Blu-ray, not just successor to DVD-Video but also to audio CD...

[emm7th]

I was pondering about it this morning...

If SACD/DVD-Audio both failed to penetrate the market, why not capitalize on the Blu-ray's success to possibly replace the old standard for recording music - the Red Book CD? Technically, Blu-ray's audio is at least on par (or better) than SACD/DVD-Audio's standard.

Comparing them: Blu-ray's audio supports up to 8-channels while SACD/DVD-Audio's supports up to 6-channels only. In direct comparison to DVD-Audio (since SACD uses different method) - Blu-ray's maximum is 7.1 24bit 96KHz or 5.1 24bit 192KHz PCM while DVD-Audio is 'only' 5.1 24bit 96KHz or 2.0 24bit 192KHz.

Certainly, if almost all video standards today are in HD, why not the audio? What SACD/DVD-Audio has left-off, Blu-ray can fill in without the unnecessary new equipment - because ALL BD players support the specs that I've just mentioned regarding the audio in Blu-ray.

The record labels can just put in the audio file on the disc then add some kind of a media-player-esque interface (using BD-Java) instead of a video (which could use some unwanted bandwidth). Then voila, it's BD-Audio!

[docjan_uk]

Physical audio formats are in the position that blu-ray will be in around eight to ten years from now.

I don't see another hard copy format catching on in THAT industry anymore... and let's be honest, the infrastructure is certainly in place for HD audio to be downloaded and stored if necessary.

[david2189]

dont see anything ever replacing cd

[Bobby Henderson]

SACD and DVD-Audio didn't get anywhere because the music industry didn't support it with good, new content. The failure of those formats has absolutely nothing to do with the popularity of MP3s and other download-able, portable music.

Best selling performers haven't been mixing and mastering their albums in 5.1 channel 24-bit/96kHz format. Instead, they've been sticking with 2 channel stuff and doing perverse things with the waveform so it will sound louder on radio and CD. The harsh recordings also make it so the severely compressed AACs sold at iTunes seemingly sound just as good as the CD. It's basically a lot of crap.

[ManUtd]

The sad story is that the vast majority are satisified with AAC or mp3s or other lower resolution formats over CDs, I don't see how BD could replace CDs no matter how much better the specs are.

[frenchglen]

DVD-Audio/sacd was a frikin mess. We all know that, and so many things went wrong I don't even know where to start, so I won't.

Perhaps the industry will learn their lesson this time and do away with physical music formats forever - because, sadly, the CD has already been slowly replaced by mp3 downloads, so why try to replace it with yet another physical format? But what's frightening for me, is that music is regressing into mp3 rubbish and there has actually been a cultural change in the way people listen to, treat and appreciate music. It didn't just start with the iPod. It started with portable CD players, where people started to ONLY experience their music with cheap rubbishy headphones.

Blu-ray VIDEO is successful because at least half the picture, is, well, the picture. That alone is enough to excite enough people to buy into it. The problem with hi-res MUSIC, is that it requires expensive audio equipment to even show the difference. Equipment that won't be getting any cheaper any time this century.

So my conclusion and hope is that, hi-res music downloads will be the successor to CD, for those who want to buy at least CD-quality music. There are already sites popping up like itrax, musicgiants, and linnrecords. Downloads are basically risk-ree unlike physical disc format standards, and there is certainly money to be made from it (but definitely not mainstream appreciation).

[Maxell]

Not going to happen, especially because downloads are also a big portion and still growing part of music lowering cd sales.

[Dragonraine]

CD is too entrenched as far as physical music goes. Look at when they did DVD audio, i can barely find any of that around. Most people find CD to be fine or use downloads.

[Anthony P]

CD is too entrenched as far as physical music goes. Look at when they did DVD audio, i can barely find any of that around. Most people find CD to be fine or use downloads.

and this could have just as easily have been

VHS is too entrenched as far as physical video goes. Look at when they did LD, i can barely find any of that around. Most people find VHS to be fine

for a dumb ass reason why DVD would not have worked.

DVD-A and SACD did not go anywhere because there was a war and the formats had different support from different companies. In the end everyone just gave up on them. Formats either catch on fast or die young. I don't know what will happen with BD audio, but for every thing there are countless techs that never went anywhere.


but from a BD hater what else would we expect.

[Gremal]

Originally Posted by frenchglen

DVD-Audio/sacd was a frikin mess. We all know that, and so many things went wrong I don't even know where to start, so I won't.

The only thing that was a mess was that consumers didn't adopt SACD, which is clearly the superior format.

Perhaps the industry will learn their lesson this time and do away with physical music formats forever - because, sadly, the CD has already been slowly replaced by mp3 downloads, so why try to replace it with yet another physical format?

Because CD uses technology that's now about 25 years old and in that time, processing power, optical formats and digital recording has vastly changed. The goal is audio quality. Your argument, if applied to BD, would be to just forget about it and wait for downloadable movies.

But what's frightening for me, is that music is regressing into mp3 rubbish and there has actually been a cultural change in the way people listen to, treat and appreciate music. It didn't just start with the iPod. It started with portable CD players, where people started to ONLY experience their music with cheap rubbishy headphones.

Of course it started with CD, so if you know that why are you arguing against moving to a superior optical format?

Blu-ray VIDEO is successful because at least half the picture, is, well, the picture. That alone is enough to excite enough people to buy into it.

Well, many factors contributed, not the least of which is that all PS3s are BD players.

The problem with hi-res MUSIC, is that it requires expensive audio equipment to even show the difference.

I agree with that point. It's valid. But HDTV requires expensive video equipment, and that is taking off. There is just a double standard where the public is concerned with video vs audio. We all have friends who want to dabble in HT...they buy a nice screen and then play their audio from the plasma's speakers.

