DVD-Audio or SACD?

[John Corn]

I've been following the "battle" of the multi-channel music formats with interest for a while now, and was curious as to which you prefer.

I prefer the DVD-Audio format, since it will prevent us all from having to purchase yet another peice for our home stereo... we can use a DVD-Audio player to play DVD movies also, as well as all the "old" audio CDs we have now. Many also play MP3s and other formats.

Some say, however, that the SACD actually sounds better, from a purely sonic point of view. Given that Sony is pioneering it, and they were right about Beta... ;) ... I'm inclined to agree. I was QUITE impressed with some SACD's that I've heard.

But my problem with it is that I already have a DVD player capable of playing the new DVD-Audio format, along with MP3 and WMA and the old audio CDs... etc. I don't want to have to purchase YET ANOTHER player for audio disks. I have already made my audio CD player redundant with my DVD. I'd rather not do that again.

What do you think?

Or... do you even care about multi-channel music?

[oblio98]

I have both and prefer DVD-A.

DVD-A:
Always a multichannel mix
Optional M/C DTS/DD mixes for those w/o DVD-A capability
Video content - Menus, lyrics, extras

SACD:
Confusing disc variants - Some play only on SACD players, not CD players. Some are M/C, some are not. Some stereo SACDs have been re-released as M/C SACDs. Some are stickered as M/C (CCRs) but they are not. CAnnot access M/C mix without an SACD player.

They both SOUND great, however.

[Steve Mehs]

I perfer DVD-A since I can play the discs in my regular DVD player until I get a DVD-A Player. As Oblio said the lyrics and video are also a nice bonus. I've never played around with SACD but, just by looking at the selection of music I'm not musch interested in the format. So far there are 3 DVD-A's I like (and I have all three) whereas with SACD I haven't seen one album yet I would buy. Even though I'm not using analog multichannel for DVD-A yet, the DD5.1 track still kicks CD butt.

[Frank Z]

I'm kinda in the middle on this one. I've got a universal player so it's not really a problem. Altough a lot of people can play DVD-A discs on therir current players, many people do not have them connected properly and are missing out.

If you are getting into multi-channel music and can't decide which format, I'd recommend getting a universal player and experiment with both formats.

[Martyva]

If you have a DVD audio player, you need a receiver that has 5.1 analog inputs, or in many cases, will not get sound from your player, when playing DVD audio disks. These start at under $300

[oblio98]

Originally posted by Martyva
If you have a DVD audio player, you need a receiver that has 5.1 analog inputs, or in many cases, will not get sound from your player, when playing DVD audio disks. These start at under $300

 

 

Well, yes and no. You will not be able to hear the High Definition tracks without a DVD-A player AND a reciever or amplifier with 6 channel in analog inputs. However, you can still "get sound", either stereo or DTS/Dolby Digital surround audio if you use the digital out of the DVD-A player and the digital in on your reciever. Even without either of these, you can STILL just get the stereo track from a DVD-A when played normally on a DVD-V player.

If you have a single layer SACD, you will get NOTHING from a DVD or CD player that does not do SACD.

 

:-jon

[HTguy]

Some say, however, that the SACD actually sounds better, from a purely sonic point of view.

There is no way that anybody can truthfully say this.

To test this objectively would require the same mix of the same program playing on the same (universal) player through the same system at the same level.

I don't think this is even possible because I don't know of one program that is available on both formats. (I could be wrong.) But it would also require that the program was mixed & mastered identically. That's very unlikely to happen unless someone sponsers a special recording for the purpose of experiment.

Even if that were done, to eliminate any possibility of subjective preference the listening test would have to be of the "double-blind" method.

But is such an experiment even necessary? Not in my opinion because one thing is known for sure: both DVD-A & SACD provide outstanding sound which is far superior to ordinary CD & even better (potentially) than DD, dts, or high-bit wide bandwidth PCM.

[Martyva]

On some DVD Audio players, the auto detect for a DVD audio disc directs all the information to th 5.1 channel outs, rendering digital sound inoperable,

[Chris Blount]

I have heard both but I prefer DVD Audio. Extra features on the disc like DTS can be a plus. Personally I think the DTS 96/24 track blows everthing else away although its only available on some DVD Audio discs.

[Bill D]

I have SACD and am quite happy with it. There are some SACD discs that will also play on your standard CD player as well as the SACD. In theory SACD gives more bandwidth to the music then DVD-A. But as mentioned I'm sure direct comparison's are tough to do and would yield arguable results. I think that as more players that have both formats get cheaper you may see that both formats survive. I remember when DTS was taken out of the loop for hometheater, it was just going to be a theater format. The first generation DVD players didn't even pass DTS when they started coming out with software with DTS. DD and DTS currentlt live together even on the same discs. Pretty good considering they are competitors.

[BobMurdoch]

I say invest in a Universal player that plays BOTH. Pioneer makes a good one that is also a Progressive Scan DVD player, so you can upgrade and not increase the number of components in your stack.

Then it becomes a kind of a Dolby/DTS-like choice depending on whichever product is available.

[Nick]

"...Sony is pioneering it (SACD), and they were right about Beta..."

Which just shows that not all of the superior technologies win in the marketplace.