Blu-CD or SACD? (not the new Blu-spec CD, discussing profile 3.0 BD vs. SACD)

[frenchglen]

What do you guys think of the future of the SACD format?

The Blu-ray "Profile 3" doesn't seem to be a new format with different codecs or anything, but just a Blu-ray Disc with no obligation for BD-J. It will just emphasise the audio. Assuming this:


Blu-CD Advantages
- Already compatible with PS3 and every other BD player. No need for new players.
- Ability to use PCM which simplifies the mastering process for the record companies
- Ability for more than 5.1 channels (SACD is only up to 5.1)
- Variety of codecs to choose from, and plenty of space for them all.


SACD Advantages
- Thousands of great releases already on the market
- Um that's all I can think of


I think they should call it something like Blu-CD. It needs to have CD in it, so people instantly know what it's meant to be. People will associate the "Blu" with high definition so they conclude it must be a high resolution CD that you listen to. DVD-Audio was like "What? so it's a DVD (instantly thinking video), um, with audio on it? But movies already have audio? What??" It was a stupid name. SACD is great because it is marketed as a type of "ultra CD" to consumers. Maybe it's more successful because it's simpler. It's a type of "CD", not some stupid complicated format only understood by audiophiles and techies (though I love DVD-Audio, don't get me wrong).

"Profile 3" just needs to be marketed as a simple ultra-quality surround CD playable in the lounge room on your PS3/blu-ray player, with optional extras such as video clips, etc.


So what do you think?


-- fg --

[DrinkMore]

What is SACD?

[calcajun]

I believe it will be uncompressed or a different hires format. I do not believe sacd format will move to Blu. Sacd can easily be outperformed some other way with the space avail on BD.
Thats just what i think though.

[calcajun]

SACD

Super Audio Cd


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Audio_CD

[Aaron]

Originally Posted by frenchglen

What do you guys think of the future of the SACD format?

The Blu-ray "Profile 3" doesn't seem to be a new format with different codecs or anything, but just a Blu-ray Disc with no obligation for BD-J. It will just emphasise the audio. Assuming this:


Blu-CD Advantages
- Already compatible with PS3 and every other BD player. No need for new players.
- Ability to use PCM which simplifies the mastering process for the record companies
- Ability for more than 5.1 channels (SACD is only up to 5.1)
- Variety of codecs to choose from, and plenty of space for them all.


SACD Advantages
- Thousands of great releases already on the market
- Um that's all I can think of


I think they should call it something like Blu-CD. It needs to have CD in it, so people instantly know what it's meant to be. People will associate the "Blu" with high definition so they conclude it must be a high resolution CD that you listen to. DVD-Audio was like "What? so it's a DVD (instantly thinking video), um, with audio on it? But movies already have audio? What??" It was a stupid name. SACD is great because it is marketed as a type of "ultra CD" to consumers. Maybe it's more successful because it's simpler. It's a type of "CD", not some stupid complicated format only understood by audiophiles and techies (though I love DVD-Audio, don't get me wrong).

"Profile 3" just needs to be marketed as a simple ultra-quality surround CD playable in the lounge room on your PS3/blu-ray player, with optional extras such as video clips, etc.


So what do you think?


-- fg --

The PS3 plays SACD's.

[frenchglen]

Originally Posted by Aaron

The PS3 plays SACD's.

Yeah, but not every blu-ray player will play SACDs. But once blu-ray is standard, a Blu-CD format will be easy to implement...

And let's face it, not that many people know what SACD is anyway. And personally, I think that having only two SACD authoring firms in the world (one in Japan and one in Austria) and not being able to make/copy your own SACDs has marred its popularity somewhat.

Whereas I can already make my own Blu-CDs or DVD-Audios from studio masters I have lying around.

It just needs to be really well-marketed as a different format (even though it's not) and have the support of the whole industry once HD-DVD falls (and Sony prepared to make it the successor of SACD)

Of course there's the whole DSD vs. PCM thing, but DSD just seems like another example of Sony going out and doing their own thing (and one that hasn't caught much industry support).


