DVd`s have been upgraded to HD etc what about music ?

jamieuk23

jamieuk23

jamieuk23

Suspended
Joined
8 Jul 2006
Posts
498
as you no all audio on HD DVD`s are all upgraded to dolby + and True HD etc.

What about music ! do you think we will see these formats released on CD or even DVD ?
 
Most people struggle to tell the difference between MP3s and CDs... it's really not worth the upheaval of introducing a new standard.
 
jamieuk23 said:
as you no all audio on HD DVD`s are all upgraded to dolby + and True HD etc.

What about music ! do you think we will see these formats released on CD or even DVD ?
Click to expand...

The difference between Hd and non-HD media on a suitable screen is quite noticeable even to the average Joe. I don't think the same can be said for CD quality and higher than CD quality can it?
 
CD quality (no not crappy 320k "CD quality" mp3's) is about as good as you are going to notice, using stereo sound. We only really need higher bitrates if we are pushing more channels.
 
Dingleberry88 said:
If anything the quality of music is getting worse with the likes of iTunes.
Click to expand...

What when itunes are promoting DRM free music?
 
tom_nieto said:
SACD and DVD-A have been about for quite a while now.
Click to expand...

They have, some are even multi channel music. But apart from some enthusiasts, it hasn't really taken off. With Movies, the screen it is displayed on gets better, and we can see the difference. But speakers wise, most people play music on their little micro HiFi and even on a seperates HiFi system the difference can be hard to tell.

Redbook (CD) has been so popular and decent it will be around for a while yet. Online download like itunes is where its headed (some might say we are already there) but the physical media CD have a long life yet.
 
Last edited:
Jokester said:
It's more an issue of the low bit rates that they're encoded at though.

Jokester
Click to expand...

That and the mastering on most pop CDs is done in such a way as to make it as loud as possible and sacrificing dynamic range as a result
 
james.miller said:
speaking of which, are there any decent albums worth owning on sacd?
Click to expand...

Michael Nyman - The Piano OST

Sounds much better than the original album on an SACD :)
 
Kreeeee said:
CD quality (no not crappy 320k "CD quality" mp3's) is about as good as you are going to notice, using stereo sound. We only really need higher bitrates if we are pushing more channels.
Click to expand...
Yeah I think that's right. It can be proved that the sampling rate used on CDs is high enough so that all sounds audible to humans are perfectly represented. I guess you could increase the sample size from 16bit to 32bit but I don't suppose we would notice such small differences.
 
pointy shadow said:
Pink Floyd - Dark Side of the Moon SACD is simply awesome on a good 5.1 setup.
Click to expand...

I don't own that, but I buy a lot of Live DVD's just for the surround sound on them. I know a lot of people think 5.1 is rubbish for music but I love the immersion it gives. Jean Michelle Jarre in China is awesome for instance, but for live gigs I like 'crowd noise' too.

Paul
 
Psyk said:
Yeah I think that's right. It can be proved that the sampling rate used on CDs is high enough so that all sounds audible to humans are perfectly represented. I guess you could increase the sample size from 16bit to 32bit but I don't suppose we would notice such small differences.
Click to expand...


thats not true, sine waves at higher frequencies end up being tiangles when sampled at 44khz
 
m3csl2004 said:
thats not true, sine waves at higher frequencies end up being tiangles when sampled at 44khz
Click to expand...
But the hardware will know to treat the samples as points on a wave and will interpolate them accordingly. If you know that the wave is meant to be a sine wave (which it obviously would be with sound) then you can completely recreate the signal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom