Blu-Ray profile 3.0 (Audio only)

Profile 3.0

I've never seen blu-ray profile 3.0 mentioned before. Seems like an updated DVD-Audio on Blu-Ray.

"There are four profiles for hardware based Blu-ray players, three of them for video based Blu-ray players. Profile 1.0 is known as the "Grace Period Profile". Profile 1.1 is known as the "Final Standard Profile". Profile 2.0 is the "BD-Live" profile, while 3.0 refers to audio only Blu-ray."

"All profiles, apart from Profile 3.0 (audio-only) requires support for BD-J."

Audi A3 said:

Alexander J
Can you tell us more about Blu-Ray profile 3.0.?

Blu-Ray Profile 3.0 thread - Link

Click to expand...

I am more on the creative side,
But I asked my Athoring consultants to keep me updated regarding 3.0 development and will be glad to post more info if there's any news.

Alexander J - thank u.

Hope you receive information this year. It would be nice if BD 3.0 would support play-back without a screen - like SACD, and still have video material like DVD-Audio.

DVD-Audio supports playback without a screen, it's just that the equipment manufacturers (and to some extent the disc authors) have been too inept to implement it properly.

All the universal DVD-A/V players out there should have an "audio-only" mode that bypasses the menus, then it would work just like SACD. There are a couple of DVD-A only players that do this, but I'm not aware of any DVD-A/V players that can.

Same story with disc and track names - DVD-Audio supports this just as much as SACD does, but the manufacturers don't implement it as much, and presumably the disc authors haven't been as good either.

It's not the format, as such, it's the implementation. :

But I suspect that any audio profile of Blu-ray would hit the same implementation half-heartedness.

The only dvd-audio I know of that had no on-screen operating system (actually, there's no video content of ANY kind present) is the Elvis Presley disc...and I sure wish more were authored that way.

I read years ago that a dvd-audio disc could be authored to play just like a CD, but the main reason given for not doing that is that since it is a dvd-based format i.e. video related, supposedly "everyone" expects to use their TV with them and that is how most are made. That is the dumbest thing I've ever heard as far as that format is concerned. @:

FYI for those unfamiliar with this format: many dvd-a discs can be used without a TV, as long as you only want to listen to the multichannel tracks (setting the disc in the tray and then pushing "play" FIRST will cause the disc to play like a CD). It's when you want to switch to stereo or another set of tracks is when things can get weird quick with many titles.

I'll be pissed if they screw this up again i.e. if the operating standards for the Blu-ray version are as disorganized. The "do it if it feels good" attitude was great for the 60s, but not for music format standards.

FriskyDingo said:

The only dvd-audio I know of that had no on-screen operating system (actually, there's no video content of ANY kind present) is the Elvis Presley disc...and I sure wish more were authored that way.

I read years ago that a dvd-audio disc could be authored to play just like a CD, but the main reason given for not doing that is that since it is a dvd-based format i.e. video related, supposedly "everyone" expects to use their TV with them and that is how most are made. That is the dumbest thing I've ever heard as far as that format is concerned. @:

FYI for those unfamiliar with this format: many dvd-a discs can be used without a TV, as long as you only want to listen to the multichannel tracks (setting the disc in the tray and then pushing "play" FIRST will cause the disc to play like a CD). It's when you want to switch to stereo or another set of tracks is when things can get weird quick with many titles.

I'll be pissed if they screw this up again i.e. if the operating standards for the Blu-ray version are as disorganized. The "do it if it feels good" attitude was great for the 60s, but not for music format standards.

Click to expand...

Nimbus DVD-As don't require a TV to play the HiRes tracks. After hitting close, they bring up a screen announcing showing a selecion, and immediatly start to play it, so a screen is not necessary.

From my experience, EVERY DVD-Audio disc can be played straight away, just like a CD. It will automatically choose the best option your DVD-A player is set to support and you simply use the audio language button on the remote to change between surround/stereo. I too wish that content creators would just leave the video/menus alone and make it like SACD/CD, because all I want is the music. I'm very passionate about this, because an audio format should be an audio format, and it will be weakened/complicated if any video is mixed in with it. In order to not confuse the consumer and the entire market, they should be making a separate DVD disc for any video supplements, or somehow distinguish it VERY clearly on the packaging.

My understanding of blu-ray profile 3.0 is that it's EXACTLY the same as the blu-ray video format, just with no obligation for advanced blu-ray video features (BD-J, and maybe PiP). I.e. you could manufacture a "Blu-ray profile 3.0 ONLY" player if you wanted (which is a bit silly anyway as you'd want to have movie playback as well). In other words, Blu-ray video IS Blu-ray audio, it's exactly the same format (unlike DVD-Audio compared to DVD-Video). It's more comparable to Audio CD vs. CD-ROM, but even better - NO new physical technology is required ANYWHERE, industry or consumer-side. ALL that would be required, is for the recording/CES industry to market it and call it something like "Blu CD" with its own logo. EVERY blu-ray player ALREADY out there supports it, NOW. And every tool which allows you to make a BD disc (of which there are already numerous free ones) can already make a "blu-ray audio" disc. We just need to give it a good name and logo so that average consumers can understand what it is.

I'm all for it. But the question is, is Sony up for it, or are they too scared everyone will be able to copy the discs just like, oh, the enormously-successful CD and DVD formats, and unlike the not-so-successful SACD (and DVD-Audio) formats? Sometimes Sony annoys me.

I think, Blu Audio or Bu CD could be ab success, but they (the firms) must call self, why it was not till now: First the system-wars beginning frim quadraphonic times with 4 non compatible systems. We have had discrete vs. matrix, but aölso the two discrte Systems CD-4 and UD-4 and also SQ and QS was for a perfect reproduction not compatible.

And also "only" 2 different systems are too much for an interess by the usual concumer or the mass market - like SA-CD and DVD-Audio too. And Blu Ray Video will now come to a big demand, when it was finally the only new system. Befor there was the danger, that both systems (let's one time think to the lost HD-DVD) would fall flat on one's face. The consumer has since then make a inquiry strike.

And now for my opinion (by experiene some meanings in the web-sides and forums or papers): It was a big error,to make the DVD-Audio similar to the DVD-Video in hinsight of the fans of the home cinema. I think, that this fans in the majority are only interested in surround noises and by listening music they are further on reactionary or without only a little phantasia for surround music. But the unsual an only stereo-music listeners will be a lot more people.
And thoe will on the other hand no an interess for the more complicated technic of a video surround equipment.

So I think, we (I mean the firms) must begin again by the quadraphonic roots.
The coming blu music record should have only 4 channels (by listening also 5 with the phantom center, which is well known by the stereo listeners). And also the equipment for quadraponic Blu Music disc should be further wellknown by the interesting stereo-listener. For the 4 channels he has only to buy a second stereo-system (ideal then both equal). And the handling is the same as by working with stereo equipment with direct handling by all modes. And for changing the loudness in front or back one must only turn a knob without walking through some displays. If the new 4-channel quadraphonic surround disc will be a succes, the industry can build new 4-channel amps or switch over amps 6/8 to 4. And 4 speakers will have also easier an places in the room than 6 or 8. Music is not a real cinema (only for the ears and the sound phantasia.)

That is my idea and I am thinking to make another flyer (as already some in the past) with this recommendation for an easy working Blu Music record. If they will come with a 8 channel Blu music record on the market for only a few technical freaks I will say: forget it!

