Blu-ray CD - the future of High Resolution music?

[Teazle]

Count me in. CD sounds horrible next to SACD; too bad there aren't more of the latter.

[blindcat87]

If you have read the discussion, the reasons behind the failure of previous attempts have been discussed and they have nothing to do with consumers not caring about quality, but inconveniences of the new formats and consumers not being informed of quality differences. The differences are easy to hear and one does not need an expensive system to hear it, just a standard surround system or even a stereo system will do.

Dismissing the idea because previous attempt failed for reasons that can be avoided by a new format is no reason to dismiss it out of hand.

Chris

Originally Posted by statikcat

What reason is there to really have a disc with higher quality than CD? You are not going to gain much sonically. There have already been formats beyond CD - even ones that ran on DVDs and they all failed. The quality gain is so small and most people do not care about 5.1 in this reguard. CDs are still around because they already sound great. If anything music sales are showing that people don't mind even sacrificing cd quality to mp3s/aac.. These formats currently have no future at all imo.

[seto]

Nothing beats a good LP. Go analog! ^^

[NutsAboutPS3]

A "Blu-ray CD" can just be a standard Blu-ray disc, can't it, no need for a different format?

All they'd have to do is release a CD as a Blu-ray disc, they could include videos for tracks where available, or lyrics on the screen if there isn't a video. Audio in the highest possible quality lossless format, of course. Plus it would probably fit on a BD-25 so could be made a double sided disc, CD on one side, and BD-25 on the other. I think it's important to keep it CD playable so people can still play it in the car or rip the tracks to an mp3 player.

[jkwest]

I would be all for it...

Sony just has their hands tied right now...I'm pretty sure they have already considered this as an option...

[Teazle]

Originally Posted by NutsAboutPS3

A "Blu-ray CD" can just be a standard Blu-ray disc, can't it, no need for a different format?

All they'd have to do is release a CD as a Blu-ray disc, they could include videos for tracks where available, or lyrics on the screen if there isn't a video. Audio in the highest possible quality lossless format, of course. Plus it would probably fit on a BD-25 so could be made a double sided disc, CD on one side, and BD-25 on the other. I think it's important to keep it CD playable so people can still play it in the car or rip the tracks to an mp3 player.

AFAIK "the highest possible quality lossless format" now supported by Blu-ray is (I think) up to six channels of 24-bit PCM at 96 kHz. (I don't know offhand about 7.1 though 7.1 at 24/48 is possible.) Ideally an expansion of the spec would allow for DSD or maybe 24/192 PCM; that would be really hi-res.

[Flea77]

An easier option, and my personal favorite, just make SACD part of the BD player required specs. This way, everyone who buys a BD player gets a SACD player, then you already have tons of units people can play NOW, factories already equipped to make more, people already familiar with how to make it, and lastly, you preserve people's investment in their current SACD/CD collection.

I make this suggestion because I am not sure you will get much more out of BD than SACD and I already have SACDs and they sound fantastic. Just update the SACD specs to take HDMI into account (if you must, personally I go with the analog outputs, and there are strong reasons to do this).

Personally I think the masses failed to adopt either SACD or DVDA because they had garbage for sound systems. Now with BD and their HD TVs they will have surround systems that can show them the difference between what a CD sounds like (crap) and a nice multi-channel SACD (awesome).

Allan

[Gremal]

Originally Posted by Flea77

An easier option, and my personal favorite, just make SACD part of the BD player required specs.

An excellent suggestion, but I think the BD specs are open enough to include DSD, if studios would agree to include that in their HD productions. There is even a higher sampling rate of 5.2 MHz now associated with DSD. This would be wonderful on film soundtracks and audio-only BDs, if record labels would see fit to issue them.

[cruzzer cruz]

it really sucks that this will probably not happen. i hate downloaded music, it sounds like crap.

i may not have bought a cd in a long time, but i'd support a better format like BD.

[Teazle]

Originally Posted by Gremal

An excellent suggestion, but I think the BD specs are open enough to include DSD, if studios would agree to include that in their HD productions. There is even a higher sampling rate of 5.2 MHz now associated with DSD. This would be wonderful on film soundtracks and audio-only BDs, if record labels would see fit to issue them.

I was just surfing re: this new 5.6 MHz DSD spec which I hadn't heard of til now and found this story about a 5.6 recording from last year:

http://mixonline.com/mixline/nco-korg-mr1000-020507/

Quote:
Recording engineer Brian Foraker (a member of the product’s beta testing team) and NCO [Nashville Chamber Orchestra] staff audio engineer Gary Hedden tested the MR-1000. “We did a recording of a rehearsal day and then had Paul come to listen at Gary’s studio,” says Foraker. “We played back both the [MR-1000’s] DSD 5.6 MHz recording and a 24/96kHz PCM version, then switched between them. He was amazed at the experience of hearing the NCO like this.”

==
For the doubters, the situation with hi-res audio is comparable to that of HDM for film: there's information in the analogue source which low-quality digital can't capture adequately within the bounds of normal human perception. Just as DVD is inadequate to capture everything on the actual film medium, CD quality is similarly inadequate to capture music (either original analogue recording or live perf recorded digitally).

