DVD Audio (It really is in the source)

Be aware that there are two key newer formats that are worth considering:
DVD-A. Basically a much enhanced version of CD
SACD. A more technically advanced method of recording music than DVD-A and is apparently even better than DVD-A.

Both of the above use the DVD disk data levels, although neither can play on a standard DVD player, and each system requires proprietory gear. The good news on this is that some brands are making gear that can play all of these formats, ie. CD, DVD, DVD-A and SACD (mainly Pioneer).

Recording quality appears to be the most important thing about the disks. I've read of and heard some multi-channel mixes that sound truly awful and off putting, but I guess you could apply that to most formats. I understand that one some of the better recordings that a £130 Sony SACD player can give a CDS2 a good run for it's money when the Sony is using SACD and the CDS2 is using CD.

The thoughts that occur to me are:
1. Stop spending more money on CD players as my existing unit is already pretty good).
2. Buy a new SACD player, but keep it cheap. At a later date I do think that Naim/Linn et al will come in with a CD5 priced machine that will completely blow the doors off anything by Sony or similar.
3. Where possible, concentrate all of my new CD purchases on buying SACD instead. I wouldn't countenance just going out to replace my existing CDs, that's just madness. However, why deny the option of getting an even better front end for new music purchases when they can be bought on SACD?

quote:

---

I’m totally lost for words when considering a CDS3/XPS2 for £7000, or even a second hand CDS2/XPS for £3500, when the Linn Unidisk gets so close,

---

But how close are they?. I've heard a few SACD players and as yet haven't heard anything to convince me that they are even near CD5 levels yet. I haven't heard the Linn or Meridian, but how long did it take to get the best out of CD (are we there yet?). Clearly SACD and DVD-A should provide a technically superior sound. But CD provides a technically superior sound to LP, (so they said!).

Hi folks,

Where do I get a reasonable amount of NEW SACD/DVD A releases. It doesn't make any sense discussing about the advantages of new formats as long as there are just a few titles available(at least when compared to the amount of new CD's). What we first need is: SOFTWARE!

This fact also seems to be the reason why Naim waits with its own SACD/DVA A equipment.
I'm told that higher resolution also means much more technical problems on the hardware side. So I'm rather sceptical about the future of highresolution formats. I sit back and wait and enjoy my Naim CD Player....

Cheers.


Reto

Did a bit of an experiment a few days ago. At the time my wife was standing at the far end of the next room - I could still see her. I have to say that she is not at all interested in audio equipment and so what I was doing at the time had not even registered with her.

I played about 30 seconds of a CD through my Pioneer DVD Player DV656A, which routes through my Yahama AV Amp. DSP-AX630SE to a Naim 82/HiCap/Naim 250 for the front speakers and a Naim Nait 3 for the rear speakers. No centre front, centre back or sub-woofer in use as front and back speakers are fairly large.

I then played the same piece of music through my CDSII/XPS/82/Hicap/250 to the front two speakers. Whenever the music started to play through the CDSII her head lifted and there was a smile which told it all. Even from 8 metres away in another room the difference in quality was immediately striking.

I also have DVD Audio and SACD discs which sound fine through the surround system but when a direct and immediate comparison is made with a CD played on the CDSII the myth that the days are numbered for CDs and CDPs is exposed.

After spending a lot more time with some of these new discs (even been down to the shop and bought some copies for myself) through much better than my sisters - but still what I would call domestic systems, I am even more impressed.

I think nearly all on this forum agree that LP's are much superior to CD play-back (so why do we spend "house deposits" on CD players)and I also think the best LP is miles better than the best CD ...... BUT with I am convinced this new format is "going to go where no CD has ever been before" .... no matter what player you are using. I can't wait to get these discs back to may place and hear them through a fairly serious 5.1 system.

The battle is not over. As I mentioned in my first post, a couple of the DVD-A's I heard are simply dreadful compared to the CD mix. Part of this may be it's incredible clarity. The K.D. Lang DVD-A (which produced her voice beautifuly) clearly revealed the the percussion being done by the most miserable sounding and poorly programmed drum machine I have ever heard.
The surround sound effects are easily overdone and can be distracting .... but whn the mixing engineer "gets it right" it is quite entrancing and from my perspective as a musician, adds immensely to the listening experience.

