DualDisc Approved

[High Fidelity Review]

Hopefully the good moderators won't mind me posting a link, but I thought members might like to know that the DVD Forum have officially approved DualDisc.

See: http://www.highfidelityreview.com/news/news.asp?newsnumber=12004614

Here's hoping that some of those indefinitely stalled titles will now surface!

 

[Jesper]

Hopefully the good moderators won't mind me posting a link, but I thought members might like to know that the DVD Forum have officially approved DualDisc.

See: http://www.highfidelityreview.com/news/news.asp?newsnumber=12004614

Here's hoping that some of those indefinitely stalled titles will now surface!

Hi Stuart,

Thanks for info. Now I just hope they will speed up some releases!! :sun

 

[JonUrban]

Stuart, as always, you can post whatever you like! Thanks for the news!

:-jon

 

[davcole]

Though a CD layer means nothing for me it's nice to know that this is being approved. Hopefully this will speed up releases!

 

[Frank]

Perhaps this one:

http://www.audiorevolution.com/news/0604/7.lambs.html

Frank

 

[Jesper]

Frank,

I don't "want" the cd either, however could this speed up some titles, incl. Genisis - I am all for it...

 

[BOSSMAN]

It's a good idea that should have been implemented right from the onset. How much did these retail for in the test markets?

 

[Cai Campbell]

The problem with DualDiscs is they can hold less information on the DVD layer than a regulard DVD or DVD-A. This means as they pack on more "value added" material, eventually something will have to give. Invariably, this will translate to lower resolution surround-sound tracks. I was actually hoping that DualDisc would go away. DVD-A is fine just how it is. On the other hand, if DualDisc is deemed a consumer success and it means more titles, then I'm all for it (but I'll still whine about lo-rez surround-sound).

 

[Patrick Cleasby]

The problem with DualDiscs is they can hold less information on the DVD layer than a regulard DVD or DVD-A. This means as they pack on more "value added" material, eventually something will have to give. Invariably, this will translate to lower resolution surround-sound tracks. I was actually hoping that DualDisc would go away. DVD-A is fine just how it is. On the other hand, if DualDisc is deemed a consumer success and it means more titles, then I'm all for it (but I'll still whine about lo-rez surround-sound).

I've actually highlighted this issue in my magazine column - saw an Usher Dual Disc, 24/48 surround, checked my pure DVD-A version and sure enough, 24/96!

Not for nothing did warners go with The Nightfly, Reanimation and Automatic for the people in the trials...;-)

 

[JonUrban]

Very interesting, Patrick...........

 

[John Kotches]

I've actually highlighted this issue in my magazine column - saw an Usher Dual Disc, 24/48 surround, checked my pure DVD-A version and sure enough, 24/96!

Not for nothing did warners go with The Nightfly, Reanimation and Automatic for the people in the trials...;-)

Just to poke a hole in that theory...

3 Doors down has a running time of: 41:29 and includes a 24/96K Stereo track, 24/96K Surround track and a music video.

The Nightfly has a running time of: 39:21 and includes a 24/48K Stereo track, 24/96K Surround track and a music video.

Perhaps it's time for a better theory?

Cheers,

 

[High Fidelity Review]

The problem with DualDiscs is they can hold less information on the DVD layer than a regulard DVD or DVD-A.

I think you'd have to qualify that statement. The DVD layer of a DualDisc can hold the same amount of data as a regular single-layer DVD, 4.7Gb, so in that regard it is not compromised.

The problem comes when a title requires more than 4.7Gb; a dual-layer DualDisc isn't currently possible, so a title such as 'Pet Sounds' which contains high-resolution 5.1, stereo, mono, Dolby Digital, DTS and a raft of extras would have to be limited in some way. I'm guessing we'll see fewer dedicated high-resolution stereo mixes (the thinking being that the CD layer will suffice for stuffy two-channel listeners) on DualDisc or less redundant formats such as DTS cluttering up the discs.

And Patrick, I seem to recall making this point in my first DualDisc article, oh, a few months ago now.

 

[High Fidelity Review]

3 Doors down has a running time of: 41:29 and includes a 24/96K Stereo track, 24/96K Surround track and a music video. The Nightfly has a running time of: 39:21 and includes a 24/48K Stereo track, 24/96K Surround track and a music video.

But both of those are limited in terms of running time.

42 minutes of 96/24 stereo PCM + 96/24 5.1 PCM = 5.53Gb. MLP achieves an average 30% reduction, so that would be roughly 3.87Gb, leaving ample space for a video or two.

The problem comes when we start talking about longer albums...

 

[Cai Campbell]

Actually, I'm thinking of more "added value" components such as videos, that most consumers will likely appreciate over hi-rez audio content (whether it be stereo or surround) and thus could potentially encroach upon high or higher resolution audio content. Sure, the same potential exists for DVD-A but with half the space it is more of a concern for DualDisc.

 

[John Kotches]

But both of those are limited in terms of running time.

42 minutes of 96/24 stereo PCM + 96/24 5.1 PCM = 5.53Gb. MLP achieves an average 30% reduction, so that would be roughly 3.87Gb, leaving ample space for a video or two.

The problem comes when we start talking about longer albums...

Stuart,

I don't disagree with your overall point, however the argument that the particular discs being chosen(especially in the case of the Nightfly) simply doesn't hold up in the face of the evidence available.

The data reductions I've seen shows typical compression at 45-50% with an aggregate closer to 40%. Of course a lot will depend on the content, and how readily it compresses.

Cheers,

 

[wavest]

I've actually highlighted this issue in my magazine column - saw an Usher Dual Disc, 24/48 surround, checked my pure DVD-A version and sure enough, 24/96!

Now that you brought it up... how is the sound quality of the Usher disc? I've been considering picking this one up, but am not sure if it will play on a 563a that doesn't have the upgrade.

Thanks!

 

[timbre4]

On working vacation, glad to see all the traffic on this! Saw the Lamb link but was not in position to post the link, thanks for getting the word out and buzz building.

Now we should see those bleeping titles...

 

[Patrick Cleasby]

Just to poke a hole in that theory...

3 Doors down has a running time of: 41:29 and includes a 24/96K Stereo track, 24/96K Surround track and a music video.

The Nightfly has a running time of: 39:21 and includes a 24/48K Stereo track, 24/96K Surround track and a music video.

Perhaps it's time for a better theory?

Cheers,

Just to poke a hole in that rebuttal

I wasn't familiar with 3 doors down, but it's not a Warners title, but the Nightfly is 24/48 surround. (Not that I mentioned resolutions).

I think the observation stands - they didn't try the Last Waltz did they? Tell me how they're going to do that and stay fashionable - Double Dual Disc anyone?

 

[Patrick Cleasby]

And Patrick, I seem to recall making this point in my first DualDisc article, oh, a few months ago now.

Yeah, but nothing beats seeing with your own eyes what they've gone and done!

 

[Patrick Cleasby]

On working vacation, glad to see all the traffic on this! Saw the Lamb link but was not in position to post the link, thanks for getting the word out and buzz building.

Now we should see those bleeping titles...

Well, at the risk of provoking the usual howls of disbelief, I enquired if this news might unblock the JB logjam, but the answer came back that we're now looking at the autumn for ROE!