Dietrich

Please, for the love of god, let us NOT go backwards to phantom centre.
It's a dreadful thing to suggest - using a true centre anchors the front of the mix in a much more solid manner - phantom centres can cause many issues with phasing plus make it necessary to use a lot more EQ to shoehorn all the material into the soundfield, and the even bigger problem of the field losing focus the moment you leave the sweet spot - the whole image shifts alarmingly.
Where a lot of mixers are going wrong is in failing to use & understand the centre channel properly in the first place.
It's not for isolated vocals. WHat you should be doing with it is using it as an additional slot along the front of the whole mix. Let me try to explain what I do.
Imaging 2 vocal parts - you can pan these using Centre/Left & Centre/Right with a hell of a lot more accuracy & much less corrective EQ than you would be able to do with a straight pan pot going L/R with phantom centre. Ditto guitars
Drums also benefit greatly from the correct usage of a real centre. I honestly cannot think of any good, valid reasons at all to go back to Quad.

As far as "Blu Disc" goes, what is the POINT?
Please try to explain exactly WHY you need either a 25 or 50Gb disc for straight music titles?
I'll save you the bother - you don't.
It will never be a music format, as it was designed first & foremost as a VIDEO format, with all the issues that implies.
It will not replace as a musicformat because oit is simply too expensive to create & produce for a format with an extremely small - one could say almost non-existant - market. HD DVD players out sold BD players by close to 5 to 1 - Sony fiddled the figures by including PC (2 million shipped with BD ROM drives) and PS3 (another 12 million units sold). Standalone BD players are well under 500,000 worldwide - hardly a resounding and ringing endorsement.
Hollywood went Blu for 2 reasons.
1 - Mandatory AACS and assurances from Sony that BD+ would never be cracked due to the strength of the encryption requiring years to use a "brute force" decryption method.
2 - Massive bribes (allegedly) from Sony (500 million to Warners, 200 million to Fox, 400 million to Universal etc) who also have been paying companies to drop HD DVD and stock BD only
Now BD+ is broken wide open, there is no longer any secure system for BD - so Hollywoods big incentive is gone. All they are left with is reason #3 for opting on this monster - the sheer bloody outrageous expense of producing certified content.
And given how much money Sony's PS3 division are currently losing (every PS3 is sold at a loss, due to the cost of manufacture being what it is) and don't forget Gertrude Rothschilds lawsuit applying for a complete import embargo on all Blue Laser Diode products because of massive and blatant patent infringement on many counts either. So the manufacture & replication/authoring costs are not going to go down in price any time soon. Hollywood have never forgiven small companies for taking a lot of DVD-V off them, and they do not intend to make the same mistake a second time.
I advise you to get some facts about these costs - and then ask yourself if a small label can afford them?

Neil, it sounds like you're saying that Blu-Ray authoring and production costs are prohibitive enough to stanch development of any MC audio titles for the format. And yet, we all agree that SACD and DVD-A are pretty much dead (or at least are jerking spasmodically as they approach room temperature) and commercial DTS music releases seem to be at the end of their rope, too. So I ask, not at all rhetorically, with all these avenues shut to us, what hope is there in the future for any sort of commercial MC audio format serving the large (read: popular) music market?

Or are we all just beating a dead horse here, forced to be content with the body of work that's already been produced, with nothing more to look forward to?

What hope in the future will be for any sort of commercial MC audio - as Frank Foti sayd? I have not only hope, I have a big wish for that. But as I sayd before, I am afraid, that a new run up with Blu Ray surround music will not be a succces with the same mistakes ore flaws as by the attempts before. And the main point is: easy-easy-easy- for the needed masses - in the time of MP3 and ipod without the usuless rubbish of cinema mode and too much picures, which our ears can't listen.

And Neil: 4-channel quadraphonic mode is for me not a step backwards, it is also today reality for me and by the most of our members here - for music and even for my DVD and Blu home-cinema. Of course it is allowed to take all the newest surround technic up to 10.2, but I have not heard a better reproduction as with 4-channels by home conditions. Quadraphony is for me the next logic step from Stereo to Surround in the chain of developments 1-2-4. And real things will not be old-fashioned. But with 5.1. and 7.1 for the audio music some mean, they can invent the wheel new.

