Which format will win?

[ckelly]

Will it be SACD or DVD-Audio?

or will vinyl become stronger as a medium against piracy....

Chris

[THOR]

Some form of MP3 will win ;) The days are numbered when people carry around any sort of media, everything will be electronically tranferred and be digital. I saw an MP3 player the other day as big as a credit card and just a little thicker that could hold 128MB of music thats about 32 songs. Just imagine what the future will bring.

[ckelly]

Thor

I think you are right, MP3 or some other related format will probably become more important, especially to the mass market.

I also think these other new formats will also be a part of the market, especially for a niche in the market, the people who are more demanding of sound quality. They are different market objectives and will probably coexist, much the same way there is equipment for two very different markets.

I also wonder if the way to go is to revive vinyl: after all the new formats in the end are trying to make CD's sound more like vinyl. If that is so, then why not simply revive the format. (If it works... don't mess with it...)

Chris

[THOR]

I think the reason vinyl died is because it is not user friendly. From what I have read vinyl sounds better, but only with well maintained records and a properly tuned and taken care of quality TT, and most people are/ were to lazy to contend with those issues and when something easier came along, even at the cost of sound quality they jumped on it. Also it is/was a pain for lazy folks to keep changing records or to skip ahead to a song they wanted to hear. We won't even go into portability. Tapes were easier CD's were even better especially when you throw 5, 25, 100, 200 disc changers into the mix. Now comes MP3's and I can let my playlist play 24/7 for over a week and not hear the same song twice, and find any song I want to hear in my collection practically instantly.

I think all the other medias will always have a niche market of enthusiasts tho, but I don't think records will ever appeal to the mass market again. People are far too busy and value their free time too much to spend it flipping records ;)

[car67]

Chris,

I have similiar thoughts. I think the billions in R&D invested in the formats will be incentive for the main industry players to keep SACD and DVD-A going on for a while as niche markets for those after sound quality. Or maybe they'll cut their losses. Hard to say as it's all a mess right now.
As you said, the new formats are only trying to recreate analog so vinyl may well prevail. For the industry , all those guys buying second-hand records are guys that they would want buying new SACD's, DVD-A's and even CD's. If this keeps going on..

Jack

[GeniX]

I dont think vinyl will prevail. Of all the people I know, the few that do still have record players cannot even recall if they are able to still play - or where they have been stored.

The physical size, shorter playtime, cleaning requirements, and lack of being robust are (at least IMO without consulting a huge mass of sample people to generalize) primary reasons why CD will remain a standard.

In the absence of another format meeting both the above items, and also cost, the CD will stay.

I also disagree that they are trying to make new formats sound like records. I think that any new analogue formats in development are only that - analogue formats. The 'warmth' that vinyl provides is now being left to the sound engineer to play with using his mixer.

just my thoughts!

[car67]

Genix,

Just to clarify, from my point of view. I don't think people are trying to make the new formats sound like vinyl. I think they are trying recreate an analogue event, if you like, which is what sound is. Vinyl, like reel-to-reel is an analogue format. Perhaps because of this, it has inherently, a better chance of recreating that analogue event more faithfully than a digital format. Tends to be a common view among vinyl fans. I support this view to an extent but it is different to saying they are trying to recreate vinyl.

I think vinyl will prevail against the new formats i.e. SACD and DVD-A. IFPI data for global vinyl sales show an increase for 2001 and I believe also the previous year. CD sales have been falling but their problem is piracy and not vinyl. As you pointed out, CD has a lot of factors like convenience in its favour and I agree it will most likely be around for a while. The real issue is how is the music industry going to restruture and adapt the way they do business so that they themeselves can survive?
But that's another topic altogether!:)

Jack

[Drybasement]

This will certainly be challenged but here is my POV.

The MP3 format will fail. The recording industry will see too that. The format may not go away, or it may evolve into something else but you will ultimately pay for it either through online subscriptions or one time fees. This will not bode well with the masses (who are used to downloading free music) and ultimately fail.

I see MP3 players as a novelty toy. These will not replace CD and DVD players anytime soon. And the concept of an "all in one" computer internet home entertainment system player dishwasher thing may happen but not in my lifetime. The software media will again be some sort of shiny disc only smaller and can hold ten times the information. Format unknown at this time.

I hope the day never comes when we will forced to do all of our music shopping online. Part of the fun for me is digging through stacks of vinyl or flipping through racks of CD's.

Who really knows what the future may bring.

[Walt]

Dryb,

I believe "Blue Ray" is the next format after CD/DVD ... do a google search and it should yield some interesting facts.

As for this debate, the jury is still out for me, although I don't think either SACD or DVD-A will be the winners ...

[GeniX]

While new formats may include analogue, I dont think digital will go away. With computers becoming key to controlling and running almost every appliance, and the internet being computer based (duh), digital technologies may change, but digital encodings of music are here to stay IMO.


Piracy is an issue, and one the music labels will address as soon as they can figure out a method which retains ease and convienience for people but effectively stops piracy.

In the end piracy comes down to values in people, and people will still pirate music. If you agree with music labels stopping piracy, you should probably make a good effort to keep your music legal (this isnt directed at anyone in particular)

[THOR]

I have said all aong that I would gladly pay for the songs I want to download as long as I can do with them what I will, ie: burn them to CD, copy them to other computer in my house etc. The pay services I have read about that the big record companies are trying to start would only allow you to DL the song but it would have code or such in it that would not allow you to copy it or burn it to disc.

Also it is about $16 average for a CD and a CD holds on average about 14 songs or so. So 16/14= $1.15 per song.

I will gladly pay $1.15 per song for the songs I WANT, than to pay $16 for a CD that has one or two songs on it I want and 14 or 15 that I don't.

MP3 will go away but it will be replaced by a better form of format that will sound better and be an even smaller file on your computer, many are already in the works.

[Walt]

And here is some info ...

http://www.matsushita.co.jp/corp/news/official.data/data.dir/en020219-4/en020219-4.html

Essentially the next incarnation following on from DVD. But still utilising existing encoding formats.

For any new format to succeed I think there will have to be more unanamity amongst the record labels, engineers, and hardware/software manufacturers than what existed in the DVD-A vs SACD situation.

Forgetting for the moment that there are question marks over the perceived superiority of SACD/DVD-A over redbook, and that the new technology was relatively more expensive for little perceived gain, the big problem with the launch of these new formats was the lack of backing from the producers of the content.

The public will buy into a new format even if it only offers a marginal improvement over existing formats, provided there is availability of titles.

DVD-video didn't really take off until some of the major studios swung around in support, and started releasing in the new format.

Likewise for anything in the future. You're going to see the Sony's, Panasonic's, Toshiba's, and Pioneer's of the world engaging with content producers in the marketing and launch of any new format in the future. Lessons will be learnt from the lukewarm response to SACD and DVD-A.

Older formats, whether digital or analog will continue to persist with small bands of avid enthusiasts, each sticking to their prefered format due to a perceived quality/nostalga.

When the dust has settled, I tend to agree with Thor that eventually some new MP3-esq format will surface with some inbuilt ability to keep piracy in check, and that will appeal massively to the record labels, and they will swing in behind it in a huge way. Because of that, the new format will overtake the others ... its all driven by content - that's why we mess with this stuff after all ... :)

[Drybasement]

I hope eight track tapes comes back. :D

Seriously, all good points and a good topic. The future of technology is fascinating. Certainly computer based and internet oriented.

Happy listening, too whatever format floats your boat.

[bully]

Don't believe they'll be able to suppress piracy. Too many crackers. If the USA mandates 'chips' or such, and Canada does not, I'm buying whatever un-chipped gear from Canada. Mebbe even 'take a vacation.'

The only real way to get around pirates is to make the content available at a much more reasonable price. The technology of cd is 'mature,' and they simply should not cost the same now as they did 15 years ago.
Same with downloadable.

