[kelly]

http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/ptech/1....ap/index.html

comments?

 

[kerelybonto]

The article address the main shortcoming of the hi-rez formats: they can't be copied. Obviously the music industry doesn't see that as a downside, but it is for consumers. But I really think that'll change eventually -- the equipment manufacturers are not the labels, and if they want to sell these things, they'll incorporate features that consumers want. SACD is not, as CNN stated, inherently copy-proof. I'll ignore the DVD-A portion, since DVD-A is pretty crippled. Not going to argue that.

The rest of the article is misleading. It talks about the lack of digital outputs, failing to note that no one needs a digital output except in the aforementioned copying scenario. Few consumers have digital receivers, so I don't really see it as an issue. And the players do have digital outputs for Redbook.

Then there're paragraphs like this: Quote:

The Audible Difference has tested several units, Fay said. It found that the SACD disc playback quality is superb, but the legacy CD playback was not.

Now come on. In audiophile terms, that's correct -- but not at all for the average consumer. Any machine capable of playing SACD probably sounds better in Redbook than 90% of what people own. Add phrases like "hardware limitations" and the article sounds pretty condemning.

Then's there's the discussion of SACD watermarking. I wasn't even aware SACDs were watermarked, but the article speaks of one "introduced during the mastering process." Can anyone comment on this?

I also found this section of the article interesting: Quote:

In a recent Gartner G2 survey, 88 percent of respondents said they believed it legal to make copies of CDs for personal backup use while 77 percent felt they should be able to copy a CD for personal use in another device.

In other words, 23 percent of the public has been brainwashed into thinking they can't make copies of their own music for their own use. Sad.

kerely

 

[CaptBubba]

Um, my sony ns500v has digital outs. Sure they only output redbook audio, but that's all todays DACs can decode! If the players had SACD digital outs then he would be complaining about how there is nothing to hook them too. I actually think that the only reason he sees for digital outs is to hook it up to a cd-r deck.

Quote:

They're engineered to be copy-proof.

For now. Tv was not copyable when it was introduced, nor was radio. Nor records. Nor cds.

edit: Quote:

Some urge consumers to wait it out

Um, who? One guy at one store in California?

 

[RVD]

I read the article in the paper a few days ago and posted it in the Source/Formats forum and found it informative, because I did not know too much about the whole SACD/DVD-A copying issue. Also I didn't know Arizona had an audiophile club.

The only thing I agreed with in the article is the lack of titles for SACD/DVD-A. The lack of digital outputs is very misleading as most SACD players have them, but they are just for Redbook. Also SACD players maybe lacking in Redbook playback, but I imagine the only people buying SACD players are audiophiles anyways and most of them probably know about modifications and DAC's that can be used to improve Redbook playback on SACD players.

 

[markl]

It wasn't totally negative, they only seem concerned about copy-protection issues:

Quote:

About 1,000 recordings are now available in Super Audio CD or DVD-Audio. Both require special new audio components and produce five-channel sound with superb clarity and definition.

Quote:

"With high-resolution audio, the need for secure interfaces becomes even greater, since the quality of audio on such formats as SACD is virtually indistinguishable from the master (tape)," said Sony spokesman David Migdal.

Quote:

Moreover, there are no digital outputs on any SACD or DVD-Audio players now available, making them a tough sell despite the discs' higher tonal quality and fuller audio range.

This isn't entirely true. The standard for digital connection for the new formats is Firewire. I recently saw a review in some audio mag for a player that came equipped with a Firewire connection (but I don't remember which one). OTOH, if you don't have a receiver/surround system that accepts firewire, you're still SOL if you want to use a digital connnection as there are no receivers/pre-amps that I'm aware of that accept firewire and decode both SACD/DVD-A (could be wrong).
Nevertheless, you can still use the analog outputs of SACD/DVD-A players (which I do) many of which are now providing bass-management features.

Also, I believe Denon's new mega-buck DVD-A player has a proprietary digital out that I believe interfaces with their top-of-the-line Receiver the 5803. Proprietary solutions are not great, but better than nothing.