As I said before, it is of course allow for the music-fans to do this for here own taste. But we must see the mass-market. I cannot see difficulties to produce a Blue Ray Audio. I think, the video part may run additional together with the sound tracks, but as black-cinema. In this manner also the DVD-Audio is possible without pictures. We self have made such a music DVD in surround. The phantom-center with not so abslute sharp reproduction as the separate one will have also advantages by home-cinema: Most the sound will come out of the center - also when the actors will stay beneth the center in half left or roght. From our live sound experiense our ears know, that a sound comes from that diredtion, where the source is to see (noises or peoples speaking). And when an actor by a movie stay beneth the center, you have the impression, that the sound of his speaking is heard also beneth the center from left or right.

Quadraphony is also the most economy surround-mode. You have only a transmission of 4 channels, but you can listen 5.
Especially little music firms have produced DVD-Audio and SA-CD - sometimes till now. And also the production with Blu Ray will cost in some few future time more less then today. It is onle to have the will to do that.

Of course, not all points can explaineds here (especially by time), but all discussion about surround sound will be always interesting.

Dietrich

It's my understanding that dolby tru is MLP? If so, why is it you don't see the hd decks ( either format) capable of doing dvd-audio? and can dolby tru be acessed via multi-channel analog?

Now we will have in a short time the first Blu Ray's only for audio (sound). Neil Young will offer now all of his (re)productions with Blu Ray audio. I think unfortunately only with stereo like his DVD-Audio's. A norwegian Label has announced 2 classic production, which shall be offered also in Blu Ray audio manner. They take the new sound formats Dolby HD and DTS Master. I am awaiting, that also other firms or Labels will take the Blu Ray (only) for music to have the highest quality. So I think, also music surround will have a rebirth, because with one system the consumers is not further on afraid to take the wrong system. When the blu ray will have in future some more acceptance on the market, more firms will and should offer the only audio version of Blu Ray together with the surround mixdown. Let's have hope.

Regarding a Phantom Center Front "Channel"
in Surround Sound (Quadraphonic) Systems:

This post (and some of the subsequent posts)
explains why a phantom center front "channel"
is perfectly satisfactory.

https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/forums/showpost.php?p=73194&postcount=242

I haven't found much about the NQRC tests
(for free) on the Internet or Usenet.

Kirk Bayne

Quadro-Action said:

Now we will have in a short time the first Blu Ray's only for audio (sound). Neil Young will offer now all of his (re)productions with Blu Ray audio. I think unfortunately only with stereo like his DVD-Audio's. A norwegian Label has announced 2 classic production, which shall be offered also in Blu Ray audio manner. They take the new sound formats Dolby HD and DTS Master. I am awaiting, that also other firms or Labels will take the Blu Ray (only) for music to have the highest quality. So I think, also music surround will have a rebirth, because with one system the consumers is not further on afraid to take the wrong system. When the blu ray will have in future some more acceptance on the market, more firms will and should offer the only audio version of Blu Ray together with the surround mixdown. Let's have hope.

Click to expand...

I have been hopeful that a market will exist for Blu-ray audio releases since I first saw mention of the product over three years ago. It really is the first of the better than CD formats to get mainstream news media mention on a regular basis and the first to have a chance with bsically no consumer confusion about which format to support now that HD DVD is gone and SACD and DVD-A relegated to the tiniest of niche formats. There should be over 20 million Blu-ray players in consumer's hands worldwide really soon, so it has a start and has the music companies attention. If we want high quality audio on a pre-recorded 5" shiny disc format, it is our last and best chance. The market may move away from media like this but I am unwilling or unable to get with the downloading craze so I am delighted it is being a chance.

It is good to see another optimistic post regarding Blu-ray potential here at this forum.

Chris

Chris Gerhard said:

I have been hopeful that a market will exist for Blu-ray audio releases since I first saw mention of the product over three years ago. It really is the first of the better than CD formats to get mainstream news media mention on a regular basis and the first to have a chance with bsically no consumer confusion about which format to support now that HD DVD is gone and SACD and DVD-A relegated to the tiniest of niche formats. There should be over 20 million Blu-ray players in consumer's hands worldwide really soon, so it has a start and has the music companies attention. If we want high quality audio on a pre-recorded 5" shiny disc format, it is our last and best chance. The market may move away from media like this but I am unwilling or unable to get with the downloading craze so I am delighted it is being a chance.