[Walt]

Pete,

Good point about the crackers ... however as far as the cost of CD goes, they've always been cheap to produce (heck we know that now we can buy cheap spindles of the things for peanuts), so the reason the price don't come down is because you're paying for content.

When we went from vinyl/cassette to CD, the price jumped up - the artists/labels seized the chance to claim a bigger share of the pie, and they have never relinquished it.

So unless content becomes cheaper, the mature nature of the technology has no bearing on the unit cost in the case of CD's.

[car67]

Agreed - too many crackers and way too much money at stake for the pirates to just throw their hands up in the air!:) Good luck to the big companies if they think they can develop an effective anti-pricay measure that can last for more than 6 months. Even if they have some unity, of which there is no sign at the moment, I doubt if it can happen.

Thanks to technology nothing is safe from piracy now, least of all vinyl. Personally, I see restructuring of the industry in way they deliver and market content e.g. via the internet to lower costs to a greater extent than they do today and we've probably seen the end of huge recording contracts worth tens of millions for certain stars. Yep, in this day and age I think those days are over.
Productions costs? Well, they'll have to find a way..maybe a few less B&W Nautilus's as studio monitors!:p:

The end result is the same one that Pete envisaged, more reasonable prices.

Jack

[Thatch_Ear]

I think that the DVD/SACD/CD player is going to be the make or break item in the audio world. I recently bought a Sony single play for less that $200 including sales tax. The SACD chip is the same one as was in the machines that were going for $5K and up 2 to 3 years ago. The weakness in this machine is lack of quality elecrolitics which I am going to change. So I probably will spend another $100 beefing up the power supply and getting a descent cord with earth ground, that type of thing. To me that means Sony is going to really push the SACD format. I think that also that 5.1 CDs will disappear because you can do 5.1 with the Sony SACDs. I also believe that the discs will always have stereo playback for music. Not much 3D sound I want to be in the center of for music playback. Pink Floyd, but they were 360 sound in concert.
Well the thing is that big money will make a choice as to what will be on the market with quality not being the top qualifier. A perfect example is Beta and VHS video tapes. Another is CD and vinyl. You can buy new vinyl now though I have not looked at it but when CDs came on the market the production of vinyl and TT was stopped.
Going into Blockbuster to rent a movie and over the last year the DVD section has gone from less than 25% to well over 50% in the floor area.
I bought my fist DVD player because it had the Burr Brown 24/96 chip in it and I could get it in a DVD player for $250 vs $600 bottom line in a CD player. I had it for 5 months before a DVD was even used in it. It was my CD player. Still is but in the bedroom.
Sony has bought a lot of labels and are carefully remastering the old analog recordings for CD which has to be done because of the curves that were used to get vinyl to sound realistic. The studio master is back in business and because of this even the DDD recordings are getting better.
I could swear that the recordings that I have carefully compiled over the last few years because of the music type, performane and playback quality sound better on the new Sony than they did on the Toshiba DVD. The difference between the DVD player and the Sony CD player it replaced were enormass. Even the wife commented on it and she really does not care.
Well those are a few of my thoughts on why CDs will stay and SACD will also. It is just a matter of time till most all new players will take the format and regular CDs will start to dwindle. Digital stream into throw away when broke or outdated HTAV recievers is just too easy. One interconnect and hook up the speakers. The thing that really makes me laugh is that people are buying the same thing twice for the most part. My DVD/SACD/CD has a DAC. I do not need a HT reciever to DAC the dig into analogue so I can get DTS movies. The guys designing building and selling the stuff know it too, but if you buy into the new tech you will pay twice for the same circuit in 2 different pieces of gear whether you want to or not. I however believe that the masses are completely ignorant of the fact that they are getting screwed as it is so subtle.
Thatch

[Thatch_Ear]

I just plugged in an example of older format that I found at Tower for $9. It is Billy Holiday's Lady in Satin. Columbia Jazz label, Legacy release 20 bit digitall remastered, small print on the back= Sony Music Entertainment Inc. The 20 bit sounds great on the SACD though it is only playing in regular CD mode according to the LCR.
Thatch..............wow the coffee is GREAT this morning!