[CptGreedle]

Originally Posted by seto

Nothing beats a good LP. Go analog! ^^

While I can't argue with you directly, I can say that a friend of mine has taken me to his home to show me his $26k speakers (each) and precision $100k+ set up... in his home. Yes the turn table sounds AMAZING. But with the set up he has, a regular CD sounds almost as good!!! He is a serious audiophile and has spent tens of thousands of dollars on a top-of-the-line state-of-the-art CD player that separates all the components and gives an amazing result. However yes his turn table sounded even better!
But the last thing he showed was his SACD player, and I must say that I could take that over a turntable any day. Sure they sound identical (or close to it) to me... and some will argue that the warmer sound of the turntable is better and sounds superior, but it is so close that the convenience of a digital disc wins out. No scratches and pops, no trying to find the right track, no large vinyl to store, and it supports multi-channel.
I must admit that he prefers his turntable still, and that turntable was amazing (so precise that it had almost no pops or scratches), but he is also opening up to SACD more and more.
For me, my system doesn't even cost a fraction of a fraction of his... I spent about $300 on all 9 speakers, and $800 on the Receiver... plus $500ish for the PS3... so that leaves me at less than $2k...... a far cry from his. So I can barely hear the difference between a CD and an SACD on mine, but I absolutely love the multi-channel. That alone makes the SACD worth it. I do plan to (someday) get better speakers, but until then I will live with what I got.
A music BD is silly. You already can get a music DVD, and an SACD. I think adding 2 channels is not worth it, and the quality of an SACD can not be beat.

Are music DVDs and SACDs similar quality?

[tiger roach]

I would really love for a higher-res format to replace CDs. I had high hopes for SACD... *sigh*

It's just that most of the music-buyers out there are happy with mp3, which is even lower resolution than CDs. The differences of high-res in the audio world are just not as apparrant to most people as they are in the video realm.

[Teazle]

Originally Posted by CptGreedle

But the last thing he showed was his SACD player, and I must say that I could take that over a turntable any day. Sure they sound identical (or close to it) to me... and some will argue that the warmer sound of the turntable is better and sounds superior, but it is so close that the convenience of a digital disc wins out. No scratches and pops, no trying to find the right track, no large vinyl to store, and it supports multi-channel.

Apart from the differences of convenience, lack of scratches/pops and (!!) the fact that optical discs don't wear out, vinyl isn't so great with the low end. Low mids are OK but ordinary CD tends to beat vinyl in the bass since it's harder to get that needle wobbling for the lows and I think maybe impossible for the sub-bass (say 30Hz or under) -- someone correct me if I'm wrong there.

[reiella]

Originally Posted by Bluray_ne1

I tend to agree, music downloads, rather than video, is where things are headed. I just want to see downloadable multi-channel surround sound music (like SACD) available. I love my SACD's, there just aren't that many good ones out there that suit my taste.

The music environment is heading that way because of portable media.

While admittantly, there are some nice 3d headphones that create multichannel output. They're not that common, especially when you're looking at the portable layer.

I don't think we'll see a jump in that manner for a while largely because of that.

I think you may be better off fighting for more studios to release music video blus or concert blus to get your hi-quality sound in a home theatre setting ;(.

[NutsAboutPS3]

Originally Posted by CptGreedle

A music BD is silly. You already can get a music DVD, and an SACD. I think adding 2 channels is not worth it, and the quality of an SACD can not be beat.

Are music DVDs and SACDs similar quality?

I don't understand your comparison between a music BD and a music DVD. A music BD could have LPCM at 192kHz 24bit, which surely is a big improvement over CD and DVD.

Admittedly SACD might be even better, but the music BD would be playable in any BD player. I'm just looking ahead to when BD replaces DVD and the majority of households have a BD player.

[JimPullan]

Myself, being an audiophile, your points here are right on! Just because some think the compressed audio on their ipod sounds good and a regular CD sounds great, have not 'experienced' musical entertainment at 192/24 or 96/24 two channel or multi-channel. Wth the mass storage capacity of this new format (Blu-ray) taking hold, it is only logical to use that fantastic medium to concurrently introduce Blu-CD's. Whether lossless linear PCM (Digital) or uncompressed PCM Analog, the difference is staggering, not to mention totally immersive. You are actually hearing the music, not the speakers. [Jim]

Originally Posted by blindcat87

If you have read the discussion, the reasons behind the failure of previous attempts have been discussed and they have nothing to do with consumers not caring about quality, but inconveniences of the new formats and consumers not being informed of quality differences. The differences are easy to hear and one does not need an expensive system to hear it, just a standard surround system or even a stereo system will do.

Dismissing the idea because previous attempt failed for reasons that can be avoided by a new format is no reason to dismiss it out of hand.

Chris

[johnnymech]

Originally Posted by BluSmoke

I think it would be great if the BDA decided to release the 8cm discs as the high definition replacements for CDs.

If you haven't noticed, the music industry has been tanking for years. People don't buy CDs as it is. I don't think people will spend more for what they're not paying for now.

[Chuey]

Originally Posted by CptGreedle

A music BD is silly. You already can get a music DVD, and an SACD. I think adding 2 channels is not worth it, and the quality of an SACD can not be beat.

Are music DVDs and SACDs similar quality?

For an audiopile like myself, I don't think a music BD is silly, instead I think its a great idea and I wish I could see that some day. Better yet if they can put DSD on a BD with multi channels and high resolution 2 channel I will be in heaven.

Music DVD and SACD does not have the same sound quality as SACD, not even close in a high resolution system like your friend has.

[The Seventh Taylor]

Originally Posted by CptGreedle

Are music DVDs and SACDs similar quality?

Check this section of the SACD FAQ:

"How does multi-channel sound on SA-CD (and DVD-Audio) differ from surround sound on DVD-Video?"

[Clark Kent]

The real missed opportunity for the music industry was them not forcing the issue. If they had released every cd of the last 5 years as a hybrid sacd they would have converted many consumers to high resolution music. But the silly format wars and some labels releasing only on dvd-audio killed that chance possibly forever. With where the music market is moving towards, cheap lossy downloads, I just don't see a Blu-ray CD being anymore successful than prior formats.