It is good to see another optimistic post regarding Blu-ray potential here at this forum.

Chris

Click to expand...

Hi Chris - you're not alone.

Blu-Ray as a video and audio format has a chance - the future might be interesting.

I think it's sad that a forum like this in generel is very pessimistic about blu-ray (and sony).

As more and more people upgrade their movie systems to 5.1 or 7.1, it's up to us to let them borrow a disc of surround sound music. You all know what it's like to hear your favorite album in MC for the first time. I remember letting a friend borrow the Metallica DVD-A and watching them come in the next day with the "WOW" look on their face. We owe it to the format to infiltrate the minds (and ears) of the uninitiated. They'll thank us and, hopefully, we'll be able to convince the companies to provide more format to meet the increased demand that we'll create.

My new slogan: "Share a Disc - Create Demand"

ok, all of us don't know the future and also the same with those by Blu Ray Audio. But I am afraid, that this will be not a big success, when they work even now with 7.1 channels. Only a minority of home cinema fans will install this - an a till now stereo-listener will get panic by the idea to have placing 8 loudspeakers insted only 2 in his room. And also the majority of the home cinema fans has unfortunately the same old-fashioned views of surround sound with music like the often to read viewes of borung purists. This was the result by an inquiry in another forum - may be again here? So it was a big mistake by the music firms, that home-cinema would be a solid basis for introducing the DVD-Audio - hoping so for a big success. Beneth the deterence of the system battle this was the other 50% of the mistake.

So I am further on for a quadraphonic working system by an actual or coming (Blu Ray) surround technic. Quadraphony is a logic further development of stereo. 5.1 or 7.1 Audio is cinema based music. But music is not real cinema - only give some phantasia impressions and pictures by listening music in the brain of the listener - not on a screen. So a 4-channel disc will make more sence by stereo-listeners together with the recommendation, that they need only a second stereo hardware-system. And a 4channel disc will of course run also with a 7.1 system - with 3(4) silent speakers. On the other hand - around nearly 100% of our quadraphonic fans here in our circle are listening also video-surround with "only" 4 channels. But don't misunderstand me: Each may be free to make that, what he prefers - also till a 7.1. system. But for an succes an the market we can't see only our own taste, but more that, what could be interesting for the "masses". And the masses will have things, which works easy (look for excample to the bad "cinema on the phone display" or ipod etc.)

So I am afraid, that a new start of audio surround with 7.1 will be again a false start. That are my doubts. Of course, if there are 7.1 audio surround Blu Ray's on the market, I will buy them too and make a downmix self to 4.0 as also now with 5.1. So each may have his own prefered technic and sound.
Important, that the music industry will start with those audio surround activities an the new Blu Ray level. I think, this will come, when this record will get the majority on the market or some more than today.

Dietrich

While we here may remember, cherish and tout 4 channel quad audio, it has no marketing impact with current audiences. Whereas, the phrase "5.1" certainly has strong inroads with consumers from films and concerts if not solely music releases.

For that reason, at least 5.1 has some toehold with consumers and a better chance with winning some consumers.

I have not a second sight of the future, but I know the facts in the past and actual. It is right, 5.1 runs well by home video, but although DTS-CD's, SA-CD's and DVD-Audio's was fitted with 5.1, there was no a success. And now even 7.1 should be the breakthrough? Quadraphony has had beneth the wellknown system-battle the handicap of a for many too complicated technic - and the unsatisfying channel separation with early matrix systems. Quadraphony with a sole digital technic would have had better chances. So it is incomprehensible, that the CD - introduced only a few years behind last quadraphonic software - was not realized with additional 4 channels. But we will see, what the future will show, how audio surround will rund with much more channels. But I will recommend the industry by a right time in hinsight of the channels: Back to the roots. But over all - lets' have an intersting discussion.

Dietrich