The really depressing thing is to see ancient pressings such as AMERICA, and FLEETWOOD MACK etc being re-released on the new format and charged out again at higher than ever prices. (Wow what does that make it now for the Record Companies ... 45's, LP's, Tape Cartriges, Tape Cassettes, CD's, now SACD's and/or DVD-A's ..... and evertime increasing the price for the product ..... God some of them were even on 78's)

Anyway, after a couple of days listening to DVD-A (I have some SACD also, but I wouldn't call any of them a good listen .... much too gimmicky or appalling mixes) I believe that as this/these technologies develop, it's going to get us back to the sound quality we had with LP's ... probably better actually plus give us the convenience of the CD medium.

As Sukubee said above .... whe you get this king of sound for a $130 DVD player, why would you spend big money on a vanilla CD-only player?

Pioneer already have a multi player out at only GBP800, which even gets good revies on CD but outstanding on SACD and DVD-A. You can be sure the others will follow at speed and the prices will drop very fast.

Reto from Switzerland: I don't know much about DVD-A, but SACD is galloping along in software selection but I also think some of it is pretty dubious mixing quality. I have a dreadful SACD of Billy Joel "The Stranger" God only knows how Sony could have released this when they're trying to promote a new format. It's truly abysmal.

Telarc are producing some great dual format titles which also play on CD (www.Telarc.com)but unfortunately, they're bloody expensive at USD25 each - plus postage.

God Save Vietnam where we can buy "locally made" stuff for about one dollar.

I'm excited.

I'm glad to hear some positive initial impressions. I'm guessing that there is still a strong market for quite a while yet for a *really good* CD-only players.

Don't forget that lots of folks have huge CD collections and will be interested in playing those for years to come. Unless the DVD player does a cracking job on redbook CDs, people will still want a strong CD-only player.

Just like people by turntables to play records they can't be bothered to replace (or that can't be replaced) with a CD.

- GregB

Insert Witty Signature Line Here

I'm a little surprised at most of the responses on this thread.

The only person who's replied having actually tried an SACD disk with his Naim system routed it via his AV amp. Surely you've noticed by now just how rubbish the pre-amp section is on AV amps. Please go plug your Pioneer 656 into a stereo input on your 82, use the Pioneer as a stereo replay unit and then tell us how the pioneer compares when playing an SACD against your Naim CDP.

As for the rest of the replies, talk about ostritches, heads and sand.
I don't seem to remember anyone stating that having a good CDP was a bad move. Clearly most of us probably have large CD collections and it goes without saying that we should make use of them.
But to dimiss the fact that you might be able to spend all of £130 which on your new CD purchases which might make them sound like a CDS2 sounds a little ... odd.
If Naim stated that that a £130 upgrade of it's CD players would make any new CDs you bought sound amazing, you'd probably jump at the chance. Why be so negative, just because it has a Sony badge.

Before we go any further, no I don't have an SACD player either, but I'm certainly going to investigate very shortly.

As for disk availability. Try:
play.com - they have approx 170 disks available
Amazon.com - they have substantially more
I understand that there are approx 1000 SACDs in total available, a good deal of which are classical.
Come on guys, lets wake things up.

quote:

---

But to dimiss the fact that you might be able to spend all of £130 which on your new CD purchases which might make them sound like a CDS2 sounds a little ... odd.

---

I thought I did address this directly. I have heard a £3000 MF SACD playing what I considered poorer music than a CD5 playing CD's. Until I hear an SACD player that surpasses at least CDX level (which should be possible) then I'm not that interested.

Greeny>

Did I say anything about comparing the quality of and SACD player playing CDs and comparing that to a good Naim CDP?

What I'm saying is that you should be comparing a £130 SACD using SACDs against a Naim CDP.

What I'm then saying is that on any new disks you buy, why buy them on CD, buy them on SACD.
Make sense?

...at all.

