1. Join Now

    AVForums.com uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

DVD-A vs SACD

Discussion in 'Hi-Fi Stereo Systems & Separates' started by karkus30, Jan 1, 2005.

  1. karkus30

    karkus30
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2002
    Messages:
    13,991
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +1,261
    This has no doubt been answered a thousand times, somewhere or other...but.

    Can you bolt a dac/processor onto a DVD player to achieve DVD-A ?

    If not, whats out there in audiophile territory for DVD-A replay ?

    Im currently using a Denon 2900 with DVD-A and SACD capability, is this going to kick the butt of my Marantz CD17 in pure stereo (providing you can get the right software of course) oh and dont worry about multichannel 5:1 and the like......Im not interested, heard it all through my h/c system and hated it.......hell, it took me ages to find and position a perfect stereo pair, I cant consider trying to do this with 5 speakers and that excludes a sub. So, for the moment 5.1 is fine for h/c and not for standard recordings.

    Also, what happened to HCDC ? is this no longer in the race ?

    My guess is the industry will move to DVD-A and SACD will disappear, it doesnt make sense for manufacturers to make multiple format mechanisms. DVD is the defining standard, for films and computers, so why complicate things.

    What worries me is that my 500 odd standard red book CDs will be played on the backwards compatible DVD players, but they will lag behind the current audiophile technology. This means keeping two machines and when the supply of standard mechs dries up .............!!!!!!!
     
  2. SKA.face

    SKA.face
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    I personally think they are both white elephants,I would look for a better CD player,or add a DAC,cd can sound stunning in plain redbook,if you want another format of very high quality I would add a Turntable,old technology,but capable of awesome sound.
     
  3. recruit

    recruit
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    I hope they introduce more DTS 96/24 which IMO is as good as DVD-A and have been very impressed with the sound quality.
     
  4. karkus30

    karkus30
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2002
    Messages:
    13,991
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +1,261
    Already have a pretty good turntable which blows the CDP away.

    Your opinion was my opinion last week, but as my brother decided he was upgrading his system, he did a bit of research and then asked for my input.

    I listened to what he was saying and dismissed it (after all, vinyl has no restrictions in the definition, because its pure analogue, its all down to the quality of the replay system). But it haunted me a bit , so I started looking around the web for answers.

    What I found startled me. Most respected vinyl addicts have compared DVD-A with vinyl and find the digital source to be better :eek: Some have stated that its better than SACD and that the older HDCD technology beats SACD.

    So he race looks like DVD-A , Vinyl , HDCD , SACD, CD.

    Im severely tempted to move the Denon 2900 into my Hi Fi set up and try this DVD-A against my current set up, but its a ball ache to do and I dont have any DVD-A albums (theres still only around 1000 available, I think).

    I had been considering a Musical Fidelity x-dac, but this new information has made me re-consider.

    Apparently manufacturers such as Philips, have decided to concentrate on just DVD mechanisms as these are where the profits are being made, which means they are withdrawing production of dedicated CD mechanisms.

    Smaller CDP manufacturers in the medium to high end bracket are having to look for alternate sources of supply and thats leaving only Teac and Meridian mechs as possible replacements. The problem is that these are too expensive for most smaller manufacturers and several have already decided to quit production and concentrate on other products.

    Theres something weird going on with DVD-A, its almost like the manufacturers are trying to limit the flow on purpose. Do a bit of digging and you find that the website addresses for the manufacturers are in Denmark, why just Denmark ?
     
  5. Mandel

    Mandel
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    SACD :thumbsup:

    SACD undeniably has the highest audio quality of any available home hi-fi format. The results of well mixed multichannel releases are simply stunning. However you state you're only interested in stereo and there are definite advantages there. It's like the leap from CD up to Vinyl all over again.

    As for the point about making multiple format mechnisms, a fully featured SACD disc is just a CD format layer and a DVD format layer double layered disc. All the player needs to know is how to decode the DSD stream, not any more difficult than it knowing how to decode the inferior 96/24 PCM format of DVD-As.

    There again it depends how good your hearing is. Some people claim they can't tell the difference between CDs and Vinyl while some can easily tell DVDAs from SACD.
     
  6. karkus30

    karkus30
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2002
    Messages:
    13,991
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +1,261
    Yes, my machine plays both SACD and DVD-A and I have played Pink Floyds DSOTM in 5.1 and was suitably unimpressed with the result. Its sort of interesting for a few minutes then I find it gets really wearing.

    You state 96/24 PCM for DVD-A, the Denons manual suggests that it can also be 192/24, whats the story ?
     
  7. Mandel

    Mandel
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Basing your view of SACD on one disc is a little limiting. Personally I like DSoTM 5.1 very much, bu it is a very aggressive mix(true to the original quad version) which some people may not appreciate. Most multichannel SACDs are a little more subtle.

    Yes DVD-As can be 192/24 however few are. Using that samplerate significantly reduces the playing time of the disc and you still have the inherent limitations of PCM.
     
  8. karkus30

    karkus30
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2002
    Messages:
    13,991
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +1,261
    When you say reduce, does that mean you cannot have a whole album on a disc ?

    You might be right about the m/channel thing, but I did'nt like quadraphonic either. I find the whole thing distracting. I think it probably needs matched sets of speakers and amplifiers to get it right and Im never going to be able to afford a system like that which would rival my 2 channel system. Maybe when we get sympathetic feed back systems that adjust the system to suit room dynamics, maybe then we can start thinking about affordable m/channel audiophile hifi, but its hard enough to set up a h/c system to give a good sound, never mind trying to adapt it for hifi use.
     
  9. Mandel

    Mandel
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    I agree with the point about matching speakers. Multichannel audio really doesn't work with a 2 big speakers + satellites arrangement. I use DTS:Neo to play CDs in surround, generally either you love surround or you hate it :)

    I'm not quite sure about the length of a 192/24. At a guess about 50mins ish?!
     
  10. karkus30

    karkus30
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2002
    Messages:
    13,991
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +1,261
    Interesting, so that means it would probably end up as a classical format.

    I just dont think surround really works for music, but there again I bet that same argument applied to mono over stereo, therefore I am already a heretic ;) Makes me wonder if we really need stereo at all, if you really want a perfect central image, then one speaker does the job.

    I think its down to manufacturers wanting to add a novely factor or value add to promote sales of a new format and it easily fits with the increasing number of homes that have bought into 5.1.
     

Share This Page

Loading...