[Billfort]

I'm hoping SACD takes off. As background, I am a vinyl lover - as mentioned earlier - there is no better way to reproduce an analogue experience (music) than use an analogue media (vinyl). As much as I've tired over the years, I've never heard a CD front end that could do what vinyl does. CD was great for convenient background noise or in the car, but when I wanted to really listen to music - it was always back to the turntable.

I tried SACD (a Sony 777ES player) about a year ago and was amazed at how good it was. This was so different - a real soundstage, air, smooth high end, a way deep image - in short, kind of like a decent analogue front end. This is a modern, convenient format that lets me get lost in the music - I love it. It sure isn't going to replace my turntable but I'm glad SACD is around. It's still a digital - yes/no - 0/1 interpretation of an analogue signal, but it seems to work a hell of a lot better than CD's. I even picked up one of the cheaper Sony SACD players (CE775) to go with my Antique Sound Labs Head amp and Sennheiser 600 headphones for a bedroom system - pretty incredible sound for the bucks.

I have no interest in DVD-Audio - too video focused, and I will not buy something with audible watermarking. Even if SACD only survives as a niche type format, I'm happy - I have lots of great music, there is more on the way, and niche formats can continue to bring you the music - like vinyl. These Sony machines are even pretty good redbook players - what's to loose?

Billf

[bigmacc]

Interesting topic my two cents.

1. I'm surprise how vinyl keeps hanging around and the market there appears to be for high-end turntables and records.

2. Thors point if record companies could offer the buying public a system where you could pick and choose music ( l would perfer CD's) for $1.50 a song l believe this would result in higher sales.

3. The promises made for CD's high quality sound for a reasonable price proved to be false; records where cheaper and better sounding. The result of this l believe is a consumer who will not embrace new audio technology very quickly.

4. Bully has the right ideal about Canada heh! l'm surprise that more comsumers do not look towards Canada as a source for equipment. With the American dollar worth about $1.65 of one of ours there are bargains north of the border.( Plus a free "Big Bubba" Molson Canadian beer can to any member of this site to visit Bigmacc). :D

[bully]

Great conversation, some real thoughtful comments.

I strongly agree that content comes from the artist/creator. I don't mind paying for that artistry/creativity. I object to paying a premium to the middleman, i.e., the record company.
At one time they were important.
In this digital age of the internet, I beg to say they are not.

That is why I object to their efforts to strangle creativity. I do not download music, because I'm not sure how, and I don't know how to get it from there to my cd burner (which only loads dust for lack of this old geezer's knowledge base :( ).

In the 1960s and 1970s there were local/regional bands/musicians that were as good, if not far better, than the national/international groups. They were eventually 'strangled' by the control the recording companies had over the industry.
Today 'indie' groups and musicians have the technical means to get their sound out to as many people as visit a website.

THAT is what cranks the 'music industry.' Their control is tenuous, and they are bringing their big guns to a knife fight. And, how in the hell are they winning? Our courts are just not up to the speed of technology, and the obsolescense of certain industries.

Rock on, dudes and ladies,
pete

[car67]

In a July HiFi News &RR - an article about Matshushita's seminar in Europe mentions a question to the panel about the future of DVD-A..."Panasonic staff later admitted informally that Universal's decision to back SACD instead of DVD-A was a setback, but the company could not compete with the financial incentives offered by Philips and Sony."

Sign of more to come?

cheers
Jack

[George R]

:grnbounce Hey All:beer:

Good thread with lots of thought provoking content. Guess I'll add my two cents worth.

I think that with technology expanding exponentially, it's very possible that the "next big thing" is ight around the corner and may make current music reproduction (and perhaps ALL electronics) obsolete.

