DVD-Audio: Perspective
02-18-2006, 01:48 PM
#1
Not a Blowhole
Thread Starter
DVD-Audio: Perspective
Lots of talks about so-called "High Resolution" formats such as DVD-A and SACD, but as an audio journalist and an MSEE. I am not convinced that other than non-compressed multi-channel capability, none of the hi-rez formats is demonstrably superior to "good ol' Red Book spec CD". Even when testers control for mis-matched levels, the mixes themselves are often different from CD to Hi-Rez, so it is an apples to oranges mis-step from the beggining.
The theoretical "superiroity" of DVD's 24-bits has nothing to do with what most folks consider resolution by the way. It is actually an indice of signal to noise ratio (S/N). The S/N may be calculated by taking the actual bit capability and multiplying by 6.02, to get the S/N capability in dB. For "regular" CD's @ 16 bits, that is just over -96.3 dB.
The mathematically astute among you may say "Hey -wait a minute! 24 bits x 6.02 = 144.48. That's a huge difference!". Yes, you could say that. But consider a few things first:
1) ACTUAL S/N is limited by the weakest link in the audio chain. This is almost always the amplifier, where practical S/N is generally about 18 bits - silly tube designs often restrict us to around 10-bits, masking by either noise and/or distortion, or THD+N. What good is a hi-rez DVD-A of 20+ bits when the system capability is 10?
2) Then, there is the issue of ambient noise in the environment - in this case, the huge residual noise in the TL itself. The midrange is less affected, but the treble and bass are. The "airiness" promised by the potentially wider bandwidth of DVD-A (around 96kHz if you have bat ears, special speakers replacing the OEM units, a source recoding with [rarely found] significant spectral content above 20 kHz, and so on) is compromised by ay number of driving-related noise factors. including the rushing of air around the body. Bass is not a Hi-Rez "perk" anyway, but even if it were, the amount of noise generated by an automobile below 50 Hz is huge; on a spectrum analyzer, one sees high amplitude noise well into the subsonic. People have to lay a heavy hand on the bass EQ or tone controls, limiting clean output and changing the spectral balance. Not at all a pretty picture.
3) One other thing: many hi-rez discs are sourced from standard CD source masters (48 kHz at best), and among those, some of the best-selling hi-rez discs are outright frauds. The most glaring is the Blue Note SACD release of Norah Jones' wildly popular "Come Away with Me" CD - it was not even re-mixed through an SACD ADC/DAC for cryin' out loud. Spectral analysis shows that it has the 22.05 kHz high frequency limit of a 16-bit system (1/2 the sampling rate of 44.1 kHz). In fact, comparing the CD and SACD "hi rez" release shows that the SACD is identical to the CD - it had the same source tape, and matches bit for bit. To make sure the takeaway is clear: Blue Note did not even bother to do a simple $30,000 re-mix through an SACD device to effect the transfer to SACD - they just took the original DAT CD master and let it roll. So in my opinion, they perpetrated a fraud. The thing is, some (including me) bought both the CD and the SACD; at first listening, I thought there was nothing special about the SACD. This just about closed the book on hi-rez for me, but the scientific training said "Make sure your assumption are right first!". I had assumed the disc was a true SACD mix - not true. So anyone who heard "a tremendous imnprovement" in Norah Jone's "CAWM" SACD are examples of Placebo Effect. Still, Blue Note should be horse-whipped - I have written them many times demanding my money back, and filed a complaint with several State's Attorney and the FTC - all to no avail, of course. (BN actually contends there is no fraud, of course - the disc is an SACD disc, at least by their definition. And it will not play in most CD players, or the 3G TL either.
But I think Blue Note's deception really drives home the point that Hi-Rez is a non-event for the great preponderance of digital audio buyers; Blue Note likely thought that the market is so small, and SACD buyers so susceptible, that no one would. A few did, including John Atkinson at STEREOPHILE magazine.
Is this mere sophistry, you ask? Well, consider this: where even in the declining silver disc musical sales biz, CD sales were in the Billions $US, DVD-Audio disc sales were around $350,000 - so tiny as not to show on a pie chart unless scaled finer than a gnat's a-hole. So apparently many have voted with their dollars - this does not prove hi-rez is a conceptual failure, but it certainly proves it has been a business failure. Remember Betamax?
I have 2 DVD-A's. The one that came with the car, and one I bought to perform tests, and which I can also play on my Bel Canto PL-1A "Universal" player.
The theoretical "superiroity" of DVD's 24-bits has nothing to do with what most folks consider resolution by the way. It is actually an indice of signal to noise ratio (S/N). The S/N may be calculated by taking the actual bit capability and multiplying by 6.02, to get the S/N capability in dB. For "regular" CD's @ 16 bits, that is just over -96.3 dB.
