Some good news on Blu Ray Audio

High Fidelity Pure Audio format brings hi-res audio to Blu-ray | whathifi.com

Universal Music Details First 36 Blu-ray Audio Titles

My only concern is that once again we are seeing niche music, and the same old 'famous' mainstream albums being pushed out. To see the format take off, unlike SACD/DVD-A, we need to see a commitment to put out new albums by current artists, and, crucially, to keep the prices keen.

 

I welcome the move towards hi-res. I'd be even more welcoming to multi-channel hi-res on blu-ray. I want to be excited about this, I really do, but...I'll keep my pessimism to myself for the time being in case it's contagious

 

Don't worry Windhoek, looking at that list I'm worried too. This could be the big opportunity to get rid of CD for good and replace it with a high resolution medium that offers great potential. Don't be surprised then if the record companies **** it up.

Lets' face it, CD was a gift for them and they nearly messed the launch of that up. They then created a millstone for themselves with the slogan 'perfect sound for life', and by giving out mickey mouse info on durability and distortion. When you look at the Distortion figures for early CD players (later exposed as bogus) it makes you laugh...

 

There's a few good albums there but it's not a great choice. I've no experience of this format. How do they compare to DVD-A and SACD?

Bri

 

The first few I've had are a bit of a let down. They aren't bad, but they didn't blow me away. This is due, at the risk of starting another row, to the lack of dedicated Audio on the low to mid end players. The high end players and the new mid price players do have high quality Audio out, and it's these that will be the way forward. By 'mid' I mean something like a Denon BDP2012, not an £800 Oppo!

Once I've got a better Blu Ray player I don't doubt the Discs I already have will sound better.

 

Ah then my Panny won't be up to the job then. My mate was looking at a Led Zeppelin album the other week but he didn't get it. Not my type of music but it would've been interesting to try it out.

Bri

 

An optimist by nature, I'll also keep my pessimism to myself !

People that, I suppose, describe themselves as audiophiles (and I'm not sure I like the label) - and I'm one - come in all different shades, are a minority. Sadly perhaps, we always will be - and our preferred format doesn't make the slightest jot of difference. There will always be those ones that had their LPs, never put them back in the sleeves, allowed the stylus to become gammy and worn out before replacing, those who are intoxicated by the "digital supremacy" of CD, that used just "all-purpose" mini-systems - and finally those for whom all things digital are the same, will never really appreciate high quality audio reproduction.

We don't all hear things the same - and why should we?! I suspect those that seek somethig higher than the average, will always be in a minority, and a large percentage of the public have been hoodwinked.

They always were though!

 

Sad but true. However, what you've described is much more applicable to the UK than elsewhere in the World. As a former HiFi salesman it was disillusioning to read how small 'HiFi', as in separates, total share of the Audio replay market was - and that was during the so called 'CD boom' of the late 80's to mid 90's during which Audio sales reached a peak never to be repeated.

It's also sobering to reflect that in studies done in terms of 'desirability' HiFi is consistently low down the list in the UK, whereas in France, for example it's often been in the top five.

When you take that into account, it shows just how (very) small the demand must be for Hi-resolution Audio as not many have the kit to justify it, even with separates. I remember reading a breakdown of what end of the market sells the most and from where the separates are sourced, with Japanese goods, low end, taking the lion share of even that limited market. That sounds obvious, but when you see the breakdown it doesn't look like a pyramid, more like a tack... Lots of budget, a small mid, and high end sales that you can count on your fingers.

T'was ever thus.

 

Serge Gainsbourg's 'Histoire de Melody Nelson ' Never dreamed I'd own a hi-res copy of that!

Result!

 

Nothing wrong with Stevie Wonder and Diana Krall. The problem with modern forgettable radio artists of course are that the people in charge are deliberately squeezing all the dynamic range out and blasting "noise" out. Before anyone says, my alarm is set to Capital radio because it is my switch-off time before the serious business of earning money. Any "HD" re-release would be a waste of time.

In relation to CD bashing am going to refer to my post here: http://www.avforums.com/forums/news...-launch-hi-res-music-masses.html#post19219676

Think there is a definite element of bandwagon jumping on audio enthusiast sites with people who use HDTracks and label themselves audiophiles (ugh). But when you ask, few are able to coherently explain what is wrong with CD other than "because I read it on a forum" and "a larger sampling rate is better just because". You know that is right

 

Never said there was. That isn't the point. The point is that previous attempts to launch hires has centred on re-issues (as if we don't have enough of those) and once again it seems the 'biz' is going down that path. If they concentrate on new releases on Blu Ray rather than rehashing the same old albums it might take off. Might.

CD is a very poor carrier of information with limited space and bandwidth. Hence DVD-R has replaced it. Please don't quote the old '16/44 is enough because that's all we can hear' because that is utterly irrelevant. Hires is about getting as much bandwidth as you can, to capture accurately as much musical information as you can. Sound engineers have stated (and what would they know eh?) this is why virtually everything is, or should be mastered to 24/96 or 24/88.2 now. With 16/44 they have shown (graphically) you cannot get as much information from the music.

On the hardware end, with 24 bit filters you can get much closer to the calculated value from the straightened staircase waveform after it's been oversampled and this leaves you with much more accurate information. (Moon Audio: Upsampling, Upconversion and Oversampling) In other words engineers are trying to get away from 16bit because it's not accurate enough. But 16bit is as high as CD can go...

 

Why not. Engineers only dealt with higher standards so that they could maintain 16 bits throughout, whilst processing all the nasty stuff between the microphone and the final CD.

CD is 100% bit perfect.

This idea is going to be short-lived anyway. Digital is the future of music distribution. The studios just need to get their heads together with existing delivery systems to give people unadulterated lossless digital files with high-res artwork embedded in the metadata. But they insist on delaying the inevitable by going for another physical medium that they hope to overprice and exploit

 

Because the medium cannot handle more than 16bits? This is the maximum recording value of a CD. HDCD goes higher (20 bit), but only by using a 'fudge'. They also sound ****.

CD is a 100% bit perfect. So is DVD, so is Blu Ray. So what? I'm not sure what you are arguing here?

Digital distribution by network sounds great - if you have a decent replay system at the end of it. Such a thing as yet, even with high priced streamers, doesn't exist. Unless of course you are happy having a £4000 piece of kit that produces the same sound from a compressed MP3 as it does from a re-mastered 24/96 wave?

 

Am all for physical media and I promise I am alone amongst my peers for still buying CDs, but many have happily gotten past digital transports and building an audio system around digital files.

Take a step back as you are attacking two different things now and I fear it will increase exponentially. Be happy and compromise, mainstream lossless codec distribution would be a hugely positive step instead of the industry presently marketing 256kbps or 320 kbps MP3 files as the apex.

 

Good to hear it! That you are still buying discs that is. You've highlighted there a big problem. Most of the younger generation (20 somethings and under) don't have hifi and are not interested in doing so. They listen to music in portable form or on PC. This is not good - for quality.

Not attacking anything. If the industry can come up with Streamers that don't, to quote one reviewer, 'homogenize' the sound of Digital files I'm all for it.

 

I noticed Amazon had The Rolling Stones 'Grrr' on bluray audio for £8.99. I thought that was a good price but did a 'flubit'... and got it for £7.61 delivered

 

Queen's A Night At The Opera has just been announced as the first title in the second batch of releases. It will feature both stereo and 5.1 mixes, although there's no details yet as to whether this will be a new mix, or the same as featured on the DVDA.

 

Damn, I just paid £23 delivered for the DVD-A and I bet the blu ray is cheaper, doh!

 

The current batch of releases sell for between £10 - £16 on Amazon, so i'd expect it be in that price range.

It probably wont be released for a while yet so you can get a few months of enjoyment out of the DVDA before deciding whether to get the Blu-ray.

 

Are they available in the U.S.?
I haven't been able to find them for sale here, although I've seen them for sale in Europe.

 

I think that this format, while I would love it to really take off, is going to be doomed as a failure because of unrealistic expectations that because its on a Blu-Ray disc then it MUST have a 5.1 mix.

I'm still perplexed by these demands, especially when the results are so very very patchy. Some good ones exist, such as the Pink Floyd ones (done as quad mixes back in the 70's properly anyway) and The Who's "Tommy", which was done by Pete Townsend, but the majority sound thin and crappy.

I don't quite understand why, when an album from the 60/70's was recorded in mono or stereo, peeps want a 5.1 mix of it. For example, Pet Sounds, does anyone want that in 5.1?

I'm happy for the best quality 1.0/2.0 versions of the audio on these discs (such as that recent Stones GRRR Blu-ray), as they preserve the sound and mix as-intended by the producers and the artists at the time. Unfortunately for the masses that confuse high resolution with multichannel, this format is screwed!