Mark

 

[andrzejpw]

The CNN article did bring the copy issue to the front. A format that isn't portable, meaning it can't be copied, ripped, etc, is not going to survive. Think of the current generation of college students. They are used to ripping, making mixes, etc. Do you really think they'll let that get taken away lightly?

 

[markl]

If you are no longer able to get your MP3's for free, you have no choice but to actually buy your music as all previous generations have done.

Nothing will prevent you from making copies of the CD layer of your SACD, though. You can use the standard digital out of your CDP/SACDP to make a copy. If you're converting it to crappy MP3 formats what difference does it make if your ripping off the Redbook or SACD layer?

DVD-A may be a different deal. Not sure if it allows any ability to make copies. Actually, i take that back. You can use the downmixed Dolby-Digital layer through your standard digital out to make copies of your DVD-A discs.

I'm not trying to make light of this situation, just pointing out that paying for music may be a quaint old-fashioned custom, but it has been known to work!

Mark

 

[kelly]

Copy protection could and probably will be added to the redbook layer of SACDs the same way many redbook CDs employ various copy protection techniques.

There is no copy protection in the history of software that has not been defeated. Pirated software will always exist. Copy protection schemes will not force millions of impoverished communist Chinese to load up in the minivan to a trip to Best Buy, but it will piss lots of people like me off which does influence my decision when I'm at Best Buy deciding which CDs to pick up and which ones to leave behind.

Little known fact: MP3 is a compression standard. It can compress anything that can be recorded, pirated or legitimate. Many legitimate mp3s in this world exist. Some are released by artists on their web sites. Some are made by people who legally own a CD and wish to play songs from it on their laptop or iPod.

Copy protection does not hault piracy but it does cripple the the versatility of a legally purchased disc.

 

[andrzejpw]

markl: You'll be happy to know that this high school kid buys all of his music these days. Hi-fi audio has a way of doing that to you.

But what will want to do, and copy protection makes it difficult, is make copies of some cds so that I can take them in the car. I'm not keeping originals in there to get stolen.

btw kelly: You chinese best buy minivan trip was comedy gold.

 

[AndreYew]

Kerely,

Quote:

Then's there's the discussion of SACD watermarking. I wasn't even aware SACDs were watermarked, but the article speaks of one "introduced during the mastering process." Can anyone comment on this?

There are two watermarks, but they are introduced at pressing, not in mastering, though there is really nothing preventing people from putting Verance-style (ie. DVD-A) watermarks into SACD releases.

Basically, in order to press an SACD, you need a black box from Sony that has the necessary encryption stuff to encode the discs correctly so that SACD players will decode them. SACD also has a visible watermark that's done by altering the metal substrate of the disc.

I thought the article was fairly uninformed.

--Andre

 

[kerelybonto]

Okay, so this watermarking is completely different that DVD-A's. The artilcle presented them as being effectively the same.

kerely

 

[Calanctus]

As others have mentioned, the article does make the major point that digital copying of hi-rez audio is prevented. I don't agree that this is a violation of 'fair-use rights', since the concept of fair use does not mean that the content provider is *obligated* to provide the content in a way that can be copied.

Quote:

since DVD-A is pretty crippled.

In what sense is DVD-A crippled? Neither hi rez format can be copied in the digital domain...so how is it different from SACD (except for usability issues such as the terrible labelling on DVD-A recordings)?

Quote:

[size=xx-small]The Audible Difference has tested several units, Fay said. It found that the SACD disc playback quality is superb, but the legacy CD playback was not [/size] Now come on. In audiophile terms, that's correct

Sorry, that's not so in the opinion of many major reviewers. "Audiophile' magazines such as Stereophile, The Absolute Sound and Hi Fi News PRAISE the CD playback of the Sony XA777. It sounds very good indeed to me. I'm not qualified to comment on other hi rez players, since I have not auditioned them extensively, but the XA777 performs very well in comparison to 'audiophile' CD players.

Quote:

The standard for digital connection for the new formats is Firewire.