The mathematically astute among you may say "Hey -wait a minute! 24 bits x 6.02 = 144.48. That's a huge difference!". Yes, you could say that. But consider a few things first:
1) ACTUAL S/N is limited by the weakest link in the audio chain. This is almost always the amplifier, where practical S/N is generally about 18 bits - silly tube designs often restrict us to around 10-bits, masking by either noise and/or distortion, or THD+N. What good is a hi-rez DVD-A of 20+ bits when the system capability is 10?
2) Then, there is the issue of ambient noise in the environment - in this case, the huge residual noise in the TL itself. The midrange is less affected, but the treble and bass are. The "airiness" promised by the potentially wider bandwidth of DVD-A (around 96kHz if you have bat ears, special speakers replacing the OEM units, a source recoding with [rarely found] significant spectral content above 20 kHz, and so on) is compromised by ay number of driving-related noise factors. including the rushing of air around the body. Bass is not a Hi-Rez "perk" anyway, but even if it were, the amount of noise generated by an automobile below 50 Hz is huge; on a spectrum analyzer, one sees high amplitude noise well into the subsonic. People have to lay a heavy hand on the bass EQ or tone controls, limiting clean output and changing the spectral balance. Not at all a pretty picture.
3) One other thing: many hi-rez discs are sourced from standard CD source masters (48 kHz at best), and among those, some of the best-selling hi-rez discs are outright frauds. The most glaring is the Blue Note SACD release of Norah Jones' wildly popular "Come Away with Me" CD - it was not even re-mixed through an SACD ADC/DAC for cryin' out loud. Spectral analysis shows that it has the 22.05 kHz high frequency limit of a 16-bit system (1/2 the sampling rate of 44.1 kHz). In fact, comparing the CD and SACD "hi rez" release shows that the SACD is identical to the CD - it had the same source tape, and matches bit for bit. To make sure the takeaway is clear: Blue Note did not even bother to do a simple $30,000 re-mix through an SACD device to effect the transfer to SACD - they just took the original DAT CD master and let it roll. So in my opinion, they perpetrated a fraud. The thing is, some (including me) bought both the CD and the SACD; at first listening, I thought there was nothing special about the SACD. This just about closed the book on hi-rez for me, but the scientific training said "Make sure your assumption are right first!". I had assumed the disc was a true SACD mix - not true. So anyone who heard "a tremendous imnprovement" in Norah Jone's "CAWM" SACD are examples of Placebo Effect. Still, Blue Note should be horse-whipped - I have written them many times demanding my money back, and filed a complaint with several State's Attorney and the FTC - all to no avail, of course. (BN actually contends there is no fraud, of course - the disc is an SACD disc, at least by their definition. And it will not play in most CD players, or the 3G TL either.
But I think Blue Note's deception really drives home the point that Hi-Rez is a non-event for the great preponderance of digital audio buyers; Blue Note likely thought that the market is so small, and SACD buyers so susceptible, that no one would. A few did, including John Atkinson at STEREOPHILE magazine.
Is this mere sophistry, you ask? Well, consider this: where even in the declining silver disc musical sales biz, CD sales were in the Billions $US, DVD-Audio disc sales were around $350,000 - so tiny as not to show on a pie chart unless scaled finer than a gnat's a-hole. So apparently many have voted with their dollars - this does not prove hi-rez is a conceptual failure, but it certainly proves it has been a business failure. Remember Betamax?
I have 2 DVD-A's. The one that came with the car, and one I bought to perform tests, and which I can also play on my Bel Canto PL-1A "Universal" player.
02-18-2006, 03:48 PM
#3
Not a Blowhole
Thread Starter
Slam away bring it- I will be happy to spar on the playing field of ideas. But if the engagement is the sort of nonsense I see in the Newgroups, where amplifiers have "soul", 3-dimensional layering", etc, I will "surrender". Or challenge the poster to match my post of an escrow bond of, say $500, and then we will do a level-matched comparison, and determine what is/is not audible, and by extension, who is/is not full of crap.
Oh, no Cable Cultists either. I have written many an article on that issue, double-blind testing, and other audio science. If anyone can demonstrate that the electro-magnetic science of the great J. Clarke Maxwell no longer applies, I will try to get a Nobel Prize for the author.
Oh, no Cable Cultists either. I have written many an article on that issue, double-blind testing, and other audio science. If anyone can demonstrate that the electro-magnetic science of the great J. Clarke Maxwell no longer applies, I will try to get a Nobel Prize for the author.
