Vote

I'm curious how DVD-Audio stacks up against SACD, which has garnered rave reviews.

Looking more toward the SACD format. Question: Will the SACD be available to other manufacturers besides Sony, or will this be another Betamax fiasco?

It's time for the entertainment industry to realize that, no matter how they try to encrypt their products, it will always be possible to make copies. Every encryption system fails at some time. Second, I don't know anyone who is intrested in pirated software. The people who buy audio or video DVD players are interested in the best playback they can get, not in saving a dollar on a movie or record. Or maybe I'm just tired of the entertainment industry treating me like a criminal.

I'm happy they are delayed, because nothing is worse than a format war. Maybe this delay will spell a defeat for DVD-A and the end of the war. Similarly, many years ago I welcomed the defeat of the Beta format, even though I knew VHS to be technically inferior. But nothing is worse than having two competing formats and never knowing if the player you buy won't be obsolete in a year, with no software to play in it.

Can't the record industry ever realise that they cannot come up with a scheme that can't be hacked?

I'm happy! It just goes to show that, in their arrogance, they thought that encryption for copy protection was the answer, but forgot that, if it can be made, it can be broken. This form of copy protection will never stop commercial pirates, the people who really cost the music industry a fortune. Neither will it stop the person making a tape for the car. Who does it stop, then? What a waste of time an effort. If they want to stop piracy, they ought to look at the causes! Music is priced too high, and that's it!

I am not a DVD-man

Why sweat about it , both formats have very limited software at present Who wants to buy another re-master of KOB or some arcane music that sounds technically great but is not to ones taste. At any rate , in the 3-5 years that it will take to get a decent music catalog together , the emphasis will have shifted away from optical to SS storage.

I, and I will state right up front that I have never heard either format (DVD-Audio or SACD), wonder if the public will care enough to support either format? Personally, I dont think so, as to most people, CD sounds just fine. We'll see.

That gives me more time to save money for one.

I am hoping that SACD becomes the standard format. I believe that SACD, because of its more simple approach, has the potential for the best sound quality. The DVD-A standards are so all-embracing that it is a perfect recipe for disaster (sound-quality wise). A DSD recording played back via the SACD format looks ideal!

Why mess up good music with Digital Venereal Disease? Two channels are better than four. Four channels are better than two. Five point one channels are better than . . .

The stronger the encryption, the smarter you make the hackers. They're always going to find a way around things.

All of this BS from the media companies . . . Bah Humbug! Maybe it's because the dealers don't want yet another product to sell? I've held up purchasing a new standalone DVD box until this gets cleared. Maybe a lot of us are doing so and the high-end dealers are pissed off? Who knows? In the meantime I just keep spinning records while the consumer-electronics firms and the music industry keep going around in circles.

Yah, I am an audiophile. I LOVE listening to a good recording. I will spend more than your average person on gear to make sure my listening experience is the best I can get (or afford). But dammit, I hate format wars, and I hate the political manuvering of the recording industry and the electronics giants. I just want to have a good format at a reasonable price. CDs are already overpriced; how much are we going to have to pay for DVD-Audio? Probably $20-$50, thanks to the precedent set by DVD movies. The "DVD" in the name will be enough to justify the higher costs to the recording bigwigs. I am SICK of paying so much for music. And truth be told, I will probably settle for less-than-perfect CD sound, or even MP3 downloads (or WindowsMedia, or something better out next month), if I can buy an album for $7 or $8. That price is where I see value. Not $18 for the latest CDs, and definitely not $25 for DVD-Audio. Give us a good format, and for God's sake, make it affordable.

Why is the DVD Forum taking so long!!!

When there are dedicated 6-channel studios, with original recordings being produced in true discrete multichannel by people who know how to use the equipment, then the new formats will be viable. Until then, it is more re-releasing of old recordings in the latest pajamas. In the case of DVD and SACD audio players, I think it's the cart before the horse.

Delay all you want, I don't care to buy it. New equipment, new discs all incompatable with what I currently own.

I believe that surround-sound audio will lead to many gimmicky recordings with unnatural sound. It will be tough to correctly place speakers. Listening rooms will have to be completely dead so room reverberations don't mix with recorded ambience. The acoustically dead listening room will not be compatible with our massive CD and LP collections. I think that, given a certain speaker and amplifier budget, higher-quality sound reproduction will be achieved by spending it on two channels instead of spreading it around five or more channels. I hope that surround music is never introduced.

