Are you interested in Blu-ray Audio (Profile 3.0)

[Josh]

As many of you you know, Blu-ray spec also has a third profile for just audio content. The difference between this profile and the BonusView (Profile v1.1) and BD-Live (Profile 2.0) profiles is that it allows the disc to automatically start playing without any visual navigation required.

While high definition audio is not a new idea, the war between DVD-A and SACD effectively killed the formats, preventing them from becoming mainstream.

There have already been some audio releases (such as TrondheimSolistene: Divertimenti and Nine Inch Nails: Ghosts I-IV), but nothing from the larger music studios. I am taking a poll to gauge interest in the idea of Blu-ray music, so please answer honestly.

[stockstar1138]

if ive already got the equipment, why not buy better sounding media.

never bought SACD or DVDA, but would be intrested in BD audio.

[kx11]

i have a dvd-a album (megadeth,peace sells but who's buying) and i don't mind bd profile 3.0

actually there's a HD-audio album comin' from Halford (judas priest) this year hopefully

https://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=1129

[HDJK]

You want an honest answer? It would be a dream come true

I don't mind how they do it now (kind of like DVDA) but the ease of use of the SACD and the potential adaption of the format of all the record companies (and then mass consumer adaption) sure sounds

[Bobby Henderson]

A "BD Profile 3.0" setup is absolutely UNNECESSARY.

The Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio formats can deliver anything that DVD-A could deliver and do so using current player models that can decode or output those formats.

SACD's 1-bit Direct Stream Digital audio operates on a different principal of Delta Modulation (many millions of samples played per second with only 1-bit per sample). Still, the end result is in the same ballpark as 24-bit 96kHz audio.

Originally Posted by SS316SRV

If I cannot put it onto a portable music player, I am out.

Though it may be hard to believe, there are people who actually do listen to music on home stereo systems in their living rooms. Pre-recorded music is not made exclusively for iPods.

Audio on Blu-ray could serve every purpose of music listening. The master quality audio would be perfect for any home stereo setup, no matter how high-end it may be. BD Live features would allow portable versions of the music to be offloaded to a flash drive attached to the player. Those files could then be loaded directly into portable music devices or put onto a computer for the audio to be burned onto standard CD-R discs.

[HDJK]

Originally Posted by Bobby Henderson

A "BD Profile 3.0" setup is absolutely UNNECESSARY.

The Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio formats can deliver anything that DVD-A could deliver and do so using current player models that can decode or output those formats.
...

It's not about new codecs, but a feature that would allow the player to start playing right away (like a CD). At least I think it is...

[Josh]

Profile 3.0 would just use existing codecs to store sound more like a CD - as individual tracks which would start playing immediately.

I just ordered SACDs for Dark Side of the Moon and The Downward Spiral. Can't wait to check those out!

[plm999]

Originally Posted by HDJK

It's not about new codecs, but a feature that would allow the player to start playing right away (like a CD). At least I think it is...

You are correct. The motivation behind Profile 3.0 was "headless" (no video) navigation. The codecs available for Profile 3.0 are exactly the same as the other profiles. I would love to have well produced, 24-bit, lossless music!

[SS316SRV]

Originally Posted by Bobby Henderson

Though it may be hard to believe, there are people who actually do listen to music on home stereo systems in their living rooms. Pre-recorded music is not made exclusively for iPods.

I never said it was. For me, I listen to music prodominately in the car or when I am excersicing. If I cannot put it onto my iPod, then I am not interested. For home listening, it would be amazing, no doubts. I have heard SACD and DVDa. I rarely, if ever sit down and listen to music in my home.

[prerich]

I actually don't care because I enjoy listening to my music in 2-channel. I've heard some DVD-A and I liked it but would I replace my exisiting 2 channel music collection for a 7.1 experience - I don't thnk so. Would I buy some, yes I would, but I don't think its fesable for the average person (its hard enough to get people to mass accept BD let alone going Profile 3.0).

[threenine]

Originally Posted by SS316SRV

I never said it was. For me, I listen to music prodominately in the car or when I am excersicing. If I cannot put it onto my iPod, then I am not interested. For home listening, it would be amazing, no doubts. I have heard SACD and DVDa. I rarely, if ever sit down and listen to music in my home.