[Teazle]

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=39573

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...ghlight=blu-cd

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...ghlight=blu-cd

[Bobby Henderson]

The only thing that was a mess was that consumers didn't adopt SACD, which is clearly the superior format.

Why would average consumers adopt SACD or DVD-A when virtually none of the music they wanted to buy was available in either format?

That's essentially why both of those formats have gone no where.

It's ALL about the quality of titles available. It's a big reason why Blu-ray beat HD-DVD. Better quality pool of movies from which to choose.

With SACD and DVD-A customers didn't have anything to choose. Not unless they liked obscure Jazz albums, classical music or remasters of 30 year old rock albums. The actual SACD and DVD-A titles simply appealed to far too few people.

[cwphoto]

Originally Posted by Gremal

I agree with that point. It's valid. But HDTV requires expensive video equipment, and that is taking off. There is just a double standard where the public is concerned with video vs audio. We all have friends who want to dabble in HT...they buy a nice screen and then play their audio from the plasma's speakers.

I'm one of them.

It's not that I don't appreciate audio, it's just that it's slightly less important to me than video - and I don't have the budget to do both right now.

[Clark Kent]

When BD becomes as mainstream as dvd I think there might be a chance that it becomes a format for high resolution music. SACD/DVD-A died because of very little hdmi support, poor title selection, and general consumer ignorance among other factors. But there seems to be a small inkling that Blu-ray could one day do this. It has already been reported that certain labels are planning music releases on BD now that it is the only HD format left standing.

[emm7th]

An interesting read:

Record Labels Ignore Blu-ray Format To Replace The Ailing CD

[Bobby Henderson]

That article was an interesting read.

Blu-ray Disc could indeed function as a more effective distribution vector than SACD or DVD-A ever hoped to be. Blu-ray certainly has the bandwidth and supported audio formats to deliver multi-channel music at the highest levels of quality and in a secure manner.

Unfortunately, the production standards of most popular music projects is just plain crap.

If you have an audio editing program, import tracks from any rock music CD released in the last few years. Chances are you will find a wave form that has been clipped to freaking oblivion, just so it can sound louder and also not sound much better than a lossy iTunes AAC file.

There's not enough progressively minded music performers who are in touch with the importance of delivering music in the highest levels of quality. Most just want it loud, harsh and only in 2 channels.

Guys like Trent Reznor (Nine Inch Nails) are an exception to that rule. Reznor has made multi-channel versions of at least a couple of his albums. NIN's new Ghosts I-IV will be available on Blu-ray, but with the high res audio done in stereo, not multi-channel. The music will be accompanied by graphics and photography.

It's also kind of telling that Ghosts I-IV will be released independently of any recording label.

The biggest problem with the popular music industry is it is held in a stranglehold of creative control by corporate interests. They don't want the natural cycle of big changes in style taking place in the music industry. When certain types of music become unpopular record executives can lose their jobs and entire labels can go bust. Media conglomerates want to sell people the same tired vanilla flavored music from here on out. We haven't had a really good house cleaning of music styles since 1990.

Much of the movie industry is also being affected by this same corporate culture. Ever wonder why we have so many sequels of movies that were crappy in their original version?

I don't think the "suits" want their signed music talent turned loose with a high resolution multi-channel palette. Production budgets on such projects would be higher and thus eat into their precious profit margins. And those record labels would be wandering into still relatively uncharted territory.

With that said, I'll probably pony up the $75 for the NIN Ghosts I-IV BD when it becomes available in May. I think that kind of example deserves to be rewarded.

[dialog_gvf]

Originally Posted by emm7th

An interesting read:

Record Labels Ignore Blu-ray Format To Replace The Ailing CD

The four major labels need to remaster their top 100 selling records into a high-resolution format (like uncompressed PCM or DTS-HD or Dolby TrueHD) and pair it with HD video content, HD video interviews and beyond.

The key difference is that everyone with a BD player already has compatible equipment. There is no need to get someone to purchase new hardware.

A minimum LPCM + DD5.1 and some stills (perhaps lyrics) would be a great incentive for music lovers to expand the use of their BD.

Classical was the early big DDD on CD. How about showing the video of the new recordings? That would be cool.

Gary

[Canada]

Have 2 SACD which I only got because my PS3 will play them.

1. Dire Straits: Brothers in Arms
2. Genesis: Invisible Touch

[lateralus85]

Music on Blu ray has already started. NiN new album you can buy the blu ray version of it for High quaility Audio.

For the price of $75 you got 2 cd's of the album. A data dvd where you can mix all the music as you please, a blu ray disk for high quaility sound of the ablum plus a slideshow. Including other little goodies.

Then there was a $300 version where you got all that plus a limit addition book of sometype and the artist signature etc. And all 2500 copies sold out the day of its release.
So yes Blu ray disk are coming. $75 is a bit steep for an ablum even though it comes with some goodies. All i care about is the music.

And cds are dieing rather quickly. People are not using cd players anymore but mp3 players. Infact i cannot remember last time i listened to a cd. I only listen to a few artist and normally i buy their music and rip it on my computer before i listen to the album a few times on the ps3. After that i can handle mp3 audio.

[solskei]

You'd have to replace the decks in your car and with many of those you have to replace speakers too. It's expensive. And why waste that money when cd audio is just fine. Most people listen to music in their cars. They don't listen much in their homes. The ones that do have really nice sound systems and cd's deliver excellent quality through excellent hardware. People aren't going to want to spend extra money for higher audio quality when they can hardly tell a difference. It just isn't going to happen. At the very least, it won't even start to happen until blu-rays costs companies pennys to manufacture.