As to piracy, well, I think this issue is just a response to the greed of the recording industry. Ever since the advent of home recording, whether reel to reel or cassette, prople have been "pirating" music. I recall radio stations doing simulcast concerts and broadcasting level signals so people could get good tapes. I also don't recall anyone ever being sued for this practice.

Now, I believe that the ARTISTS who create the music that drives our hobby, should get fair recompense for their work, and the companies that produce the media we listen to it through should get a share for their part. But to me it seems like their share keeps getting bigger, yet it's still not enough for them. Let's face it, not everyone has a computer and many who DO, have no internet connection. My Dad, who has both, has no interest in downloading music. The point being, there are still many,mamy people who buy vynil,tape or CD.

A lot of people bought albums (vynil) AND cassettes to copy them to. My own cassette collection is predominantly home recorded, mainly because of the quality of the cassette itself along with higher quality tape. My LP's were played once to get them on reel tape, then put back into their sleeves and stored. Folks who don't have CD players in their cars STILL buy cassettes to copy their CD's to tape. This, of course, means they buy the CD FIRST.

As my mother would say, piracy "my left foot", (i don't know why it was the left foot). It's greed.

Well, that turned out to be quite the rant!:rant: :rant:

I'll leave some bandwidth for other posters.:beerchug:

:D Happy Listening:cool:

[Thatch_Ear]

I don't think that the piracy issue will have a thing to do with the format that comes out as the best new thing.
Although the largest market, because of the type of sound they are looking for, the earthquake in the car generation is not generally looking for quality sound reproduction. They are also the Napster generation and probably will not buy gear or music based on quality but on content. This is just a generalization folks!!!
I went to Tower Records last night and they are selling the single play Sony DVD/SACD/CD player for $200.
The Sony SACDs also will play 5.1 discreet just like DVD A does, they have 2 layers so you can play Stereo too.
The thing I like about the little Sony is that for $200 you get a machine that stands up to the transports and DACs that were so expensive a few years back, it will play music in surround or stereo, the 20 bit recordings that are selling for less than $10 sound great on them and you can watch movies too.
While not the best SACD player I do like mine a lot and to tell the truth a single disc player usually lasts for many years. So I have the bases covered while I sit on the sidelines for a little more than the price of 10 new discs. I have had mine for over 2 months now.

[Walt]

Some very interesting comments and particularly links to some of the new compressed formats in this thread (http://audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1169&perpage=15&pagenumber=1) .

I may invite Moogfan to tell us some more in this forum to those that are interested.

:)

[mayorbill11]

I could see the need for compressed mp3s disappearing in the next few years due to increasing hard drive sizes, if it were up to me I would get all my music at CD quality but it's just so easy to get mp3s on the internet that I don't see that happening. That being said, i'd gladly pay $650 dollars to have all the mp3s I have now in full CD quality on my computer, but that taking up about 40 gigs, it would only be if I had a new computer. I don't like buying CDs because you spend 15 dollars for like 3 songs alot of the time and I'll never pay for mp3s because it's a shitty format with weak bass and and grainy mixed-together highs. I'd pay a dollar a song to download CD quality files.

[Rob Babcock]

After a couple down years, CD sales were actually up 5% in '04. LP sales are an infinitesimal blip on the radar, comprising about 1.5% of total sales. The very slight rise in sales was the "bounce at the bottom" and the retro fad for all things 70's (and some DJ's are using them for effects). LP will survive as the niche product it's been for the last decade, but it's never gonna be much bigger than it is now. It's day as the champ are gone forever.

That said, neither DVD-A nor SACD have really made much headway, either. Sales of both combined are still only about equal to those of LP. Sad as it is to say, Thor is probably right- the future is MP3, or some other format very much like it. Sure, DRM issues abound, but Apple has found the way to make a ton of money off downloads. Studios would love to go to a media-less "format". If they could do so, no one would ever physically own anything again. And think of the pure cash; no money spent on packaging, pressing, or distribution. And no middleman, conceivably.