-fg-

[Sir Terrence]

Originally Posted by frenchglen

And let's face it, not that many people know what SACD is anyway. And personally, I think that having only two SACD authoring firms in the world (one in Japan and one in Austria) and not being able to make/copy your own SACDs has marred its popularity somewhat.

The also have a authoring facility in Hollywood, CA. I know this because I have been there. I don't know, SACD is an audio version of blu-ray. And let's face it, if the audio masters were our property, would we like to see our work all over the internet distributed for free? Not in a free market society we wouldn't. People really do not like to be truthful about this, and we are somewhat hyprocritical when we blame record companies for being this draconian. But I cannot help thinking that if I spent a quarter to half a million on production, advertisement, and distribution of my stuff, I wouldn't be equally as draconia in getting back my expenses.

Whereas I can already make my own Blu-CDs or DVD-Audios from studio masters I have lying around.

Some of us are fortunate. I have quite a few master myself, but not everyone is this fortunate.

Of course there's the whole DSD vs. PCM thing, but DSD just seems like another example of Sony going out and doing their own thing (and one that hasn't caught much industry support).


-fg-

In doing their own thing they have created a bitstream that has a very high digital resolution, but very analog sound. Something that DVD-audio can only do at 24/192khz two channel. As far as industry support, well so many independent record companies like Telarc, AIX, Nimbus and several others have turned out so many SACD, I do not think it really needed the majors to jump on board. If those who are really interested in high resolution music had just support the format, it would be doing fine.

[jorg]

profile 3 is a blu-ray player that plays only audio

[crackinhedz]

25gb and 50gb for audio only?? Thats an insane waste of space...I do see where you were trying to go with the "Blu CD" idea, but unless they plan on compiling an entire decade of music onto one bluray disc, I just dont see it happening...

[THE STUD]

i made a thread about sacd about 4 months ago or something, called
SACD is dead.
That's the only thing to say about SACd. it's barely even accessible beyond the internet. the 2 best buys in my valley of 500,000 people doesn't carry a single SACD anymore. i went to B&N and they said "what's sacd?" sacd is dead and i want a new format of HD audio stand alone. DVD-Audio is great, but it lacks the space to put a comprehensive collection in the highest quality possible, as well as more than 5.1.

I just don't know if there's a big enough market for it. People don't care about what they hear near as much as they care about what they can see, except for a few of us(me included). everybody can see the difference btw dvd and blu ray, but not between cd and sacd. thats why i think sacd failed.... and a lack of any good titles.

i own the LOTR expanded scores which features a dvd-audio of the scores, it's awesome to listen to, but due to lack of room it's only 48/24, not 96/24 or whatever. and it's only 5.1
thats my ideas on this

[dobyblue]

SACD is far more popular than DVD-Audio and also has OVER twice the titles available.

[jdc115]

I started another thread to ask a question about SACD. As far as I can tell, only the PS3 supports the format, not even Sony's stand alone player seems to support it.

I haven't purchased a Blu-ray player yet but plan to this year if I can find one that will support SACD. The PS3 only has 2 analog outputs from what I understand and my processor does not have HDMI input. So the PS3 would seem to limit me to 2 channel SACD (not a big deal) as well as not being able to utilize DD TrueHD.

Unless CD's will be phased out and replaced by a new format, I think any new audio format will just have a small following among audiophiles. The rest seem content to have MP3s.

I am just hoping to have a single Blu-ray player that supports SACD so I do not have to keep 2 players connected.

jon

[frenchglen]

Originally Posted by THE STUD

i made a thread about sacd about 4 months ago or something, called
SACD is dead.
That's the only thing to say about SACd. it's barely even accessible beyond the internet. the 2 best buys in my valley of 500,000 people doesn't carry a single SACD anymore. i went to B&N and they said "what's sacd?" sacd is dead and i want a new format of HD audio stand alone. DVD-Audio is great, but it lacks the space to put a comprehensive collection in the highest quality possible, as well as more than 5.1.

I agree with you completely. While SACD is much bigger than DVD-Audio, both failed and I don't think SACD playback in PS3 will save the format. Sony just want to maximize/increase sales as much as they can in that market.

I just don't know if there's a big enough market for it. People don't care about what they hear near as much as they care about what they can see, except for a few of us(me included). everybody can see the difference btw dvd and blu ray, but not between cd and sacd. thats why i think sacd failed.... and a lack of any good titles.

