Since DVDs can hold 10x the info of CDs, is music available in 24 bit 192kHz or
better sampling? Does anyone do 'Audio DVDs'?

--
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 01:16:30 +0000, Dirk Bruere at Neopax
wrote:

Since DVDs can hold 10x the info of CDs, is music available in 24 bit 192kHz or
better sampling? Does anyone do 'Audio DVDs'?

Sure. From the original DADs (Classic and Chesky Records) through
DVD-A to DualDisc, there are many(!) audio-only DVD-based recordings.
There are even more on a related format, SACD.

I would have though you knew that.

Kal

Kalman Rubinson wrote:

On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 01:16:30 +0000, Dirk Bruere at Neopax
wrote:


Since DVDs can hold 10x the info of CDs, is music available in 24 bit 192kHz or
better sampling? Does anyone do 'Audio DVDs'?


Sure. From the original DADs (Classic and Chesky Records) through
DVD-A to DualDisc, there are many(!) audio-only DVD-based recordings.
There are even more on a related format, SACD.

I would have though you knew that.

Not really.
I've been thrown into the audio end of a project concerning uncompressed digital
wireless tech and am having to do some background research on related topics
that may impact design decisions. I am not an audio engineer and previously my
idea of a good system involved PC speakers and MP3:-)

Now I have to start looking at why someone might spend $15k on something a
little better.

--
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 01:55:44 +0000, Dirk Bruere at Neopax
wrote:

I've been thrown into the audio end of a project concerning uncompressed digital
wireless tech and am having to do some background research on related topics
that may impact design decisions. I am not an audio engineer and previously my
idea of a good system involved PC speakers and MP3:-)

Interesting. Several devices for uncompressed wireless audio
transmission were shown/discussed at the recent CES.

Now I have to start looking at why someone might spend $15k on something a
little better.

That's a complex question. ;-)

Kal

Kalman Rubinson wrote:

On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 01:55:44 +0000, Dirk Bruere at Neopax
wrote:


I've been thrown into the audio end of a project concerning uncompressed digital
wireless tech and am having to do some background research on related topics
that may impact design decisions. I am not an audio engineer and previously my
idea of a good system involved PC speakers and MP3:-)


Interesting. Several devices for uncompressed wireless audio
transmission were shown/discussed at the recent CES.

So far there is no perfect solution for high end audio that I have discovered.

--
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 03:00:05 +0000, Dirk Bruere at Neopax
wrote:

So far there is no perfect solution for high end audio that I have discovered.

Nor I. But I hope you and others keep trying.
IMHO, it is one of the things impeding the growth of multichannel.

Kal

On 1/16/2006 9:00 PM, Dirk Bruere at Neopax wrote:
Kalman Rubinson wrote:

On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 01:55:44 +0000, Dirk Bruere at Neopax
wrote:


I've been thrown into the audio end of a project concerning
uncompressed digital wireless tech and am having to do some
background research on related topics that may impact design
decisions. I am not an audio engineer and previously my idea of a
good system involved PC speakers and MP3:-)


Interesting. Several devices for uncompressed wireless audio
transmission were shown/discussed at the recent CES.

So far there is no perfect solution for high end audio that I have
discovered.


SlimServer/SqueeeBox wirelessly streams FLAC files (I do it). The FLAC
file is uncompressed to CD format in the SqueezeBox and sent to the
stereo.

Dan

"Dirk Bruere at Neopax" wrote in message
...


So far there is no perfect solution for high end audio that I have
discovered.

Possible solutions for high end audio:

Reeducation camps
Medical treatments
Cold Turkey withdrawal

;-)

Dirk Bruere at Neopax wrote:

Now I have to start looking at why someone might spend $15k on something a
little better.

Feed good audio to a pair of Klein & Hummels, and I think you will
understand, even if those are less than $15K/pair.

--
ha

hank alrich wrote:

Dirk Bruere at Neopax wrote:


Now I have to start looking at why someone might spend $15k on something a
little better.


Feed good audio to a pair of Klein & Hummels, and I think you will
understand, even if those are less than $15K/pair.

Well, we have some new types of speaker that really are revolutionary (to the
extent that I have not seen anything like them on the market). Doing the
frequency equalisation across the spectrum using onboard DSPs is part of what
I'm working on. They sound really good to me, although I cannot claim the Golden
Ears award.

--
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

Dirk Bruere at Neopax wrote:

Well, we have some new types of speaker that really are revolutionary
(to the extent that I have not seen anything like them on the market).
Doing the frequency equalisation across the spectrum using onboard DSPs
is part of what I'm working on.

Who's "we"?


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no simpler."

A. Einstein

"Kalman Rubinson" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 01:16:30 +0000, Dirk Bruere at Neopax
wrote:

Since DVDs can hold 10x the info of CDs, is music available in 24 bit
192kHz or
better sampling? Does anyone do 'Audio DVDs'?

