PDA

View Full Version : What format should replace the CD? DVD-A or SACD ... Read and find out !!


llbbl
09-08-2002, 10:07 PM
The battle for high end digital recordings has been taking place for several years now. It has been compared to that of the battle between Betamax and VHS. We all know how stubborn Sony can be about their standards, so it is unlikely that SACD will be leaving the market any time soon. DVD-A is the other side of the equation and appears to have the advantage at this point. This is because of the likelyhood that the new DVD players will support DVD-A.

To understand how the new formats differ from CD technology you must start with how the "raw" audio is sampled. DVD-A using a technology called Pulse Code Modulation (PCM). Here is a good article on optimizing PCM for (http://cips02.physik.uni-bonn.de/~scheller/audio/main.html) different audio formats. If you listen to mp3's than you may have a good understanding of what makes music sound better. DVD-A increases the sampling rate from 44,100 kHz to a max of 192 kHz. It is true that the human ear can not differenate between sounds above 64 kHz and this is why the normal sampling rate of DVD-A is 96 kHz. Sony and Phillips have developed Direct Stream Digital (DSD) to compete against PCM. Here is a more (http://www.dcsltd.co.uk/papers/effects.pdf)(.pdf) indepth paper that describes the differences between the two. The sampling rate of DSD is 2.82 MHz. I know you are thinking that this is way over kill, if our level of hearing is from 20 Hz to 20 kHz (http://www.sfu.ca/sca/Manuals/ZAAPf/r/range.html), and didn't I just say that 64 kHz was the limit. Well with the higher sampling rates their is some audio qualities to the sound that can be distinguished, not the frequency discrimination limit of the human ear based on two pure tones. That is another key factor, music is many times not a pure tone but a mixture / combination of a multitude of tones.

It gets even more confusing when the audiophiles start talking about noise floor, dynamic range, word length and how these affect a digital recording system. I gathered word length to equal the number of bits that music is recorded at. CD's are recorded in 16-bit, DVD-Video in 20-bit (generally), DVD-A up to 24-bit and SACD recorded in 1-bit. I don't understand the explanation fully that I found on why SACD uses a goofy bit length, but here is what I found on ABCnews.com (http://abcnews.go.com/sections/tech/CuttingEdge/cuttingedge001013.html) Now I am trying to figure out how the different bit rates that you can record mp3's are similar to the word length. I think they are talking about two different technologies because you have to remember that mp3 is lossy and these new formats are lossless. The mp3 kbit is the rate of sampling that is done when the song is converted from its supposed lossless form on the CD.

----
References
http://www.surroundpro.com/2001/11_12/feature_horror.shtml

http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/0,,sid9_gci214387,00.html

http://www.audiorevolution.com/equip/dvdavssacd/

http://www.dolby.com/digital/

http://www.ambisonic.net/mlp.html

http://www.sel.sony.com/SEL/consumer/dsd/dsd.pdf


----

I'm not done yet, but it's time for bed. I will finish it later, I promise!

ECA
09-08-2002, 11:12 PM
Alot of CD's are remastered to 22k, which really sucks.
There is a component to sound.
When you record sound at certain levels you loose the top end, where most of the Hiss, and Pop, and backgound is recorded. This is great for 1 instrument. When you listen to an symphomy, you need the extra Volume, that can be expressed as Higher Sampling.
192k can give you the whole effect of all the instruments, and give you ambient sounds.
To show this, use a good saound sampler. that shows all the sound waves that it can hear. Try to set this into a as simple as possible, and that is CD.. It cuts all sound that is not considered sound. These higher sampling rates can supply those sounds, they dont have to cut them and save space.

ruri
09-09-2002, 10:03 PM
I vote for DVD-A cause I'm not rich enough to buy both an SACD and a DVD-A machine. I'd just as soon buy a good quality DVD player that can handle xVCD, MP3 and DVD-A. And if it can also handle Divx, hey, I'm there.

I hope SACD dies a horrible, miserable death, right along with memory sticks and the now near-dead minidisc. I mean, I friend gave me a minidisc with a rare tune I wanted, and I was like, WTH?

Ioman
01-05-2003, 12:50 PM
I am voting for DVD-A. I will never ever vote for a single company's proprietary format like the memory stick or mini-disc, no matter how good they are. If the idea is not supported industry wide, then you will just be wasting your money. There is no support for it, finding related products are expensive and you will pay top dollar because they can charge that price...

Just look at: Memory Stick, Beta, Mini-Disc, Apple computers just to name a few.