That's what I'm worried about too.

It's kind of a catch 22, people aren't as interested in surround sound systems because good sound equipment [that CAN show the difference between SACD and CD] is so expensive, and it's expensive because there's not enough consumer interest. But I'm optimistic. With HD video finally coming in, people will look to upgrade the audio too. I hope. I think prices will drop gradually because of this trend. Why else would the movie studios release high-res/lossless audio tracks if they thought noone could afford decent speakers? Not just for us early-adopters...oh no they don't care about screwing us with this format war.. not that we have to worry though

i own the LOTR expanded scores which features a dvd-audio of the scores, it's awesome to listen to, but due to lack of room it's only 48/24, not 96/24 or whatever. and it's only 5.1
thats my ideas on this

Exactly.

[HDJK]

Originally Posted by THE STUD

...
i own the LOTR expanded scores which features a dvd-audio of the scores, it's awesome to listen to, but due to lack of room it's only 48/24, not 96/24 or whatever. and it's only 5.1
thats my ideas on this

Originally Posted by THE STUD

let's hope people do start caring more, for my benefit
LOTR exp. score in 7.1pcm196/24 or 7.1DTS HD MASTER AUDIO
calm down me.....

Originally Posted by frenchglen

I'll second that. Can't wait for the day [if it ever arrives]

I hate to rain on anybodys parade, but it is a fact, that all soundtracks are recorded in PCM, most likely not exceeding 48kHz sampling rate. There may be a push towards 96kHz, but I doubt we will see a 192kHz soundtrack master for a 5.1 OST anytime soon. So really, there is absolutely no gain in going 192/24 for the LOTR scores.

[doctorsteve]

Originally Posted by THE STUD

i made a thread about sacd about 4 months ago or something, called
SACD is dead.
That's the only thing to say about SACd. it's barely even accessible beyond the internet.

I tried going to one of the sites that folks here had provided a link for and the site seemed completely unintelligible. The search function sucked, and I found myself scanning page after page of completely irrelevant selections that constantly repeated themselves...

Could anybody recommend a simple, easy to use and searchable website to purchase SACD's with good selection and a good reputation?

(Now that I figured out why my Dark Side of the Moon disc wasn't sounding as amazing as I thought it should, I'd like too get some more... like Bjork)

Suggestions please... Thanks, Doc.

[frenchglen]

Originally Posted by crackinhedz

25gb and 50gb for audio only?? Thats an insane waste of space...I do see where you were trying to go with the "Blu CD" idea, but unless they plan on compiling an entire decade of music onto one bluray disc, I just dont see it happening...

I Don't think so.

Imagine 24-bit 192KHz remasters from original Quad tapes. 80 minutes of 6-channel PCM at that resolution takes up 16GB. More than DVD-Audio.

Then you might go 7-channel or even 8 [though that's overkill I think].

And that's only for 80 mins. What about the LOTR extended soundtracks? They're 180 mins and wouldn't it be nice to fit double albums onto one disc.

Then add extra Dolby/DTS/PCM stereo tracks for compatibility with lower-end systems, video extras (esp. yummy HD video extras), galleries, etc. and you definitely need 25-50GB.

You can never have enough space.

[crackinhedz]

192 kHz is overkill...maybe, 96/24 and even thats pushing it.

[crackinhedz]

Originally Posted by frenchglen

Then add extra Dolby/DTS/PCM stereo tracks for compatibility with lower-end systems, video extras (esp. yummy HD video extras), galleries, etc. and you definitely need 25-50GB.

....now see, youre going from a "CD" to a bluray "video" disc, not what this topic was about, but you can start a new thread!

[frenchglen]

Originally Posted by jorg

profile 3 is a blu-ray player that plays only audio

No, I think Profile 3 is the disc standard, that only has obligations to audio, and advanced video features.

I don't think they'd bring out blu-ray audio-only players. Even Sony wouldn't do that. Maybe Toshiba one day.

[radagast]

Originally Posted by Aaron

The PS3 plays SACD's.

That is because SACD is a Sony format that competes with DVD Audio. I have never seen a player that plays both formats.