Sure. From the original DADs (Classic and Chesky Records) through
DVD-A to DualDisc, there are many(!) audio-only DVD-based recordings.
There are even more on a related format, SACD.

More to the point, what uncompressed formats are DVD players required to
have in order to be called DVD players. Is there a high quality stereo
format that all DVD players must be able to play? Seems I recall something
about 48k sample rate.

I'm not looking here for what is frequently found, but what is absolutely
required in a DVD player.

Norm Strong

"Dirk Bruere at Neopax"

Since DVDs can hold 10x the info of CDs, is music available in 24 bit
192kHz or better sampling? Does anyone do 'Audio DVDs'?



** Pretty much every hi-fi scam imaginable has been pulled by someone or
other.

So it has with audio DVDs.




......... Phil

Phil Allison wrote:

"Dirk Bruere at Neopax"

Since DVDs can hold 10x the info of CDs, is music available in 24 bit
192kHz or better sampling? Does anyone do 'Audio DVDs'?




** Pretty much every hi-fi scam imaginable has been pulled by someone or
other.

So it has with audio DVDs.

Been looking at SACD tech, and rather ****ed off with the copy protection crap.
It means that a media PC cannot support it.
I also assume that there is no digital o/p.

So, how about feeding the audio into an ADC and sampling at 24bits 192kHz, then
storing that on the PC? Still higher quality than normal CD?

--
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

"Dirk Bruere at Neopax"


** Pretty much every hi-fi scam imaginable has been pulled by someone or
other.

So it has with audio DVDs.


So, how about feeding the audio into an ADC and sampling at 24bits 192kHz,
then storing that on the PC? Still higher quality than normal CD?



** What sort of "audio" would that be?

..


......... Phil

Phil Allison wrote:

"Dirk Bruere at Neopax"


** Pretty much every hi-fi scam imaginable has been pulled by someone or
other.

So it has with audio DVDs.


So, how about feeding the audio into an ADC and sampling at 24bits 192kHz,
then storing that on the PC? Still higher quality than normal CD?




** What sort of "audio" would that be?

Well, one presumes that since it is being fed into an ADC it is analogue audio.
What do you think?

--
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

Dirk Bruere at Neopax wrote:

Phil Allison wrote:

"Dirk Bruere at Neopax"


** Pretty much every hi-fi scam imaginable has been pulled by
someone or other.

So it has with audio DVDs.



So, how about feeding the audio into an ADC and sampling at 24bits
192kHz, then storing that on the PC? Still higher quality than normal
CD?





** What sort of "audio" would that be?


Well, one presumes that since it is being fed into an ADC it is analogue
audio.

Logical conclusion.

What do you think?

Phil? Think?

"Dirk Bruere at Neopax"


** Pretty much every hi-fi scam imaginable has been pulled by someone or
other.

So it has with audio DVDs.


So, how about feeding the audio into an ADC and sampling at 24bits
192kHz, then storing that on the PC? Still higher quality than normal CD?



** What sort of "audio" would that be?

Well, one presumes that since it is being fed into an ADC it is analogue
audio.


** How smartarse.

You are bereft of even the tiniest clue.

The hi-fi audio charlatans & scammers will LOVE you.




......... Phil

On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 03:33:37 +0000, Dirk Bruere at Neopax
wrote:

Phil Allison wrote:

"Dirk Bruere at Neopax"

Since DVDs can hold 10x the info of CDs, is music available in 24 bit
192kHz or better sampling? Does anyone do 'Audio DVDs'?




** Pretty much every hi-fi scam imaginable has been pulled by someone or
other.

So it has with audio DVDs.

Been looking at SACD tech, and rather ****ed off with the copy protection crap.
It means that a media PC cannot support it.
I also assume that there is no digital o/p.
Copy-protection bothers me not but I understand it is an issue for
others. The only digital outputs I know of are iLink, D-Link (Denon
proprietary) and an Accuphase proprietary protocol. HDMI 1.2 is
coming. There may be others.

So, how about feeding the audio into an ADC and sampling at 24bits 192kHz, then
storing that on the PC? Still higher quality than normal CD?
Already done, thanks.

Kal

Kalman Rubinson wrote:

On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 03:33:37 +0000, Dirk Bruere at Neopax
wrote:


Phil Allison wrote:


"Dirk Bruere at Neopax"


Since DVDs can hold 10x the info of CDs, is music available in 24 bit
192kHz or better sampling? Does anyone do 'Audio DVDs'?




** Pretty much every hi-fi scam imaginable has been pulled by someone or
other.

So it has with audio DVDs.

Been looking at SACD tech, and rather ****ed off with the copy protection crap.
It means that a media PC cannot support it.
I also assume that there is no digital o/p.

Copy-protection bothers me not but I understand it is an issue for
others. The only digital outputs I know of are iLink, D-Link (Denon
proprietary) and an Accuphase proprietary protocol. HDMI 1.2 is
coming. There may be others.