 

Tbh, it'll be lack of demand as much as anything else. The sales of existing Hires are embarrassing when you think how long they have been around now, and that vinyl in the same period has out sold them dramatically. While I'm a vinyl fan, in a Digital age that's madness.

The problem, as stated elsewhere, is that punters just aren't interested in high quality sources. The low level of sales of Hifi has long confirmed this, and the MP3/Ipod dock era nailed on the head what the majority are happy to listen to.

I don't blame the record companies really, I mean would you be happy to try and flog expensive (by comparison to CD and MP3) discs that only appeal to a very limited market?

 

While I would agree with you to some extent I think if there is an expectation for a multi-channel mix to be included then it may be because many people who would purchase these discs have their Blu-ray players linked up to surround sound cinema systems.

In addition, on at least one of the releases so far (Derek and the Dominos - Layla) a surround mix already exists but was not included on the Blu-ray.

 

Nirvana's "Nevermind" is the next one to be announced. Check out the "High Fidelity Pure Audio" page on Facebook for the latest info.

Suffice to say no 5.1 details have been revealed, so the FB is a a-wash with clamberings to have it in 5.1.

Again, not sure why you would want this in 5.1, it would sound so unlike the original record.

Off-topic but I am sure this release will please many though, although I can certainly skip it. Nirvana never meant anything to me. For those that missed Punk, the "Indie" breakout at the end of the 80's with the Stone Roses which killed itself with Britpop, the rave generation, I would imagine the "grunge" attack from the US was a great time. However the fact is there where miles better bands from the US around the same time, Janes Addiction and Faith No More as two examples.

Kurt Cobain killing himself was probably the most predictable and least-shocking event of the 90's given his outlook and self-loathing of everything. Still, sold a load of T-shirts eh.

 

I think many want the 5.1 just to hear it in a different way, and I mean really different. Many disagree, see the SACD/DVD-A thread for examples, but I don't find 5.1 adds much, if anything to the majority of recordings. To me it's just a gimmick unless done, very, very well. 99% of the time it isn't.

Tbh you've listed a whole series of 'crazes' there none of which did anything for me. Grunge was just the latest, but not the last, in the music businesses habit of driving scruffy looking middle class kids who couldn't play very well, and singing whiney songs, out in to the mainstream.

 

The possibility of 5.1 vs. the expectation shouldn't be the doom of this format. I base that on the example of 2-channel SACD/DVD-A sales and reviews of them that I've read.

I think that this format has the best chance to succeed of the recent high fidelity formats because the equipment required to listen to the format is already in our homes. Hopefully we'll see Blu-Ray players make their way into vehicles soon, or at the very least a redeemable download offer for a 2-channel mp3 to allow what's missing. Portability would remove one of the complications because it's easy to imagine people feeling that if they own a song in the highest quality format that they should have access to a lower quality, yet more easily transported version.

Given the size of the files of these formats and the limitations of the target devices it's understandable why downloads haven't reached the market. 32GB on a phone wouldn't provide space for many albums and that space is shared.
Hopefully the two announcements this week regarding 3D or stackable non-volatile memory will result in a significant increase of devices' storage space soon.

And to answer my own question from last night, France has them on sale now while the U.K is slated to start seeing releases in September with the U.S. to follow.

 

If people want 5.1 mixes then most amps can perform that with stereo sources. I sometimes experiment with the 'DTS neo:6 Audyssey' setting on my amp and get superb results in 7.1 with front surrounds complimenting the rear surrounds. Even 'all-in-one' systems have 'pseudo-surround' settings for stereo material.

 

Yep, it's still pseudo-surround and not a patch on a good discrete mix. After hearing War of the Worlds by Jeff Wayne in 5.1, I knew instantly there's no way I could settle for pseudo-surround any more. It's either stereo or discrete surround for me; pseudo just won't do

 

Nah, Kurt Cobain would be up there with Dylan if he was still here today!

 

I think most people are more concerned about low prices than super high quality when it comes to music and if this new technology is not cheap enough it will fall flat on its face. Physical music has struggled to bounce back from the rise of internet music and bit torrent etc. Although I don't know why they don't develop some sort of CD in a protective casing (like they used to have for minidiscs). One of my main reservations for buying CDs now is that they can so easily get broken or scratched shortly after buying them.