As if SACD and DVD-A wasn't enough...

According to this report, Dolby are coming up with something that is meant to have the edge on MLP:

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=26030

 

hmm i'm always a bit dubious when one lossless format claims 'better quality' over another . if it's truely lossless and can codec at the reqired resolution (dsd, 96/24, 192/24, whatever) then the only advantage will be in the memory footprint of the encoded file. with dvd let alone blu-ray this is rapidly becomming irrelevant (for music anyway - for hdtv recording / playback, that's another story).
cheers


julian.

 

Couldn't agree more, appears to be a solution to a question that no one has asked. Still, just think of how many thousands of hours Dolby must have spent developing it. At least it kept someone busy.

 

interested to hear more on this. Is blu-ray not what it was being pumped up to be?

 

I can't ever see a higher quality format taking off. The bloke in the street wants quantity for peanuts, not quality.

 

Lol, the bloke in the street usually wants my spare change!!

 

ditton,
i just meant that with 20gb - 50gb of storage, blu ray could store 4 hours of hdtv with 192/24 surround audio with very light to no compression (for the audio). if a lossless compression scheme is used unless they have come up with a radical new method it's only going to get roughly a 2:1 compression ratio just like most other lossless compression.

just as a side note i went into mvc the other day and there seemed to be an expplosion of music dvd's - not dvd-a or sacd just regular dvd's with music / videos on them.
cheers


julian

 

I was going to start a thread last week predicting this as the way of the future.

My reasoning went like this:

1) America leads, and everybody else follows - its the biggest market.
2) In the US people are getting home cinema systems instead of normal 2 channel.
3) These home cinema systems can play dvd's aswell as cd's.
4) Surely the next step is for artists to release albums on DVD's, with video content to watch at the same time?

Basically, I predict the eventual demise of CD players, with people having DVD players to play music on instead.

I give it, ummmmm 5 years.

 

there is no doubt that, with broadcast material, TV has greater appeal that radio, and can command larger budgets - in every respect.

The consumer will pay more for a TV than a radio, give it a more prominent place in their home and their leisure time. "Eyeballs matter more than ears as far as advertising is concerned." Producers of TV content have larger budgets than radio producers. Manufacturers of TVs command larger budgets etc ...

As I've argued elsewhere CDs are a bucket, often with the appeal of an LP album; packaging for recorded music in digital format that will nevertheless become available across the Internet in more convenient ways.

BUT ... there are these folk you hang out together who really like listening to music, for whom stereo does just fine, who do get something from the AV experience but its not essential (and can be a distraction).

That said, you might be right about music-focussed dvd albums. I will be interested to see what images get attached to 'old' music which was recorded in sound only.