I think DVD-A and SACD will hang on as niche products, too. At least til Blu-ray or HD-DVD take over. HD-DVD has already adopted MLP as a mandatory part of the standard, so technically it will be able to exactly match DVD-A. But it can also put a full rez HD picture alongside it! :yes: In the end, I expect manufactures to use whichever new DVD standard survives as an audio carrier, too. Sony hasn't announced what hi rez sound standard it will adopt, but will anyone here be shocked if they go with DSD? Anyone up for "Format War, Part II"?

But I don't see the plain ol' Redbook CD going away anytime soon.

[Jack G]

SACD and DVD-A will probably remain niche markets. Sony has pretty much bailed on SACD. If they really wanted to push, they would make all CDs hybrids. Its the smaller labels that are keeping SACD alive.
CD will be the dominant format for a very long time. Downloading may get more popular over time, especially with some of the lossless formats out there, but I'm not sure how well it will work for those of us who listen to albums, not songs and I'm not sure how much classical is downloadable.
I guess, time will tell.
Jack

[asynchronousman]

That said, neither DVD-A nor SACD have really made much headway, either. Sales of both combined are still only about equal to those of LP. Sad as it is to say, Thor is probably right- the future is MP3, or some other format very much like it. Sure, DRM issues abound, but Apple has found the way to make a ton of money off downloads. Studios would love to go to a media-less "format". If they could do so, no one would ever physically own anything again. And think of the pure cash; no money spent on packaging, pressing, or distribution. And no middleman, conceivably.
I wonder when we're all gonna be able to live completely PPV...ya right

But I don't see the plain ol' Redbook CD going away anytime soon.

Definitely.

[botrytis]

The problem with all of the formats is the original source needs to be quality!! With SACD - it really should be recorded in SACD format in order to sound good. Right now, most use PCM format for recording (the basis for CD's and DVD-A) and then convert to SACD format. There can be some loss and other things going on - like the 20K-50K harmonics that you can get with SACD.

I have some DVD-A's - some are actually amazing in sound and others are just OK. I am not sure which one will win.

Dave

[Workingslug]

Based on what I have read in some of the past articles of Stereophile, DVD-A may not be able to catch SACD. There are about 10,000 SACD titles compared to about 1500 for DVD-A so the numbers suggest the SACD has a commanding lead. As far as some of the comments toward those of us who listen to vinyl, there is an article in Stereophile but I do not have that issue here at work that compared the number of sales of Redbook CD's to the number of sales of new record albums and they claim that those two (2) numbers are close to being equal. IMO, the Redbook CD will be here for some time to come as the mass market has not accepted either SACD or DVD-A as an acceptable alternative to the Redbook CD. As an example of this, go to Best Buy and look at the selection one has for the Redbook CD's versus anything else. MP3 - I agree that some type format as this has the potential to take the market as many in the younger generation are moving toward these pocket machines as their choice for a listening format. Not only can you take it with you, but you can plug it into the computer at work or at home and have your library right there with you. It is an interesting debate and one that will hopefully continue for a while.

[asynchronousman]

Isn't it awfully downheartening that this thread originated over two years ago and nearly NO progress has really managed to happen? So much for the "progress will make everything we have now obsolete" theory.

Blu-Ray is still talk, Sony and Toshiba are silly competing for a "standard" when even HDTV can't do that, and Apple did indeed reinvent the music distribution market...on a format "sort of like MP3".

All of which demonstrates that the 5" disc in any format will remain as the best example for a few years to come.

We told them so.

[Johncan]

Apple has found the way to make a ton of money off downloads

Apple is not making money selling music. It is a loss leader to sell Ipods and other hardware. Steve Jobs has been quoted many times stating this. He has said most of the Itunes revenue goes to the music labels and to pay the costs of the Itunes storefront.

If I remember correctly, Apples makes 4 cents off a 99 cent download. The label receives 62 cents, the music publishers (the artists) get 8 cents. The remaining 26 cents goes to pay for Apple's technology costs.