02-18-2006, 04:14 PM
#4
2004 SSM/EB/5AT/Navi/RSB
Originally Posted by Road Rage
Slam away bring it- I will be happy to spar on the playing field of ideas. But if the engagement is the sort of nonsense I see in the Newgroups, where amplifiers have "soul", 3-dimensional layering", etc, I will "surrender". Or challenge the poster to match my post of an escrow bond of, say $500, and then we will do a level-matched comparison, and determine what is/is not audible, and by extension, who is/is not full of crap.
Oh, no Cable Cultists either. I have written many an article on that issue, double-blind testing, and other audio science. If anyone can demonstrate that the electro-magnetic science of the great J. Clarke Maxwell no longer applies, I will try to get a Nobel Prize for the author.
Oh, no Cable Cultists either. I have written many an article on that issue, double-blind testing, and other audio science. If anyone can demonstrate that the electro-magnetic science of the great J. Clarke Maxwell no longer applies, I will try to get a Nobel Prize for the author.
02-22-2006, 08:00 PM
#5
WayTooManyAcuras
From a multichannel standpoint, I would have to disagree. I have been involved in converting many 1970s quadraphonic tapes and LPs - first to DTS encoded CD, then in the past year, since the release of DiscWelder and WaveLab5, to 4.0 DVD-A discs.
Using the exact source tape, for example a quadraphonic 7 1/2 ips factory prerecorded reel, the produced disc when recorded at 16/44.1 for DTS encoded 4.0 CD (using SurCode DTS) can easily be distinguished from a 24/96 4.0 produced DVD-A disc using Wavelab5.
This holds true in the Acura as well as on a home system. Of course, I have found that attempting to "change" anyones mind on the internet is a total waste of time, bandwidth, and effort, so don't think that's my aim. You can have the best ears in the world and not hear a difference and that's fine with me.
As for the Norah Jones SACD, that release, while a joke as far as the "hirez" aspect goes, is still a pleasant listen in 5.1, even though the surround mix is not real a real surround showcase. However, if you listen to the SACD of "Madman Across the Water" in 5.1 and cannot hear a difference, then that's a shame.
The merits of Stereo HiRez do not interest me. In fact, of the 300 or so SACDs and DVD-A's that I have purchased, I do not think I have ever listened to the stereo programs once!
Jon Urban
www.quadraphonicquad.com/forums
Using the exact source tape, for example a quadraphonic 7 1/2 ips factory prerecorded reel, the produced disc when recorded at 16/44.1 for DTS encoded 4.0 CD (using SurCode DTS) can easily be distinguished from a 24/96 4.0 produced DVD-A disc using Wavelab5.
This holds true in the Acura as well as on a home system. Of course, I have found that attempting to "change" anyones mind on the internet is a total waste of time, bandwidth, and effort, so don't think that's my aim. You can have the best ears in the world and not hear a difference and that's fine with me.
As for the Norah Jones SACD, that release, while a joke as far as the "hirez" aspect goes, is still a pleasant listen in 5.1, even though the surround mix is not real a real surround showcase. However, if you listen to the SACD of "Madman Across the Water" in 5.1 and cannot hear a difference, then that's a shame.
The merits of Stereo HiRez do not interest me. In fact, of the 300 or so SACDs and DVD-A's that I have purchased, I do not think I have ever listened to the stereo programs once!
Jon Urban
www.quadraphonicquad.com/forums
02-22-2006, 08:39 PM
#6
2004 SSM/EB/5AT/Navi/RSB
Originally Posted by oblio98
From a multichannel standpoint, I would have to disagree. I have been involved in converting many 1970s quadraphonic tapes and LPs - first to DTS encoded CD, then in the past year, since the release of DiscWelder and WaveLab5, to 4.0 DVD-A discs.
Using the exact source tape, for example a quadraphonic 7 1/2 ips factory prerecorded reel, the produced disc when recorded at 16/44.1 for DTS encoded 4.0 CD (using SurCode DTS) can easily be distinguished from a 24/96 4.0 produced DVD-A disc using Wavelab5.
This holds true in the Acura as well as on a home system. Of course, I have found that attempting to "change" anyones mind on the internet is a total waste of time, bandwidth, and effort, so don't think that's my aim. You can have the best ears in the world and not hear a difference and that's fine with me.
As for the Norah Jones SACD, that release, while a joke as far as the "hirez" aspect goes, is still a pleasant listen in 5.1, even though the surround mix is not real a real surround showcase. However, if you listen to the SACD of "Madman Across the Water" in 5.1 and cannot hear a difference, then that's a shame.
