Poll: CDs with your surround optical discs, yes or no?

[JediJoker]

Should CDs be included with Blu-rays and DVDs, and should SACDs be hybrid with a CD layer? How does the QQ user base feel about this? Please vote in the poll and explain your answer in a post.

 

[JediJoker]

Yes. I still listen to CDs at home and in the car, and CDs are so much easier to rip and add to my stereo library than any other optical disc format. Although I love and am passionate about music in surround, the majority of my listening is still in stereo, as I'm a music lover first and a multichannel enthusiast second.

 

[GOS]

No. I no longer buy CD's, nor do I listen to any CD's. In general, I only purchase older vinyl that I can't locate on CD, or multi-channel music. On occasion I do buy SACD stereo titles.

 

[kfbkfb]

Yes - I would also like the stereo CDs to be matrix surround sound encoded (time to resurrect the old Electro-Voice Stereo-4 matrix system [could be easily digitally implemented since it just uses phase reversals for encoding]).


Kirk Bayne

 

[Mr. Afternoon]

No, ultimately. I think this is format dependent. When it comes to a DVD or a Blu-ray, something which has an extremely high chance of playability inside an average person's household (say it be a game console or a computer), then a CD is redundant and only exists to inflate the cost. If it's something like an SACD, which is much harder to play, then it's probably a good idea to chuck a CD in.

 

[humprof]

Yes. I still listen to CDs at home and in the car, and CDs are so much easier to rip and add to my stereo library than any other optical disc format. Although I love and am passionate about music in surround, the majority of my listening is still in stereo, as I'm a music lover first and a multichannel enthusiast second.

Yes. What @JediJoker said--only I'd say that my listening is half-and-half, not majority-stereo.

 

[Marplot]

Media dependant.

Something like the SDE releases, no I can mux and burn a CD if I want.

A big f'ing overpriced box like the Who's Next they better since I am already paying too much.

SACD should stay hybrid to attract the largest audience.

 

[ar surround]

Yes. People want to rip the CD layers for playback in their cars. Also, it allows the product to appeal to a wider audience especially if the CD layer is well mastered.

 

[JohnN]

I want my SACD.

 

[LuvMyQuad]

If it's totally redundant material, there isn't much point in a CD. Sometimes space limitations make additional CDs necessary. I never play an actual CD disc as most car models no longer support optical media.. I also don't need to rip at CD quality as the car will play higher res files as well.. A CD layer on SACD seems standard. As a surround enthusiast I gotta vote no on included CD. But I'll bet the public at large wants them included.

 

[JediJoker]

I want my SACD.

Look at them DVs,
That's the way you do it:
You put the hybrid on SACD

 

[4-earredwonder]

I'd rather have the RBCD content [bonus/live tracks] released on the BD~A release in higher res 96/24 since a BD~A does have a tremendous capacity! My car still has a CD player but since I don't really drive much nowadays, that thrill is gone!

 

[marpow]

I am a big stereo listener, so CD's are good for me even when they are highly compressed they sound better in the car, whereas on the home rig the less compressed sound better.
It is a great question, and my gut is answering what we have been getting, lives and extras on CD's.
I just do not see company's releasing a Blu Ray and Hybrid SACD together, so I vote for just plain CD's.
In fact if you do research and get the right CD, some of them sound fantastic.

It's a good question, and of course the real answer is what ever accompanies the Surround disc, Blu Ray and>DVD and>SACD and> we are going to buy anything because we want that surround disc.
Billy Joel's recent Piano Man with Hybrid SACD and RBCD, that was different, like 10 years ago, old school Digi Pak with SACD/DVD and CD.

 

[4-earredwonder]

I am a big stereo listener, so CD's are good for me even when they are highly compressed they sound better in the car, whereas on the home rig the less compressed sound better.
It is a great question, and my gut is answering what we have been getting, lives and extras on CD's.
I just do not see company's releasing a Blu Ray and Hybrid SACD together, so I vote for just plain CD's.
In fact if you do research and get the right CD, some of them sound fantastic.

It's a good question, and of course the real answer is what ever accompanies the Surround disc, Blu Ray and>DVD and>SACD and> we are going to buy anything because we want that surround disc.
Billy Joel's recent Piano Man with Hybrid SACD and RBCD, that was different, like 10 years ago, old school Digi Pak with SACD and CD.

And a DVD, Markie!

 

[cbmmm3]

If you know me , you know my answer.

Compact Disc me --hell yeah !~

 

[marpow]

And a DVD, Markie!

Good catch there Ralphie, I edited it.

 

[somethingcleveridunno]

Nah. Just throw every extant version of the album I'm buying onto a blu ray.

If I want a CD version I'll burn it myself or buy a cheap used copy.

Really couldn't care about other box set-style extras either.

 

[4-earredwonder]

If you know me , you know my answer.

Compact Disc me --hell yeah !~

Even if it's NOT MQA Ricko?

 

[bnyhof]

No, never listen to CD's and it would just increase the price.

 

[Bill B]

Assuming the CD doesn’t add $20 to the price ($10 is the limit) I’d like a CD copy. I will still use a boombox when I’m washing the car or working outside. I don’t care for streaming and nothing is more convenient than popping in aCD. IMO.
I also still have a CD player in my truck.

On the flip side, a good many of the MC discs I buy, I already have the CD. So that’s kind of a waste.