Here is a Stereophile review an analysis of the SACD and CD layers of the Dark Side of the Moon SACD.

DSOTM SACD Analysis

They are mastered individually and it seems that we may want to be buying that which has the best mastering rather than based stricly on the format itself.

Question: With a SACD player, if a duel-layer disk (SACD/CD) is used, can the CD layer be selected? Or can we only hear the SACD layer through a SACD player?

- GregB

Insert Witty Signature Line Here

Question: With a SACD player, if a duel-layer disk (SACD/CD) is used, can the CD layer be selected? Or can we only hear the SACD layer through a SACD player?

Hi Greg

I've been led to believe that some players allow you to force them into CD mode for playback although not all. I presume that the Stereophile reviews were done using such a player. Also re. John Atkinsons article. I would be very surprised if record companies did'nt play around with the mastering of dual layer disks to ensure that SACD was better.

Yours in Music

Syd

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mr_Sukebe:
The only person who's replied having actually tried an SACD disk with his Naim system routed it via his AV amp. Surely you've noticed by now just how rubbish the pre-amp section is on AV amps. Please go plug your Pioneer 656 into a stereo input on your 82, use the Pioneer as a stereo replay unit and then tell us how the pioneer compares when playing an SACD against your Naim CDP.

---

Of course with direct connection to the 82 it will sound better. The point I was making is more about CD not being dead than claiming that CD as a format is superior to SACD or DVD-A - which would be ridiculous. I have hundreds of CDs which I am not going to replace and so I need a good CDP.

"Interesting article. That does make comparisons somewhat more annoying."

Its really the same problem we had/have when comparing CD and Vinyl. I get tired of reading, "I compared my LP of 'Welcome to My Nightmare' to my CD and the LP was much better."

Truth is that in LP land that is a decent-sounding LP and in CD land the CD is K**P. What does it mean?

I know that over my collection, and not comparing like titles, that LP delivers the musical goods more consistently than CD does (with the limited number of CD players I have had long-term access to).

Title-by-title comparisons are kindof silly although inevitable. It will be interesting to see if the CD layer of double-layer disks is as good as the stand-alone CDs we have now. Will they remaster to make the CD layer a straw man?

- GregB

Insert Witty Signature Line Here

The bottom line is that the CD format is fundamentally flawed: (a) the sampling frequency (44kHz) is too low, (b) the bits resolution (16 bits) is too low. It was based on what was technically feasible in 1980, rather than what was required to reproduce good music. The fact that Naim, Linn, Meridian, etc. are capable of producing playes that sound GOOD is a constant source of amazement to me.
The CD partly took off because it had a number of advantages over LP: (a) the albums take up less space, (b) they were more convenient to use (compared to the rituals of LP's), (c) they were more durable than LP's, (d) you could use them in portable players and in the car, (e) the world was just getting interested in all things digital.
Now we've got SACD and DVD-A. It may be technically superior, but do we really need another disk format and to go and replace our collections again? What mass-appeal is there in replacing one shiny disk in a jewel case with another shiny disk in a slightly larger plastic case? How long will it be before the top-end Hi-Fi makers adopt it?
Personally, I think SACD & DVD-A will be short lived.
For me the next major format has to be solid state (ie. ROM cards). Just think - no moving parts - just plug in a widget the size of a PCMCIA card in and play. This can't be too far off now (eg. SD cards are aroung 512 MB and coming down in price) - I'd say 2-3 years could see it becoming viable. The advantages this would offer are: (a) more durable, (b) convenience in size (especially in portable players, (c) media easy to produce, (d) recordable media easy to produce, (e) players easier to produce (just a digital plughole, no lasers, stylus, motors, interference, jitter, etc.). We already do it to some degree with portable MP3 players anyway (though we probably don't want a lossy format!).
Wonder if/when it will happen...

In the end it will all boil down to whatever catches the imagination of the public.

Lets face it, the majority of people are more than happy with their midi/mini/portable system for CD or (urgh) MP3, where is the mass market for quality? The reason CD took off was because of its demonstrable ability to address the major failing of vinyl, ie surface noise and dirt.