John

[Rob Babcock]

Apple is not making money selling music. It is a loss leader to sell Ipods and other hardware. Steve Jobs has been quoted many times stating this. He has said most of the Itunes revenue goes to the music labels and to pay the costs of the Itunes storefront.

If I remember correctly, Apples makes 4 cents off a 99 cent download. The label receives 62 cents, the music publishers (the artists) get 8 cents. The remaining 26 cents goes to pay for Apple's technology costs.

John

Not to be a smartass, but that's exactly how they're making the shitload of money! iTunes is selling iPods by the gazillion. And I expect once amortized, the cost of the technology will level off. Shutting out other formats may or may not help them, though; an iPod user just filed a lawsuit against Apple over not being able to use certain other file formats.

Obviously, the record labels have to love the deal with Apple- pure gravy from their POV. That's what will ultimately drive downloads. Apple doesn't care if they profit from the actual download, per se. But the labels will make out like bandits, and it will only increase over time. Obviously selling an album ala carte is more profitable than selling the whole thing in physical form. Especially when you factor in the lack of pressing and packaging.

Me, I've never bought a download and I doubt I ever will, at least not until I can get a lossless one. Perhaps I'd pay a very low price for downloads just to see if I wanted to buy the full rez version. Why pay full price for compressed music with no art, lyrics, jacket or printed disc? Of course, maybe someday there won't be a choice. :no:

[Johncan]

Me, I've never bought a download and I doubt I ever will, at least not until I can get a lossless one. Perhaps I'd pay a very low price for downloads just to see if I wanted to buy the full rez version. Why pay full price for compressed music with no art, lyrics, jacket or printed disc? Of course, maybe someday there won't be a choice.

I don't disagree at all on the Ipod side of sales. They are racking it up.

I have never paid $.99 for one song, but I have purchased 192 VBR MP3s from emusic.com and allofmp3.com. You can get an entire album for under $2.00. It works for me because I love indie music anyway.

I would love to buy lossless files. I would pay $.99 for those or $10/album for lossless. A big plus would be to download the art as well.

As for DVD-A vs SACD, I have a SACD player and I like what little I have bought (Big Star, Bob Dylan, John Coltrane). I wish there was more diversity in titles. I would like to see more punk, post punk, jangle pop, and indie rock in the SACD format. However, I doubt that will ever happen. I can't imagine hearing Husker Du, the Buzzcocks, or the Weakerthans on SACD.

I have not heard DVD-A. I am not sure I want to hear more than two channels anyway. The Replacements in 5.1 would sound very strange and has little appeal to me.

I just hope that redbook CD keeps improving and that record labels stop compressing the volume levels in new recordings.

John

[botrytis]

DVD-A is two-channel also, just higher resolution. SACD can also be mutichannel, so it just adds to the confusion.

Dave

[Rob Babcock]

DVD-A is two-channel also, just higher resolution. SACD can also be mutichannel, so it just adds to the confusion.

Dave

All of my DVD-A's are multichannel, actually. Even some old classics like DP's Machine Head and the Door's L.A. Woman. I don't care for the MC remixes, except for the song "Riders on the Storm"- it sounds amazing. On the other hand, the MC remix of Foreigner's 4 is fantastic from start to finish. My philosophy: give me the number of channels it was intended for. I'll gladly accept a MC remix, but be sure to include the original 2CH alongside it. That way everyone is happy.

You're not lying about the compression, Johncan. I've got some CDs of recent vintage that have only a few dB dynamic range. :no: Most of the best new stuff will never see the light of SACD or DVD-A, so I agree they should do the RBCD version carefully and get it right.

[1420-1503]

The reason I buy cd's is that the music I seek is only on that format. If it were available on a better format; Reel Tape, Vinyl, SACD or DVD-AUDIO; that's what I'd get!! NOT the cd. So for me, the reason I buy redbook cd's is because I'm forced to.