I am relieved because the consumer electronics and music industries needs to be taught a lesson. A lesson that will only be learned if millions of dollars of profit are lost along with big chunks of market share. This lesson is that in the e-world he who is first to market wins. Thanks to the efforts of Chesky and Classic Records the true early adopters have already been enjoying Digital Audio Disk 24/96 playback for months and will continue to while the big multi-nationals chase their Holy Grail of an unbreakable profit cipher. The buzz is 'e-commerce'. In the e-world open systems are preferred over closed every time. The most open post-CD system yet proposed is using the original DVD 24/96 audio specification to deliver high bit rate audio as DAD disks. From the audiophiles point of view DVD-A only improved on DAD in areas of improved support for multi-channel programs and at the last minute the option of 24/192 data streams. This at the high costs of the option of audible watermarking included in the DVD-A decoded analog signal and no support for external DACs or DSP processors. Unfortunately rather than wholeheartedly supporting the efforts of Chesky and Classic Records for the most open and purist contribution to the audio community they are the audio press has branded them as simple stop gap formats to be swept aside when the 'real' party starts courtesy the big multi-nationals. Now with the multi-nationals a no show I hope the press and audiophiles will reevaluate and recognize that DAD is worthy of strong support. A library of DAD music can be started today and enjoyed secure in the knowledge it will never be orphaned because it is based on the core DVD specification. Also please consider the sad irony that the tragic demise of Mobile Fidelity Sound Labs and the news of DVD-A postponement appear on the same day on Stereophile's web site. We take it as a given the big multi-national consumer electronic companies are incapable (or at best, only rarely capable) of supplying audiophile caliber hardware so we support our high-end audio electronic companies. But what good is this hardware if we lack music that is delivered on just as high-end a software product? We MUST support our high-end audio record companies for they will set the artistic standards which make this hobby/business/passion we call audio worth the blood sweat and tears we pour into it.

It took me 4 years to purchase my 1st CD player. With over 2000 LP's I will not want for quality music. I even admit that some recent purchases of CD's are very listenable. Not LP's but I don't have to listen through the software for the performance.

There doesn't appear to be very much software readily available for DVD-Audio (aside from a few labels). It appears a couple of companies (e.g. Sony and Pioneer) are on schedule anyway. In my opinion, the Sony/Phillips SACD format is a more practical idea. This may allow Sony to get a foothold on the market if their technology makes an impact first. The recent review in Stereophile is an example. The response from that article alone was outstanding. It seems to be a mistake to (a) alienate the people who pre-purchased (by making them wait) just as the holiday season is upon us, and (b) allow another idea (i.e. SACD)to gain a following and lose the people who may have been undecided on which DVD-Audio formats was better. It looks like history repeating itself (CD, VCR, MP3,AC-3).

According to the articles I have read and what I understand about the DVD-V hack, there are some things that can make the current hack very dificult to implement and actually work. It is a huge mistake to delay the release of the hardware, giving much more recognition to the hackers than needed. The product should be out and running, with a "new" encryption technology in the works as well, but a delay is NOT the right approach to overcoming all the issues the new technology and marketing nightmare face.

It's just a matter of time before all music will be broadcast over the Net. A good DAC or SoundCard and some Alón speakers and you'll be set. DVD-A will be a short-lived detour and a waste of your money.

Any format that can be leaglly decoded can be cracked. This has been provern over and over again.

Just makes me wait longer to spend my money. I will wait until the standards are set.

I'm actually relieved, and here's why: SACD! Anything that will give SACD a better chance at becoming the audio format of the future is a good thing. If Sony had any sense, they would lower the price of the players and put out more SACD discs. SACD is truly an awesome-sounding format, and DVD-A is for the masses. Sure, DVD-A has the potential to sound better than CD, but it doesn't sound better than SACD. Tell that to the masses! Besides, most audiophiles would agree that multichannel music listening is just "bells and whistles." I've never been to a concert were the artists were behind me! And if the "industry" thinks that the masses are going to buy at least "three more speakers" just to hear music, they are crazy. SACD is great! I hope the music industry looks at the format from an audiophile standpoint and not some "greedy fat-cat" standpoint. I'm tired of this crappy stuff!

I care so little about this subject, I find it hard to type about it. Spin some vinyl and forget about it.

I was hoping to buy a DVD-A player because I don't have a decent high-end CD player, and I was hoping it would give me the best of all worlds, both audio and video. But with this delay, I will probably switch to SACD when the price is closer to what I can afford. The reason for the DVD-A delay makes me see it's no use waiting fot them. There will always be a chance the encryption code can be broken. I can't keep dangling on a hook until the DVD-A Forum believes they have solved all of their piracy problems. Whenever they get their act together, I might buy a really cheap universal DVD-A deck, but I'm not holding my breath on that one. Now if only Sony or someone can take advantage of this situation and put out a reasonably priced SACD player, my faith in the corporate software/hardware world can be restored.

I am glad that SACD now can get established in the market while DVD-A is still trying to work out details. I had the opportunity to listen and compare the sound of Sony SCD-1 player and the Panasonic DVD-A 24/96/192 player. Both were played through Krell electronics and Martin-Logan main speakers at the local SoundTrack store in Denver, Colorado. I must say that sound of SACD is far superior to that of DVD-A in all aspects of music. The depth of the soundstage is so realistic, and so are the instruments and their natural tone. For the first time, I could listen at higher volume levels without getting tired (compared to CDs). The big advantage SACD has is its simplicity (only two channels), while the biggest obstacle DVD-A has is its multichannel capability. I do not think anyone has specified how to align 5 speakers (location, tonal match, etc.), and I was forced to listen to Miles Davis in the Dolby Digital 5-channel setup! I had to request that they take the subwoofer out. Even then, DVD-A did not sound good at all. May be it is too early to pass any judgments. However, we all know how hard it is to get two channels to sound right. And I know it's going to be almost impossible to get 5 or more channels to sound right unless there are some very serious specifications laid out for the customer.