You bring up a great point. High resolution audio for personal use and for the car make more sense from a business perspective. Props to Acura for including DVD-A functionality in their cars \o/

[Mark L.]

Profile 3.0 would generate interest for the audiophiles but for the average person MP3 sound quality is good enough. For some sad reason most people prefer quantity over quality.

[matthewrounds]

Originally Posted by stockstar1138

if ive already got the equipment, why not buy better sounding media.

never bought SACD or DVDA, but would be intrested in BD audio.

I agree 100%. Now that I have heard true high definition audio with my recent upgrade in receiver and speakers, I can justify buying music discs again.

[Lucy Diamond]

I was always (an still am) an old analog war dog and would prefer analog anyday, but when I started listening to lossless digital formats, I began to relax a little.

Analog will always be better, but lossless digital will always be a good stand-by and a LOT less of a pain in the ass.

I'm in.

[Bobby Henderson]

Originally Posted by AlexKx

Am I to understand that this format would be able to include the huge loads of audio recordings in stereo and 5.1?

Up to 50GB of capacity allows for a LOT of possibilities. Certain DVD-A titles with less than 1/5 the data capacity would feature 24-bit 96kHz 5.1 surround and 24-bit 192kHz 2.0 stereo mixes on the same disc. Blu-ray would certainly allow for the same thing, but also allow for numerous audio formats, different languages, alternate versions, etc.

Originally Posted by AlexKx

I just hope that they go back to making the package like a vinyl in size but in better material that will last throughout life such as using plastic instead of the cardboard slipcases as they not only don't hold up over time but also turn yellow.

I liked 12" vinyl LP packaging because it allowed for elaborate cover illustrations and large goodies inside. The Jazz album by Queen came with a large poster showing over 100 attractive nude women on the starting line of a bicycle race. The re-mastered CD makes that poster into a sad joke; the image is reduced to the size of a freaking postage stamp.

Unfortunately, I don't think retail music packaging anywhere near the size of a vinyl LP will ever make a comeback. Retailers would fight such a thing because of that kind of product would hog valuable shelf space. I believe that's one of the reasons why Laserdisc never became a mainstream item. Most retailers simply would not stock it.

Audio-oriented Blu-ray discs need to keep the same packaging form factor as movies on Blu-ray. Changing the size or shape may confuse potential customers.

Originally Posted by Lucy Diamond

Analog will always be better, but lossless digital will always be a good stand-by and a LOT less of a pain in the ass.

I don't agree with that blanket statement.

Some forms of analog audio have better playback quality potential than standard 16-bit "red book" music CD. If an analog-based audio master is acquired at high resolutions, such as 24-bit 192kHz, every nuance of the original recording is going to be there in the data. Any perceived "warmth" or whatever coming from a vinyl turn table or cassette tape deck is more likely going to be mechanically induced abberations from that playback device.

Right now, the main problem with recorded music isn't playback -it's the quality of the original recording itself. Many new music titles suck in terms of recording quality. So many are made loud and harsh so they can be loud on radio and have consistent audio quality between music CD and the bit-starved MP3 & AAC formats. Music marketing has stepped in the way of audio quality. The evidence of this is easily seen when you import a lot of modern music into sound editing applications. The peaks of audio waves are not just clipped. They're downright amputated. In jacking up levels past normal peaks, lots of audio detail (big parts of the wave form) have been deleted. With that kind of crap being passed off for recorded music these days, there's little point in going to the trouble to get a new release on vinyl.

[owa]

Originally Posted by stockstar1138

if ive already got the equipment, why not buy better sounding media.

never bought SACD or DVDA, but would be intrested in BD audio.

That answer works for me as well.

[SS316SRV]

If I cannot put it onto a portable music player, I am out.

[Stephan.klose]

Originally Posted by SS316SRV

If I cannot put it onto a portable music player, I am out.

High quality content on a portable music player? That's like copying a BD on a VHS tape

[Halcro 1]

Originally Posted by SS316SRV

If I cannot put it onto a portable music player, I am out.

portable player=crappy sound

[fighthefutureofhd]

Originally Posted by Halcro 1

portable player=crappy sound

that depends. what kind of portable player are you talking about?