The merits of Stereo HiRez do not interest me. In fact, of the 300 or so SACDs and DVD-A's that I have purchased, I do not think I have ever listened to the stereo programs once!
Jon Urban
www.quadraphonicquad.com/forums
Using the exact source tape, for example a quadraphonic 7 1/2 ips factory prerecorded reel, the produced disc when recorded at 16/44.1 for DTS encoded 4.0 CD (using SurCode DTS) can easily be distinguished from a 24/96 4.0 produced DVD-A disc using Wavelab5.
This holds true in the Acura as well as on a home system. Of course, I have found that attempting to "change" anyones mind on the internet is a total waste of time, bandwidth, and effort, so don't think that's my aim. You can have the best ears in the world and not hear a difference and that's fine with me.
As for the Norah Jones SACD, that release, while a joke as far as the "hirez" aspect goes, is still a pleasant listen in 5.1, even though the surround mix is not real a real surround showcase. However, if you listen to the SACD of "Madman Across the Water" in 5.1 and cannot hear a difference, then that's a shame.
The merits of Stereo HiRez do not interest me. In fact, of the 300 or so SACDs and DVD-A's that I have purchased, I do not think I have ever listened to the stereo programs once!
Jon Urban
www.quadraphonicquad.com/forums
I don't think RR was saying the additional sampling frequency and bit resolution was a waste in general. I think he was only describing the silliness of a high-res version of a recording originally made at a lower resolution. I'm sure he'll let me know if I'm wrong about this, though.
02-22-2006, 09:43 PM
#7
Team Owner
RR, you obviously haven't colored the inside ring of your DVD-A's and SACD's green.
Mike
Mike
Trending Topics
02-23-2006, 05:47 PM
#8
The DVD-A Script Guy
I don't disagree with anything you say. It all makes lots of sense.
I only have a few store bought DVD-As. Two of them sound great to me but since I don't have the CD of them it is hard to be objective. To me DVD-A had great potential but basically turned out to be a way for record companies to re-release old music in a new format. When I look through the title's available they just don't jump out as something that would be a good use of the features of DVD-A. Certainly I'd grab the CD of most of them before getting the DVD-A.
What I do like about DVD-A is the "density" of it. As in how much CD content I can put on it and play in the car. That aspect alone has made many happy and I am glad I could play a part in helping them. I also have fun playing around with transferring DVD-V based multichannel content to it and seeing what it sounds like in the car. That's just fun for me even if it isn't fully exploiting the potential of the format. Then there are discs like the Blue Man Group's "The Complex". Can I honestly say I like the music ? or, is it just plain fun to listen to it because it uses lots of channels and funny sounds? I dunno...It's just fun. Isn't that the point ? Enjoyment when listening.
At the risk of drifting...
Throughout the years I've struggled with what exactly the point of it all is to me. As a BSEE (I bow to the MSEE) I sometimes get caught up more in in the tech side of the sound than if the songs are good. Bit rates, S/N, dynamic range, imaging, flatness, etc. I find I will listen to things because of how they sound rather than if they are good songs. Is that the point of music? A good song is good even if listened to on a pocket radio. Arguably some of the best music was written and performed long before the ability to accurately capture it. But every once and a while a really good song collides with a really good recording. LP, CD, DVDA, or whatever, you can't beat that.
Also, if I catch your drift correctly on cables...amen brother. Point me to some of the articles. I really like how boutique cables have elevated to the optical realm....$200 Toslink cables, oh please !
Whatever happened to the simpler days where I argued with my friends about why a speaker's quality was NOT measured by how many watts it was rated for? That was much simpler than arguing over this stuff
Keep it coming 'Rage
I only have a few store bought DVD-As. Two of them sound great to me but since I don't have the CD of them it is hard to be objective. To me DVD-A had great potential but basically turned out to be a way for record companies to re-release old music in a new format. When I look through the title's available they just don't jump out as something that would be a good use of the features of DVD-A. Certainly I'd grab the CD of most of them before getting the DVD-A.
What I do like about DVD-A is the "density" of it. As in how much CD content I can put on it and play in the car. That aspect alone has made many happy and I am glad I could play a part in helping them. I also have fun playing around with transferring DVD-V based multichannel content to it and seeing what it sounds like in the car. That's just fun for me even if it isn't fully exploiting the potential of the format. Then there are discs like the Blue Man Group's "The Complex". Can I honestly say I like the music ? or, is it just plain fun to listen to it because it uses lots of channels and funny sounds? I dunno...It's just fun. Isn't that the point ? Enjoyment when listening.
At the risk of drifting...
