How many channels and what formats do you want to see on DVD Audio discs?

Stereophile's picture
DVD audio standards are still up in the air, but promise (hopefully) to come down soon. For our inaugural question, we want to know what you prefer: fewer channels and longer playing times, or multichannel high-quality sound with shorter playing times.
How many channels and what formats do you want to see on DVD Audio discs?
2 channels: 16bit/44kHz
2% (8 votes)
2 channels: 24bit/96kHz
40% (204 votes)
5.1channels: 16bit/44kHz
1% (5 votes)
5.1 channels: 24bit/96kHz
26% (133 votes)
5.1 channels: Dolby Digital (AC-3)
7% (35 votes)
5.1 channels: DTS
6% (31 votes)
Mix of Formats
11% (58 votes)
Open Standards
6% (31 votes)
Don't Care
1% (6 votes)
Total votes: 511
Share | |
Comments
Anonymous's picture

As long as a new format is backwards compatible and a quantum leap forward, I'll be interested. If not, I'll stick with CDs

Anonymous's picture

or higher sampling rates. DTS if found to sound better.

Mike Bowles's picture

This just don't matter much! When multi-layer discs are available there will be a sufficient bit budget to allow artistic freedom AND proper engineering/quality choices.

Curtis J.  Simon's picture

It is expensive enough to buy high quality speakers and amplification for two channels. I would have to spend at least two thousand dollars more to increase the number of channels to 5.1. Not to mention the difficulty of reorganizing my living space (read living ROOM) for 5 channels!

Dick Nicholson's picture

I don't really want shorter playing times, but I would accept them until technology progresses to the point where they improve.

Mark J.  Bernstein's picture

Although I personally have a love affair with 2channel stereo, and do not yet have a multichannel system, I can read the writing on the wall, and acknowledge the appeal of surround sound. However, as an audio enthusiast and amateur recordist, I want the highest possible fidelity, and will gladly trade away extended playing time for better sound.

Chris Enstrom's picture

I would like to see the DVD platform used for audio as an ultra-high resolution stereo playback medium. I think that we should keep music in stereo and leave the surround sound stuff to the videophiles.

Paul Malkoski's picture

I'd love to see higher audio quality, but know that most users will want home theater capability not music only. Will we ever get an upgrade to 16/44.1?

BIFF's picture

VINYL WILL ALWAYS RATE NO. 1 IN MY BOOK. GIVE MF MORE ROOM. MORE TURNTABLE REVIEWS. AND CONGRATULATIONS ON HAVING A SONY MINIDISC ADD...THIS IS NOW THE MOST SENSIBLE DUBBING FORMAT: DAT: UNRELIABLE LONGEVITY METAL CASSETTE: CAN STILL BE "EATEN" -STILL WEARS OUT CD-R: PLEASE...FOR THE AUDIOPHILE DUBBING LP'S WRITE-ONCE IS RIDICULOUS & IT'S STILL 16BIT **READ THE MD WHITE PAPERS**

Will P-Z.  Clark's picture

First of all, I think an LFE channel is a bad idea. I know consumes relatively little bandwidth, but it just provides another avenue to muck up the mix. Second, I think we need eight channels (3 on every side) to create an accurate soundfield.

Stan Baginski's picture

Keep high end audio 2 channel

Marcelo P.  Lima's picture

The best, obviously, would be 2 channels, 24bit/96kHz and/or 5.1 channels 24bit/96kHz. I appreciate the need for higher sampling rates (for digital quality reasons). But I doubt if I can even hear anything above 20kHz (I listened to Stereophile's test CD#2..and I suppose my B&W DM603s can go that far up). So what's really the deal with higher sampling rates as far as higher frequency sound goes?

Chad Lohmeier's picture

Like any format it is all up to the way it was recorded an mixed.

John Lynch's picture

I've heard higher bit-rate and sampling rate. It's much better! Let's not get greedy in the number of channels, otherwise, we'll get some "lossy" compression scheme. Keep It Simple Stupid!

Bard-Alan Finlan's picture

This would be a good start!

Bryan B.'s picture

A combo of highest quality/most channels is the only step which will strongly differentiate the product from current CD's. For long playing times, get a multi-disc unit (they currently make 300 disc changers. Isn't that long enough?)

George Woodrum's picture

QUALITY is the overriding issue!

Anson Fogel: anson@rof.net's picture

Flexibility is key, but 5.1 channels of 24/96 is enticing. As a professional in the idustry, I can't encourage this enough.

Big Audio Man's picture

Plenty good because of variable encoding.

M.  Esteves's picture

Is there a point on having a center channel for high end audio only applications?

support@rt66.com's picture

this is a test

c.  holleman's picture

Not sure if what i chose is highest quality, but i prefer quality over quantity.

Andr's picture

I like the idea of Sony/Philips to put the DSD format and the usual CD format on the same DVD..

Chad Nelson's picture

Let's go for the theater experience - 5.1 quality channels.

Alex Gonzalez's picture

I would like to have the choice as I already have a Sony DVD 7000. However, a 5.1 24bit/96kHz would be the ultimate assuming Sony will not let first buyers in the dust!

Anh Vuu- 1st Yr Subscriber's picture

Let the consumer choose.How can the industry dictate terms of requirements? I listen to stereo only but would hate to shell out more cash for a 5.1 system.

traveler@nowhere.com's picture

I just plain want an improved format over the existing one. At this time, I have settle for DTS. The DTS experience through my ADA SSD-66 (5.1) and its DTS decoder is awesome. I just wish that DTS would get their act together and have more releases and with a wider variety of music. I also pray for the day when the movie industry will market what I feel would be a true full surround, 7.2. Great site by the way. Just a suggestion, once a month, you guys should offer a back issue special and have it online for your Web visiters or at least list the components and when they were reivewed. Offering both would be even better

Alfred Thaemlitz's picture

Always have a high quality 2 ch mix(24 bit 96kHz) with optional 5.1 channel second version.

RHarper's picture

I like the idea of at least four channels to help encourage the real spacial effect of a live event. Two channels are currently great, but the addition if presented correctly will further enhance the musical experience.

Sam Kollath's picture

Six formats/potential standards identified above: Is the consumer really going to be the decisionmaker?

Site Map / Direct Links