So, how about feeding the audio into an ADC and sampling at 24bits 192kHz, then
storing that on the PC? Still higher quality than normal CD?

Already done, thanks.

But given a normal CD and the same recording in SACD format is it worth the
bother? Or is the normal CD better than the ripped SACD?

--
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

"Dirk Bruere at Neopax" wrote in message
...


But given a normal CD and the same recording in SACD format is it worth
the bother? Or is the normal CD better than the ripped SACD?

Here's the exact relevant experiment:

(1) In some sense rip the SACD, which isn't easy because the format is
designed to be unrippable.
(2) Do a quality job of downsampling to 44/16, vastly *reducing* its
bandwidth and resolution, at least in the technical sense.
(3) Then turn right around and upsample the 44/16 back to SACD format, to
enhance their comparability.
(4) Do a level-matched, time-synched, bias-controlled comparison.

This is a fairly hard experiment to do because as I pointed out, SACDs are
designed to be unrippable, and facilities for converting 44/16 to SACD don't
exactly grow on trees.

Here's the experiment that is doable and has been done:

1) Produce the widest bandwidth, dynamic range 24/96 recording of revealing
music or natural sounds that you can.
(2) Do a quality job of downsampling to 44/16, vastly *reducing* its
bandwidth and resolution, at least in the technical sense.
(3) Then turn right around and upsample the 44/16 back to 24/06, again to
enhance comparability.
(4) Do a level-matched, time-synched, bias-controlled comparison.

You can probably do the listening part of this experiment yourself. You can
find the relevant pre-fab music files at
http://www.pcabx.com/technical/sample_rates/ . If you don't like the music,
do your own recordings and see if you can do better. AFAIK, nobody has
obtained better results than what you can obtain with these files.

"Dirk Bruere at Neopax" wrote in message
...
But given a normal CD and the same recording in SACD format is it worth
the
bother? Or is the normal CD better than the ripped SACD?

Only you can decide that. If you can find a "high end" audio store that
will let you try out their equipment, I'd bring in a normal CD and a SACD of
the same content, and have a friend (*not* the salesman at the store) switch
between the two while you try to decide if one sounds better than the other.
This is called a double blind test. If you can't tell the difference, why
pay the money for SACD?

Jeff
--
Remove icky phrase from email address to get a valid address.

On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 03:54:55 +0000, Dirk Bruere at Neopax
wrote:

But given a normal CD and the same recording in SACD format is it worth the
bother? Or is the normal CD better than the ripped SACD?
Usually, the 2channel SACD is marginally superior to the CD and,
although it is possible, the normal CD is very rarely better than the
SACD. Of course, you cannot rip an SACD and the differences in mixing
and mastering are generally more significant than format differences..
IMHO, the major advantage of SACD (and DVD-A) is that they are
lossless multichannel formats.

Kal

Dirk Bruere at Neopax wrote:

Been looking at SACD tech, and rather ****ed off with the copy
protection crap.

Well, can you blame them?

It means that a media PC cannot support it.

See above.

So, how about feeding the audio into an ADC and sampling at 24bits
192kHz, then storing that on the PC? Still higher quality than normal CD?

Marginally. Once a PCM conversion has taken place.

Dr. Dolittle wrote:

Dirk Bruere at Neopax wrote:

Been looking at SACD tech, and rather ****ed off with the copy
protection crap.


Well, can you blame them?

Yes.
It eliminates rights that we supposedly already have concerning fair use, making
backups etc. I will never buy any audio disc that I cannot copy onto the HDD of
my PC.

--
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 03:57:20 +0000, Dirk Bruere at Neopax
wrote:

It eliminates rights that we supposedly already have concerning fair use, making
backups etc. I will never buy any audio disc that I cannot copy onto the HDD of
my PC.

Buy the music, not the technology :-) If you can hear it, you can
copy it. Maybe not directly and digitally, but so what?

"Dirk Bruere at Neopax" wrote in message
...
Dr. Dolittle wrote:

Dirk Bruere at Neopax wrote:

Been looking at SACD tech, and rather ****ed off with the copy
protection crap.


Well, can you blame them?

Yes.
It eliminates rights that we supposedly already have concerning fair use,
making backups etc. I will never buy any audio disc that I cannot copy
onto the HDD of my PC.

Some people don't like to admit it, but 24/192 is a superset format, as
compared to SACD. IOW 24/192 is superior to SACD in terms of both bandwidth
and dynamic range.

Therefore, if you take one of the top audio interfaces around like a
LynxTWO, and digitize the analog outputs of a top-quality SACD player, you
should have a 24/192 recording that fully realizes the potential of SACD or
at least comes very, very close. If you did this with a SACD test
recording, and analyzed the results, you should find a very, very good
indication of the quality of the original SACD recording.