Throughout the years I've struggled with what exactly the point of it all is to me. As a BSEE (I bow to the MSEE) I sometimes get caught up more in in the tech side of the sound than if the songs are good. Bit rates, S/N, dynamic range, imaging, flatness, etc. I find I will listen to things because of how they sound rather than if they are good songs. Is that the point of music? A good song is good even if listened to on a pocket radio. Arguably some of the best music was written and performed long before the ability to accurately capture it. But every once and a while a really good song collides with a really good recording. LP, CD, DVDA, or whatever, you can't beat that.
Also, if I catch your drift correctly on cables...amen brother. Point me to some of the articles. I really like how boutique cables have elevated to the optical realm....$200 Toslink cables, oh please !
Whatever happened to the simpler days where I argued with my friends about why a speaker's quality was NOT measured by how many watts it was rated for? That was much simpler than arguing over this stuff
Keep it coming 'Rage
03-05-2006, 09:43 AM
#9
AZ Community Team
Originally Posted by Road Rage
...
The theoretical "superiroity" of DVD's 24-bits has nothing to do with what most folks consider resolution by the way. It is actually an indice of signal to noise ratio (S/N). The S/N may be calculated by taking the actual bit capability and multiplying by 6.02, to get the S/N capability in dB. For "regular" CD's @ 16 bits, that is just over -96.3 dB.
....
The theoretical "superiroity" of DVD's 24-bits has nothing to do with what most folks consider resolution by the way. It is actually an indice of signal to noise ratio (S/N). The S/N may be calculated by taking the actual bit capability and multiplying by 6.02, to get the S/N capability in dB. For "regular" CD's @ 16 bits, that is just over -96.3 dB.
....
FWIW, this is assuming for a striaght binary system, their are many audio codecs that use different binary scalings to increase dynamic range.
01-31-2007, 12:38 AM
#10
Instructor
Originally Posted by svtmike
RR, you obviously haven't colored the inside ring of your DVD-A's and SACD's green.
Mike
Mike
So I froze couple of my CDs and coloured them with a black marker lying around.
I couldn't hear any difference, but it could have been any number of things...my fridge not cold enough, BIG makes lousy markers, my cheap system had no resolution, or my hearing was just plain shot.
Ah, the memories...
01-31-2007, 03:42 PM
#11
Lt. Dangle
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Raleigh, NC
Age: 58
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RR, I think you hit the nail on the head talking about the quality of the source material. If a recording is not remastered for the new format, it may actually sound WORSE (hence the original complaint against CDs back in the 80's). However, the Beatles Love CD/DVD is a perfect example of what can be done with 30 to 40 year old masters and some love, care and know-how. I believe I could tell the CD version from the DVD version if forced - although both sound great. Also, I am not sure that Dark Side of the Moon sounds any "better" on DVD-A, but it is a revelation to hear it in quad. I am not sure there are any discs other than the Blue Man recordings that were actually made with DVD-Audio in mind. And there are only one or two older releases that benefit in any audible way from the format (Donald Fagen's Nightfly comes to mind). I think it is a statement on the recording industry's single-minded focus on profit that they have failed miserably to implement DVD-A as a format. Given their continued harassment of their customers, I doubt they will ever learn their lesson.
01-31-2007, 04:34 PM
#12
WayTooManyAcuras
Originally Posted by enormus
...... And there are only one or two older releases that benefit in any audible way from the format (Donald Fagen's Nightfly comes to mind).......
Talking Heads BRICK (All 8 albums)
Dire Straits BROTHERS IN ARMS
Daivd Crosby IF I COULD ONLY REMEMBER MY NAME
Flaming Lips YOSHIMI BATTLES THE PINK ROBOTS
Donald Fagen THE NIGHTFLY
Beck GUERO
Donald Fagen MORPH THE CAT
Porcupine Tree IN ABSENTIA
America HOMECOMING
Fleetwood Mac RUMOURS
Seal BEST 1991-2004
Donald Fagen KAMAKIRIAD
Chicago CHICAGO (II)
Mark Knopfler SAILING TO PHILADELPHIA
Graham Nash SONGS FOR SURVIVORS
Jackson Browne RUNNING ON EMPTY
Steely Dan EVERYTHING MUST GO
Steely Dan TWO AGAINST NATURE
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
mlody
5G TLX (2015-2020)
85
12-04-2019 02:11 PM
JarrettLauderdale
2G CL Dynograph Gallery
5
09-21-2015 07:51 PM
acura, audio, catcddvdadts, donald, dvda, fagenmorph, fraud, jon, perspective, powered, quad, reviews, science, urban, vbulletin
