Underworld SACDs would be neat.

[bryantm3]

just sayin', they should release the next album in hybrid SACD format, or at least explore the option of doing that.

note to anyone who doesn't know what an SACD is:
SACD stands for super audio cd, and it delivers music at a higher bitrate and less processed than CDs so it is more lossless than even CDs and has high quality sound similar to that of a record album. there are three main types of SACDs: stereo SACDs, which deliver full resolution stereo sound, multichannel SACDs, which deliver the music in surround sound (like guitar in left channel, drums in right, vocals in centre, keyboards in surround right, bass in surround left), and hybrid SACDs, which are combinations of either a stereo or multichannel SACD layer (sometimes both) and a normal CD layer. you can play a hybrid SACD in a normal cd player at normal cd quality, but to play the only stereo SACDs or only multichannel SACDs, or to play the high-resolution layer of the SACD, you need a SACD player. many DVD players now can play SACD, but if you look into one, make absolutely sure it has bass management, or you can't use the multichannel output. because of copywrite restrictions, you cannot hear the SACD layer through dolby digital or dts, so you have to connect six or eight wires to your multichannel reciever, or for stereo, connect two from the standard l/r ports (not the multichannel ones).

[stimpee]

I like where youre comin from but i'll just settle for...

just sayin', they should release the next album

[Eikman]

beer with boobs, that would be neat too.....hmmm....i would definitely explore the option of THAT!

[patrick]

beer with boobs, that would be neat too.....hmmm....i would definitely explore the option of THAT!
GET this man a TV show! stat!

[stimpee]

I blame alcohol and boredom.

[negative1]

SACD and DVD-A's are dead formats..
however, DVD's with DTS and surround sound
are much more compatible...

at least you could play it on regular DVD players..

by the way, ever listen to 'everything, everything'
in surround, that should give you a good idea of
what an album could sound like in surround..

later
-1

[bryantm3]

DTS is not high resolution and doesn't really provide many benefits. you can play a DVD-A in surround sound on any DVD player.

[patrick]

99% of stereos can't tell the difference between cds and these anyways, cd resolution is high enough for the masses and you'd need thousands of dollars to hear 96000hz recording rate (overkill) or 24 bit sample rates (good but not super necessary)

[Lou]

SACD and DVD-A's are dead formats..
however, DVD's with DTS and surround sound
are much more compatible...

at least you could play it on regular DVD players..

by the way, ever listen to 'everything, everything'
in surround, that should give you a good idea of
what an album could sound like in surround..

later
-1
i recently dicovered DTS, delicious!
And yes, EE on a 5.1 system is the best :D

[Dirty0900]

And then sell them in batches on ebay;)

[BeautifulBurnout]

And then sell them in batches on ebay;)

Need a wooden spoon Matt? ;)

[bryantm3]

99% of stereos can't tell the difference between cds and these anyways, cd resolution is high enough for the masses and you'd need thousands of dollars to hear 96000hz recording rate (overkill) or 24 bit sample rates (good but not super necessary)
it's also less processed than CDs. it takes around 9 steps of conversion to make a cd while it only takes 3 for SACD. if you've heard an SACD you'll hear the difference. i have an SACD of peter gabriel's first album and his most recent, 'up', and even in stereo, these versions are so much better than the originals you won't even believe it. and they're not remixed for surround, either! (SACD stereo) and guess how much my speakers cost? $500 for both.

[bryantm3]

see this page also:

http://www.tweeter.com/sm-super-audio-cds--bg-1189815.html

[patrick]

i stand corrected. i was totally un-aware that there were less conversion steps. that would make a big difference combined with a highed resolution. sampling rate isn't too important if we are to believe anything e-engineers have taught us

and i haven't heard sacd's in a side by side comparison before... and definatly nothing that i like (just some junky demos at a store, and wasn't wowed at all)

[bryantm3]

oh, yeah, with an SACD player with proper bass management it sounds really clear. you can hear things in the sacd layer of gabriel's 'up' that aren't even apparent on the cd layer of the same cd. i'm also waiting for the genesis SACDs, but it looks like they're going to mess up.. here's what i mean:

there's this grand finale at the end of the genesis album 'a trick of the tail' called 'los endos', and at the beginning, there are a few notes from the middle of a b side called 'it's yourself', and the producer wants to mould the two songs together and not have stand alone versions of either, and i'm freaking out and shit. i mean, why would you change the music to something that wasn't originally recorded? this isn't just overdubs, this is like putting two songs together that just don't go. but otherwise, the producer has released some standard stereo non SACD previews, and they sound pretty good, but there have been tons of errors with them (missing guitar parts, missing echos, sounds 'cold', even lost multitrack tapes for one song!) and i think he's trying to get through it too quickly ; he's doing a track a day, so i fear that the SACDs will be riddled with errors when released. producing and mixing is a long and involved process that needs to be done extremely carefully. but i don't know, maybe he's going back over everything perusing every note. we'll just have to see the SACDs when they come out. anyway, there are lots of SACDs available, and the best selling one is (obviously) the dark side of the moon (considering it's the best selling album of all time).

[bryantm3]

humpus bumpus

[negative1]

anybody hear about the hd-dvd release here in
the US?

i wonder if any music groups will take advantage
of this new format... i'm not sure, but it might
even support the new Dolby digital plus, and
some other formats like 7.1 surround..

later
-1

[froopy seal]

anybody hear about the hd-dvd release here in
the US? It's out??? :eek:

Every song ever on 1 Blu-Ray disc.:D [From here: http://www.dirty.org/forums/showpost.php?p=31973&postcount=19.] (http://www.dirty.org/forums/showpost.php?p=31973&postcount=19.%5D)

[negative1]

the hd-dvd players have been out in japan for a few
months..

the US release of the hd-dvd players was this week,
with a few movies also...

in a few months, the blu-ray players and discs will
be out..

i'm not sure about the timetable for the computer
versions...but these should be coming out soon
also..

later
-1

[TheBang]

I posted some info on the new audio formats available on Blu-Ray and HD-DVD over here:

http://forum.dvdtalk.com/showthread.php?t=451099

The gist is that there are two new multichannel, lossless sound formats, Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD. I think the general consensus is that neither would provide much improvement in sound quality over the already existing DVD-Audio and SACD formats. The only advantage would be the additional capacity afforded by the new media.

[negative1]

the thing about new audio formats is that,
they will always be improved on..

since DVD-audio and SACD players have
never really been accepted as a new format,

maybe switching over to these new formats,
they will have a much better chance...

i will never buy separate DVD-A/SACD players,
maybe a cheap hybrid someday..(and then
surround speakers)....

but i know more people will have surround sound
for their movie players, so if the new HD DVD or
Blu-ray players become successful, we will see
more releases that way..

later
-1

[patrick]

the thing is if they increase the price on the disks it won't really work. i like the idea of sacd's being backward compatable in current cd players. but the new things make sense since a hd-dvd drive will be pretty standard in a few years...

i'm pretty darn happy with cds though personally, considering the majority of people are instead leaning towoards online lossy formats even a cd would be good enough for me

(itunes and selling stuff online in mp3 / aac etc, annoys me cause it's a step backwards, when we have the technology to improve the quality, we choose otherwise this generation)

[negative1]

since hard disk prices are falling,
and in some places high-speed access
is getting cheaper...

at some point, lossy codecs, and having
access to the full tracks will make sense..

it just depends....if you only listen through
portable players, does it matter? maybe those
that listen at home or in the car care more
about quality...

i don't really use portable players anymore,
or have a car stereo for that matter..
so i guess in my case having the full tracks
is ok...