I think the future will be in DVD. Why? Because 15% of UK households already have a player, [70% of my stats are made up on the spot] the players are CD compatible and DVD-A will add an extra bonus if used properly, but even DTS is a big step up from the CD standard. All improvements will then be down to better recording and mastering.

Home cinema is driving better quality electronics into peoples homes, DTS is a quality step up from CD if done correctly, this may turn the population on to the idea of well recorded music.

I really think the music industry is shooting itself in the foot by not releasing new stuff on a medium that is hugely better than the MP3 that can be ripped from the internet. But then a lot of them still struggle to record to the level that CD can support. As a new owner of a CD5 I'm starting to appreciate how bad some recordings are, not for the music, but the process between me and the musician.

Anyway, enough (too much?) pontificating, I'm going back to my splendid new system. [Does CD5, Nait5, FC2 qualify me for an "i" in my sstem ?]

Seth
Is Naim the only way forward?
Ahh, Ahh! I'm burning!!

In the end it will all boil down to whatever catches the imagination of the public.

At the moment most people don't seem interested. At the launch of CD people were talking about it at work, in the pub, in the popular press article after article etc but I've heard very few people mention it.

think the future will be in DVD. Why? Because 15% of UK households already have a player, [70% of my stats are made up on the spot] the players are CD compatible and DVD-A will add an extra bonus if used properly, but even DTS is a big step up from the CD standard. All improvements will then be down to better recording and mastering

I've just read the article in in July's HI FI News by Barry Fox. DVD may be hampered by it's inability to share space with a CD layer if I've read it correctly. Even double sided may be in doubt. So if all the Record companies signed up to SACD were to shift all new product to Dual Layer within the next few months it could leave DVD-A high and dry.

Yours in Music

Syd

"Anyway, enough (too much?) pontificating, I'm going back to my splendid new system. [Does CD5, Nait5, FC2 qualify me for an "i" in my sstem ?]"

Yes, indeed yours is closer to the original sistem than most (I'm not sure if Nuno's bought a flatcap or not or whether he's still prevaricating about that one - I seem to recall he did ask about power supplies here once...)

Mr Sukebe,

You said:

DVD-A. Basically a much enhanced version of CD
SACD. A more technically advanced method of recording music than DVD-A and is apparently even better than DVD-A.


I don't know where you get your facts from. My understanding about this is that DVD-A is theoretically the more advanced encoding mechanism since it isn't bitstream-based in the way all SACD masters have to be. In fact, it is SACD which is the CD based solution and was mainly introduced by Sony/Philips to try to protect their revenues since the CD patents were running out.

Sonically, every high resolution format I've heard so far has been pants in my view, and that includes the famous hard disc recording played at the Bristol show in February! I can say that was unrealistic and unbalanced since I've heard the same orchestra conducted by the same man playing the same piece of music in the same hall. I've heard a few multi-channel discs and they have also been awful.

Having said that, it seems to me that the manufacturers (both of replay kit and recording studios) have finally got to grips with CD in the last couple of years, and there are a lot more CD's around whose sound quality is sufficiently good to give vinyl a run for its money.

For example, in my view the latest reissues of Led Zeppelin's CD's (in the 'original-look' CD folders) are fantastic and dump on the Led Zep remasters issued in 1990 from a great height. These new issues seem better than equivalent reissued vinyl of the 80's. However, I haven't compared them to original pressings as I don't have any.

Furthermore, the new reissue of Dark Side of the Moon is fantastic on the CD track, arguably better than EMI reissue and a whole heap better than the original CD issue. The SACD multi-channel track (played on a Pioneer 656A) seemed total pants by comparison. Of course, this could be that I'm just not used to the quadraphonic presentation which could have distracted me.

I believe that there is huge potential in these high resolution formats but that the engineers have still to work out the mechanics properly to develop good recordings consistently. I believe the high resolution formats will come under the same fire from audiophile circles until that has happened and that's likely to take a few years. CD will live on as a secondary quality format for quite some time.

