Re: DVD-A Semantics

[DKA]

We're arguing 5.1 versus 6.0 on here? Bizarre. 5.x and 6.x immediately bring up two very different mental pictures to me. Sorry. Spit back tech data all you want, folks, but 5.1 gives me all the info I need, while 6.0 doesn't.

 

[timbre4]

My 6.0 light has never come on either.

 

[sukothai]

5.0 is all I need (and all I want.)

 

[Almen]

We're arguing 5.1 versus 6.0 on here?

No, just trying to explain what the .1 (or LFE) channel is. Maybe those shouting "newbies" and "you don't get it" have read Neil Wilkes' and LizardKing's posts, and hopefully studied the Dolby and DTS standards, so there will be no more confusion over this.

 

[DKA]

No, just trying to explain what the .1 (or LFE) channel is. Maybe those shouting "newbies" and "you don't get it" have read Neil Wilkes' and LizardKing's posts, and hopefully studied the Dolby and DTS standards, so there will be no more confusion over this.

That seems like where it started, but not where it wound up.

 

[Almen]

That seems like where it started, but not where it wound up.

A fine tradition on a forum like this. @:

 

[wanners]

No, just trying to explain what the .1 (or LFE) channel is. Maybe those shouting "newbies" and "you don't get it" have read Neil Wilkes' and LizardKing's posts, and hopefully studied the Dolby and DTS standards, so there will be no more confusion over this.

From the Wiki regarding DVDA specs:

"The LFE channel is actually full range, and can be recorded at the same resolution as the other channels. This permits it to be used instead as an extra main channel, for example as a "height" speaker above the listening position; this has been done on some releases. Such usage is non-standard, and will often require special set-up by the end-user."

It wouldn't show up as 6.0 because it's not standard, but you could have the exact effect of 6.0 if you want.

 

[wanners]

The same person who wrote that on Wiki is on this thread. The majority of people explaining the format are don't know what they are talking about. Where is Neil when we need him...I give up.

I get it-- where did i say anything technically wrong. In fact I agreed with you in principle; I just said the argument is not productive--but in some ways it was productive. So I was wrong about that. Maybe you don't read so good.

 

[wanners]

Sure, I was replying to ".1 is a misnomer", hoping that most people in the thread now understand why it is called .1.

This is definitely beating a dead horse, but I don't care because there's a lot of nitpickers on here (which isn't necessarily bad all the time). I'll still defend the "misnomer" title. .1 is still somewhat of a misnomer because it could lead a person to believe there isn't a full range 6th channel. we know there is a 6th full range chnnnel, it just depends on the authoring whether it's a limited 5.1 or full 6.0. Tarkus seemed to be arguing there is no such thing as .1, and that is obvioulsy wrong wrong wrong.

 

[LizardKing]

.....Tarkus seemed to be arguing there is no such thing as .1, and that is obvioulsy wrong wrong wrong.

Tarkus was arguing that:

• ".... is there is NO POINT 1 IN DVD-A."; and
• "With DVD-Audio there IS no ".1". The original definition of DVD-A was 6 channel audio...period. Am I the only one who understands this??????".

I had to respond to that - as it could give people the wrong impression. DVD-As can contain 5.1 content...

 

[DKA]

A fine tradition on a forum like this. @:

So why did DVD-A and SACD die?

*ducks*

 

[wanners]

Tarkus was arguing that:

• ".... is there is NO POINT 1 IN DVD-A."; and
• "With DVD-Audio there IS no ".1". The original definition of DVD-A was 6 channel audio...period. Am I the only one who understands this??????".

lation
I had to respond to that - as it could give people the wrong impression. DVD-As can contain 5.1 content...

Yeah, he was referring specifically to dvda. He's making a good basic point but takes it too far unecessarily. alot of the TACET classical dvdas are 5.0. My speculation is that he doesn't do 6.0 for the simple and practical reason that very very few people are set up for more than 5.1. Why send trumpets through channel six if it's going to go to a SW.

 

[wanners]

So why did DVD-A and SACD die?

*ducks*

It's Obama's fault dooh!

 

[DKA]

It's Obama's fault dooh!

It's Mike Tomlin's fault.

 

[Almen]

From the Wiki regarding DVDA specs:

"The LFE channel is actually full range, and can be recorded at the same resolution as the other channels. This permits it to be used instead as an extra main channel, for example as a "height" speaker above the listening position; this has been done on some releases. Such usage is non-standard, and will often require special set-up by the end-user."

It wouldn't show up as 6.0 because it's not standard, but you could have the exact effect of 6.0 if you want.

I am discussing the specs (standards). You can do many things that are non-standard (for example code the height in the center channel), but that is not what I am referring to.

 

[wanners]

I am discussing the specs (standards). You can do many things that are non-standard (for example code the height in the center channel), but that is not what I am referring to.

It was relevant to what tarkus was saying. I shouldn't have used your quote. He kept talking about 6 full channels this and there's no 5.1 in dvda, etc etc blah blah.

that statement from the wiki seems to sum up the reality of the discussion pretty good. add to it neil's explanation of what .1 is and it seems settled.

 

[Almen]

Yep, agree.

These links might also be useful:

LFE/.1 in Wikipedia

Article about LFE/.1 in Home Theater Forum

 

[neil wilkes]

.1 is not a full range channel, it is a bandwidth limited channel. This is why it is called the .1
5.1 does not equal 6.0

 

[drSeehas]

... at this point I'd much rather see DVDAs being released ... instead of plain old DVDVs.

Why? You can have plain old DVD-Videos with uncompressed PCM.

... not least for the wonderful advantages afforded by DVDA & Lossless quality/MLP.

You can have "lossless" quality with uncompressed PCM on DVD-Video also. It is in the specs!

DVDA is the only format that still (10 years + on) strikes the balance between presenting the very best sound quality available whilst being economically viable for the music labels to produce.

What about DVD-Video with uncompressed PCM?

... "you need a special player for DVDA, so why bother!?".. Yes, you do for the Hi-Res/Lossless ...

No! Hi-Res/"Lossless" is also possible with uncompressed PCM on DVD-Video. And for DVD-Video you really don't need a special player.

 

[sukothai]

Why? You can have plain old DVD-Videos with uncompressed PCM.

DVD-V is only good for stereo uncompressed PCM. For surround you need DVD-A.