like to very respectfully ask that we refrain from the debate and silly name calling etc. I'm very interested in learning about others direct experience with these new formats for example, and how they compare against the decades old CD format today.

Thanks guys!

Brian