Eventually, people will hold all their recordings on hard discs anyway and store their originals (if they have any) in boxes in the loft as backups should anything untoward happen to their hard discs. As for the brigades who wish to share music, this'll be done via portable hard disc machines (e.g Apple's i-pod) which can store whole collections at good quality already.

Sadly, the future really does seem digital to me. The benefits just seem too great to ignore, and sound quality is becoming less and less the issue as the digital recordings and players improve over time.

Regards,
Frank.
All opinions are my own and do not reflect the opinion of any organisations I work for, except where this is stated explicitly.

I bought a Sony DVD player with SACD for Christmas and hooked it up through my 52, threw on an SACD, and prepared to be amazed. It was bloody awful - no dynamics at all and very flat overall despite a certain sweetness on top. I played the same CD through the CDS2 and it all came back - i.e., music, with real dynamics, authority, and timing.
Conclusion: the player matters a hell of a lot more than the format.
Don

quote:

---

Originally posted by mad max:
Mr Toon, you are correct sir. That's exactly why I purchased a cd-5 and saved a ton of cash. Compared to naims top cd players, the difference is honestly negligible.
max

---

Sorry Max but you are way off the truth here. Have another listen.

Got to agree with plynnplynn - I've upgraded CD3.5 -> CD3.5+HiCap -> CDX.
Each time I've been able to get more enjoyment out of my CDs.
As an experiment, I'm going to add my old CD3.5 back into my system and have a listen next to the CDX.

quote:

---

Originally posted by prowla:
Got to agree with plynnplynn - I've upgraded CD3.5 -> CD3.5+HiCap -> CDX.
Each time I've been able to get more enjoyment out of my CDs.
As an experiment, I'm going to add my old CD3.5 back into my system and have a listen next to the CDX.

---

Yes 3.5 to CDX is one of these 'wow what a difference' experiences. Even with a CD3.5/Hicap against a naked CDX. The CDX/XPS to CDSII/XPS in my experience is more of a 'yes I can appreciate what is happening here' experiences. There is a very significant difference beteen low and high end Naim CD players - besides price.

I think I'm with mad max here. Differences between cdplayers in different priceranges are not so big. Yes, it does get better but the difference between a good £500 cdplayer and a good £3000 one is a lot smaller than if you compare two good turntables in these priceranges. Maybe this is one reason why some people swear by upgrading the preamp before the cdplayer. Spend a lot of money on the cdplayer and you get a minor improvement, spend the same money on the preamp and the improvement is bigger.

With all due respect.......

'Being worth the cash' is a personal judgement but the difference between Naim CD players is an objective reality.

What I might say is that if a listener cannot hear a significant difference between a bottom of the range Naim CD player and a top of the range Naim CD player there must be something wrong with the setup, the rest of the system or the listeners' ears.

To talk about differences between turntables and CD players and then use that as some justification for upgrading pre-amps in preference to CD players is IMHO completely a red herring. Improving the pre-amp doesn't improve the quality of the information provided at source. Improvement in the pre-amp can only optimise what is done with that information. It is of course best to have the best quality at input and at amp stages. A good £500 CDP (or a bottom of the range Naim CDP)is however in no way going to provide the quality of information that a good £3000 CDP will provide. The difference should be almost staggering or else something is far wrong.

plynnplynn. Yes, the difference between Naim cdplayers is a reality. What I said was that the improvements are bigger when you put extra money on a turntable than when you put them on a cdplayer. I have not used these differences to justify preampupgrading in favour of the cdplayer. I said that "maybe this is one reason why some people swear by upgrading the preamp before the cdplayer". There has been a lot of talk on this forum about this lately some suggesting that even a humble cd5 is good enough for Naim's better preamps and that in some cases a preamp upgrade might be better than a cdplayer upgrade.

You say that "improving the pre-amp doesn't improve the quality of the information provided at source". It doesn't improve the source but it sure improves the sound that comes from the source. Don't get me wrong, I'm a "source first" believer, LP12/Nait3r. But I believe that if I would start from the beginning, building a new cd based sistem I wouldn't go CDS/Nait. Or is that the right way? Maybe some forum members with more experience with different Naim products than I have can give some input?

bjorne