Post by dvda-sacd January 7, 2008 (21 of 104)
|
|
Daland said:
Most people are happy with DVD and do not even take full advantage of what it offers (surround sound, other language versions, subtitles, bonus material).
Most people are happy with DivX. Most people are happy with MP3.
|
|
|
|
|
|
dvda-sacd said:
Most people are happy with DivX. Most people are happy with MP3.
When the PS2 came out they had a marketing slogn, "Do not underestimate the power of the Playstation".
At the risk of soundign simplistic and fanboy-ish; Do not underestimate the power of the PS3 to convince people that HD-level AV is a worthwhile pursuit.
|
|
|
Post by Derek January 7, 2008 (23 of 104)
|
|
What is interesting to me is the possibility of hi rez audio releases using the winning (Blu Ray) format and whether this is possible.
I believe the Blu Ray spec allows for 7.1 channels of uncomrpessed PCM audio so it would be great to see something a little more mainstream come into existance. Don't get me wrong I love SACD but am always annoyed at lack of titles available and lack of stock where I live. The sooner CD dies the better IMO :-)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derek said:
What is interesting to me is the possibility of hi rez audio releases using the winning (Blu Ray) format and whether this is possible.
I believe the Blu Ray spec allows for 7.1 channels of uncomrpessed PCM audio so it would be great to see something a little more mainstream come into existance. Don't get me wrong I love SACD but am always annoyed at lack of titles available and lack of stock where I live. The sooner CD dies the better IMO :-)
Ditto, my sentiments exactly.
The point is, as Cookie Morenco has pointed out on a different thread, SACD pressing facilities are fizziling out, so we who want a high-res format could hold out hope for Blu Ray. Plus, it's more universal than SACD, i.e. usable for games and PC software, movies, AND high-res music.
The fact that it's PCM rather than DSD doesn't matter to me because as I have found out, the quality is more dependent on masterign than if the coind is PCM or DSD.
|
|
|
Post by Claude January 7, 2008 (25 of 104)
|
|
dvda-sacd said:
Most people are happy with DivX. Most people are happy with MP3.
I know you are being provocative, but that statement shows that simplified analogies don't work here.
- Picture quality vs sound quality:
Just because someone thinks DivX-compressed copies of movies are not good enough (there are clearly visible artefacts, even on "high quality" (1.4GB) DivX files), it does not mean that he also thinks MP3s are not good enough. Many people are unable to hear a difference between CDs and high quality MP3s (>192kbs). Picture quality is way more important for the public than sound quality.
- The perceived optimum quality level:
Just because someone thinks MP3s are not good enough, it does not mean that he will be interested in hi-rez audio. For many people (including many audiophiles) CD is the optimum quality standard, and they don't need anything better. The same is true for HD video vs DVD. Many people could afford a Mercedes or BMW, but they prefer to buy a cheaper car, because they don't think it's worth having the best.
The most common mistake among SACD fanboys is that they think people who are not interested in hi-rez will be convinced by it's advantages once they are made aware of them.
|
|
|
Post by dvda-sacd January 7, 2008 (26 of 104)
|
|
Claude said:
I know you are being provocative, but that statement shows that simplified analogies don't work here.
I never meant to be provocative.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Claude said:
The most common mistake among SACD fanboys is that they think people who are not interested in hi-rez will be convinced by it's advantages once they are made aware of them.
One would expect a certain percentage of them to be convinced, but certainly, as you have demonstrated, not all.
I could afford a "better" car but I absolutely have no interest. On the other hand, I used to comment after a particularly rousing finale in Boston's Symphony Hall that I wish I could get my stereo to sound like that. With my 5 channel sacd system in place, I no longer think I am so far removed from that ideal. What I have is, in many respects, pretty close and I wonder how larger speakers and amplifiers will improve the sound where I still feel it falls short. (That is in the triple fortes).
But what surprises me when I talk about it with my seat mates is that they show polite interest but hardly enthusiasm.... and that is precisely where I would expect to have seen some enthusiasm. I would have thought people who attend live concerts would clamor for the sound I (think) I am describing. Maybe I just am not so good a salesman?
Back to the implications of this thread, it looks to me as if Blu-Ray, given the sample rate that it can support, would actually make pcm as good as dsd and with the opportunity for 7 audio channels, has the potential for superior reproduction. Having been seated up close (3rd row) for a couple of Julia Fischer's New York Philharmonic concerts, I know my wife and I would enjoy watching her on well produced Blu-Ray discs in concert! The same for Leif Ove Andsnes, the Metropolitan Opera and the Kirov Ballet doing Prokofiev! Not sure how my listening room would accommodate the TV monitor however!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Daland said:
It may even outlast BluRay as well. I am not so sure that there is a mass market for high-definition video. The situation is similar to that in the audio field. Most people are happy with DVD and do not even take full advantage of what it offers (surround sound, other language versions, subtitles, bonus material). Perhaps there is another disaster in the making for the entertainment industry.
I think you are wrong in your beliefs. Most people do not know the benefits of HI-DEF because they do not have a tv for it. This will change soon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Windsurfer said:
Not sure how my listening room would accommodate the TV monitor however!
Get a motorised screen that attaches to ceiling or even one that sits on a mobile stand and pulls up.
Then get a 1080p projector for a lovely big, "just like at the concert" sense of scale!
|
|
|
Post by Julien January 7, 2008 (30 of 104)
|
|
flyingdutchman said:
I think you are wrong in your beliefs. Most people do not know the benefits of HI-DEF because they do not have a tv for it. This will change soon.
True. Especially given the fact that most human beings are far more sensible to video quality than audio quality.
|
|