Again, not so. "Standard" suggests that the whole industry will be adhering to it as a matter of course. The brand-new Denon DVD-A player (which includes a digital out for DVD-A to their own receiver) does not use Firewire, nor has Denon announced any plans to do so.

Quote:

I recently saw a review in some audio mag for a player that came equipped with a Firewire connection (but I don't remember which one).

The new Pioneer DV-757-Ai universal player (this is the UK model number; anyone know the US equivalent?) has a Firewire out, compatible with their own high end receiver, the VSA-AX10i (again the UK number). These were reviewed in the December 2002 Hi Fi News.

Quote:

there are no receivers/pre-amps that I'm aware of that accept firewire and decode both SACD/DVD-A (could be wrong).

As mentioned the new Pioneer receiver does so--from their own universal player only at this point. Hi Fi News says that in theory any receiver (or, I suppose, any DAC) equipped with Sony's I-link implementation of IEEE-1394 should accept the digital signals from the Pioneer player, for both SACD and DVD-A . Anyone know of any non-Pioneer receivers or DACs that have implemented support for this feature?

Quote:

Little known fact: MP3 is a compression standard. It can compress anything that can be recorded, pirated or legitimate.

Absolutely correct. Has anyone tried an analogue capture of SACD/DVD-A and compared it to a digital rip of redbook at the highest possible quality? I'd be especially interested if an audio magazine tried this, though I guess industry pressure might prevent them from doing so.

Quote:

Basically, in order to press an SACD, you need a black box from Sony that has the necessary encryption stuff to encode the discs correctly so that SACD players will decode them. SACD also has a visible watermark that's done by altering the metal substrate of the disc.

That's new to me--thanks for the info.

Calanctus

 

[markl]

Quote:

In what sense is DVD-A crippled? Neither hi rez format can be copied in the digital domain...so how is it different from SACD (except for usability issues such as the terrible labelling on DVD-A recordings)?

Just to clarify (and I think this is what you're saying, Cal) both SACD and DVD-A can both be copied through the digital out of SACD/DVD-A players, but you aren't copying the hi-rez layer. You cannot make an SACD copy of an SACD disc or a DVD-A copy of a DVD-A disc, but you can still get two-channel copies off of both formats.

Quote:

Again, not so. "Standard" suggests that the whole industry will be adhering to it as a matter of course. The brand-new Denon DVD-A player (which includes a digital out for DVD-A to their own receiver) does not use Firewire, nor has Denon announced any plans to do so.

In a sense, you're right, Cal. But Firewire is "supposed" to be the standard, based on what I've read. Sadly, manufacturers like Denon have currently opted for a proprietary system.

Quote:

As mentioned the new Pioneer receiver does so--from their own universal player only at this point. Hi Fi News says that in theory any receiver (or, I suppose, any DAC) equipped with Sony's I-link implementation of IEEE-1394 should accept the digital signals from the Pioneer player, for both SACD and DVD-A . Anyone know of any non-Pioneer receivers or DACs that have implemented support for this feature?

Very cool. As I said, I was unaware of any receiver/pre-amp that could accept Firewire, but it appears there is one. This is the first of what will be many to accept Firewire.

Mark

 

[Joe Bloggs]

Quote:

Originally posted by Calanctus As others have mentioned, the article does make the major point that digital copying of hi-rez audio is prevented. I don't agree that this is a violation of 'fair-use rights', since the concept of fair use does not mean that the content provider is *obligated* to provide the content in a way that can be copied.

They're not obligated to do so... but if consumers demand that the content be provided in a way that can be copied, they would do so if they were smart...

Quote:

In what sense is DVD-A crippled? Neither hi rez format can be copied in the digital domain...so how is it different from SACD (except for usability issues such as the terrible labelling on DVD-A recordings)?

The DVD-A watermark is in the audio itself (i.e. theoretically audible) whereas the SACD watermark is not.

 

[TimSchirmer]

hmm...

looks to me like sony is finally getting what they deserve

hmmm... i feel like listening to some nice mp3's right now