How DVD-A is going to Survive

[Beagle]

Quote:

Originally posted by arnett i for one LOVE early beatles recordings. hey, a bad stereo mix beats a good mono mix any day

Yeah, I love those recordings that sound like the band is playing in one room and the vocalist is in another.

Can't wait for the multi-channel versions of those.

 

[mbriant]

Quote:

Digital gimmickry is slowly destroying music and film.

If it wasn't for a steady stream of new technologies being developed, we'd still be listening to Edison wax cylinders. Many formats have come and gone, but a few became for a period of time at least, the new standard. At the end of the day ( century actually), we have made considerable progress.

Of course, it was easier to make large, obvious improvements in the sound/convienience/durability of wax cylinders and 78 RPM records, than it is the formats of today. But there is still room for improvement.

For the sake of progress, we unfortunately have to accept the bad with the good.

Much of the problem people are having with the new multi-channel formats, is that all of the initial releases, be they DVD-A, SACD, or whatever ..... are older, popular recordings which were never meant to be reproduced in multi-channel format.

Once recordings are being engineered specifically for multi-channel, and the recording engineers become more experienced with it, I think future multi-channel recordings will gain much more acceptance from the audiophile community.

I'd say multi-channel in some form is definately going to be the future. Thanks to video and Dolby Digital, theres a very large and growing number of HT systems out there begging for multi-channel software.

The hardware manufacturers are also going to push multi-channel because selling 5 or 7 amps and speakers is better than selling 2.

 

[Beagle]

Quote:

Originally posted by mbriant Once recordings are being engineered specifically for multi-channel, and the recording engineers become more experienced with it, I think future multi-channel recordings will gain much more acceptance from the audiophile community

This is exactly what was said when CD arrived and the sound was so bad. They blamed the microphones, the engineers, everything but the format. Here we are in 2002 and CD still sounds inferior to a top notch analog LP playback system. It has improved, yes, but it's hardly the quantum leap the modern day LP improved over the wax cylinder and the 78. Even SACD rave reviews make a comparison with good analog. So nearly 20 years later, we are trying to get back to where we were. We have gained and improved a lot of things but also traded a lot away in the process. A MiniDisc will eliminate the cassettes dropouts and wear but it throws part of the music away.

Of course, all of this is moot since most people today are satisfied with mediocrity, and for them, 4 channel medocrity is better than 2 channel hi-rez, not that they'd recognize it anyway.

So we have eliminated distortions and created new ones. One step forward two steps back.

I can't understand why it is such human nature that they have to buy into everything that is invented. I suppose it is because the manufacturers are clever people who can "create" markets at will, through clever advertising along with general gullibility of society.

I like it when I can sit before a musical combo, a small group, choir, rock band, string quartet or orchestra, enjoy the sounds of the instruments being played before me. Somehow, asking them to split up and play individually from each corner of the room would defeat the purpose.

I am not a luddite who refuses to move forward, but neither am I a sucker who can be forced backwards. I just think we are "improving" the wrong things. Why not get the exact sound of a master tape into peoples homes, then focus on extra channels.

 

[mbriant]

Quote:

Somehow, asking them to split up and play individually from each corner of the room would defeat the purpose.

That would be an example of poor engineering.

Just as stereo added a left/right dimensionality to mono recordings , multi-channel, if done properly, has the potential to add front/back depth to the soundstage.

 

[jbannow]

Quote:

Originally posted by Beagle Of course, all of this is moot since most people today are satisfied with mediocrity ...

I for the most part agree with you all, but I think that mediocrity is not a "new" thing. Most people just don't care, and I don't think that this is any different that 40 years ago. As long as it works ...

BTW, for quite a few years people debated the same things about Laserdiscs and DVDs.

 

[arnett]

Quote:

Originally posted by Beagle Yeah, I love those recordings that sound like the band is playing in one room and the vocalist is in another.

yeah, it really sucks when you can hear every nuance of a performer: his breathing, his whispering to band mates, his coughing. i mean, who wants to hear all that detail?

 

[Matt]

...MBriant. It doesn't have to be some unnatural, "sitting in the middle of the stage" sort of mix. I could be a stereo mix with ambient reinforcement, sort of like a binaural recording for a surroud sound system (where only incidental stuff is coming from the other channels). That would be cool, and I'd buy into it.

- Matt

 

[Beagle]

Quote:

Originally posted by Matt ...MBriant. It doesn't have to be some unnatural, "sitting in the middle of the stage" sort of mix. I could be a stereo mix with ambient reinforcement, sort of like a binaural recording for a surroud sound system (where only incidental stuff is coming from the other channels). That would be cool, and I'd buy into it. - Matt

I agree 100% that it would be cool. It would be terrific for sound effects, or outdoor sounds like birds or crickets, even airplanes or neighbours quarrelling. To reproduce it accurately would require 300 speakers and 100 acres of land/space. But for music, I don't know. There's too many recording engineers who can't even get stereo correct so I shudder at the thought of how abysmal 4 channel would be in their hands. And where does it stop?

What are we trying to reproduce anyway?

Sounds? Music? A song? A musical idea? A feeling? Or just space?

I'd like a system that can accurately reproduce the feeling and adrenaline rush that occured when the music was being created, along with an accurate portrayal of the sounds of the instruments. I don't need to "see" the drummer on the ceiling or on the back wall. If I want to play with toys, I'll get some Tonka trucks, dumptrucks and go in the back yard and play in the dirt. If I want to hear birds above and behind me, or hear a brook babble, then I'll go for a walk in the park or the woods. If I want to hear bullets flying above and behind, I'll go to the shooting range.

What's next, 4 channel headphones? I can just see it. The set sits on your head like a giant spider, with little "speakers" circling your head, manipulated by a belt turned by a battery operated motor.

Then there will be a new set of guidelines for "break-in".

The Ety version will require an extra set of ears, so call a friend. Two heads are better than one.

 

[arnett]

Quote:

Originally posted by Beagle There's too many recording engineers who can't even get stereo correct I'd like a system that can accurately reproduce the feeling and adrenaline rush that occured when the music was being created, along with an accurate portrayal of the sounds of the instruments

there is no such thing as 'accurate stereo' in pop and rock recordings. the 'accuracy' depends on where the mixing engineer decides to place the mono tracks in the soundstage that day. and trust me, the mixing engineer doesn't hang around the studio watching where the performers stood so that he could pan the tracks accordingly in the mix.

if you're talking classical or jazz, that's a different story. but almost all pop/rock stereo is fake. exception: live recordings.

 

[Beagle]

Quote:

Originally posted by arnett there is no such thing as 'accurate stereo' in pop and rock recordings

I know. There's not much natural space and air. There is on a lot of stuff, 70's stuff, but I said I'd like a system that can accurately reproduce the feeling and adrenaline rush that occured when the music was being created, along with an accurate portrayal of the sounds of the instruments. I just like to accurately hear what was recorded, whatever it was. I find SACD comes pretty close I think, but I am assuming since I haven't heard the original recordings off the master.

So I guess 4 channel is pointless for pop-rock, another reason not to subscribe.

 

[arnett]

Quote:

Originally posted by Beagle What's next, 4 channel headphones? I can just see it. The set sits on your head like a giant spider, with little "speakers" circling your head, manipulated by a belt turned by a battery operated motor.

Beagle, you better get a patent and copyright on this immediately.

son, you're going to be a Millionaire!!