dual disc, is it doomed already?

danger boy

borrowed from: Audio/Video revolution



The Los Angeles Times is reporting some legal snags for the CD/DVD Dual Disc format even before it is released. In an article that was recently posted on the Times’ website said that Philips, who owns much of the intellectual property behind the Compact Disc and licenses the CD logo, wouldn’t let Dual Disc use the CD logo because it didn’t fit into the CD spec. Another angry party is the German firm that created the first Dual Disc. According to the Times, DVD Plus is claiming WEA has breeched their contract which has allowed the record conglomerate to continue to develop the two sided audio-video disc.

Legal problems are nothing new to the music business, however, worries about anti-trust laws also complicate the development of any new audio format. A source who asked to remain anonymous tells Audio Video Revolution that an anti-trust lawyer sits in on every phone call and meeting the major labels have about the new audio format. Labels are so frightened of legal action that they have been advised to not tell the other labels which titles they will be releasing. This kind of legally inspired secrecy makes it somewhat difficult to create a big launch for the disc that is supposed to replace the once mighty Compact Disc.

Dual Disc could be an interesting solution to the value proposition problem the record industry has been struggling with for years now. Younger music consumers want video content for their $16 investment. An easier solution to the Dual Disc problem could be achieved by stealing a move from the movie industry and making every “album” purchased a two disc set. One disc would be a CD complete with MP3s professionally recorded and ready to rip to storage devices. The second disc could be a DVD-Audio disc that includes surround mixes for both DVD-Video and DVD-Audio players along with high resolution stereo tracks (DTS 24-96 for example) and other video goodies. This two disc solution which is found on top DVD-Video movie releases like Shrek (which has two discs: one for the 4:3 and one for the anamorphic version) has three big advantages over Dual Disc. First, the DVD-Audio disc could be a “DVD 9” disc which is capable of much more storage but is thicker than the smaller “DVD 5” disc that is used on a Dual Disc. This allows many more goodies and far fewer compromises in the added values of a disc. Secondly, both CDs and DVD-Audio discs can be mastered and pressed in large volumes. Who knows how many Dual Discs can be created at this point? It is an entirely new format. Lastly, the record buying public gets two for one. American consumers love that and the labels need to make the record buying public feel like buying discs is once again a good idea, especially during the Holiday shopping season.

Bundling DVDs with CDs has in fact been successful in recent years. Adding DVD-Audio discs loaded with goodies might make the recording buying public buy even more discs considering the value for a $16 disc keeps getting better and better.

The biggest hurdle for the labels to overcome is fear. Fear of lawsuits. Fear of new technologies. Fear of new business models. Fear of abandoning formats that don’t sell. Now is the time for all of the majors to step up and vigorously promote a format that is new and exciting. Hopefully, the new snags can be smoothed over in time for a winter release of the format in a way that populates the CD bins of your local record store and on-line retailer with a video and surround sound oriented new format.

Danny Tse

There was little talk of DVD Audio as most people had moved on. The recently approved Dual Disc (likely to appear next year) is seen more as a distraction. To get approval by the DVD Forum, compromises have apparently been made instead on the CD side resulting in the thickness being dropped to the minimum and the track width/gap widened to compensate (hence the shorter play time). Accordingly, there are real concerns about long term readability, especially with a dual sided package more susceptible to handling. It will be interesting to see what happens if/when this is released to a wider market.

The above quote is from a June 2004 report posted at sa-cd.net from the SACD conference/workshop, put together by Sony/Universal/Philips, in Hong Kong. Obviously, there might be some bias there. On the other hand, I have read similar concerns about DualDisc from other audiophile websites. One of them being DualDisc may have playback problems, due to the disc's thickness, in automobile CD players. Anyone from the test markets have such problems?

danger boy

ummmm. i'll try mine tomorrow and see if it plays in the car CD player or what.

F1nut

"Younger music consumers want video content for their $16 investment."

Call me old fashion, but the only way to truely "listen" to music at home is to close your eyes and let the sounds swirl around your ears. It seems to me that the "younger music consumers" need to learn how to listen.

"The biggest hurdle for the labels to overcome is fear."

No, the biggest hurdle for the labels is finding music that the buying public will find worth listening to.

"Now is the time for all of the majors to step up and vigorously promote a format that is new and exciting."

It's already here, it's called SACD and it gives the record buying public three for one!!!

danger boy

but neither SACD or DVD-audio are catching the attention of the general public. For that reason the dual discs make sense. it give the youngsters the video they want. and us old folks can still listen to the CD side of it. it's the best of both worlds in the minds of the record industry.

SACD and DVD-a have been around now for a few years. I wonder how small the sales numbers are for both formats combined.. compared to Redbook CD's? i'm sure it's a minimal fraction of the percent of CD sales.

I support multichannel music. I hope it survives in some format. I don't really care which one... I just like it.

VR3

I do NOT want to watch a CD on my CD Player, and I definetely don't want to hear it on my DVD player

Not to mention ---- Concentrating on a TV, would seemingly make a soundstage smaller since you arnt even listening to music....

I dont like it...

Danny Tse

I think the problem for hi-rez music reproduction is that, other than us people at forums such as this one, no one cares about the quality of the reproduction. The quality of the music, well, that's really a personal choice. However, no matter what kind of music it is, quality reproduction should be stressed. Unfortunately, we have a generation, actually a mass of people, who just don't care. They see musically devices such as iPod or any other MP3 players as the pinnicle of audio reproduction. The storage capacity of such devices is stressed over the quality of the reproduction. I am not dissing the Ipod or any such similar players because I do feel they push the limits of music-on-the-go, a concept originated with Sony's Walkman. Convenient, yes. Audiophile quality, not really.

I am not that old (mid 30s) but I long for those days in the 80s when arguments over which brands, and therefore quality, of blank cassette tape used for recording can start a fistfight.

I think the DualDisc is a little too late.

Since SACD is spec'd for video as well, where's the video? At the same time, I am so glad to be able switch between multi-channel/stereo and SACD/CD with just 2 buttons on the front panel of my SCD-CE595 SACD/CD changer.

Also, on DualDisc, wouldn't the video portion have to be modified for NTSC/PAL formats, therefore driving the cost of production up? That's 2 separate inventories to produce.

F1nut

DB,

You're right, it is small in comparision. Sad really. I remember awhile back that Sony was going to start releasing everything in SACD hybrid, that they would cease making redbook CD's. I thought that was an excellent idea, but it hasn't happened. IMO, the record labels need to promote the hell out of hi-rez if they want it to succeed.



Danny,

You've got many good points, too many don't care and maybe there are just too many choices today. I might be wrong on this, but I think SACD is capable of still video only.

TroyD

Historically, the folks interested in high quality recording such as ourselves has always been a relatively small segment of the market. The music industry and recorded medium, like it or not, is primarily driven by convenience.

IMO, the success of high resolution formats is going to be if they can incorporate it in such a way that appeals to folks OTHER than us. In order for the format to succeed it has to, one, be convenient. Two, it has to be commerically viable. In order to do that it has to either offer something to justify the cost. For the majority, simply offering better sound quality is not going to be enough. It has to offer multi-channel or video or something of that nature.

BDT

TheReaper

My prediction is that the next two years will determine whether one of the high definition audio formats (dvd-a/sacd) takes off, or whether they die. In-home multi-format players (dvd/cd/dvd-a/sacd) are coming out now at $150. Which means next year they will be under the magic $100 mark. So there will be players available, it will just be a question of, will anyone buy.

That 2 disks for one deal, could be the trigger, all it will take is one label to break from the pack, and do it. The actual cost is minimal, and hopefully one of the labels is greedy enough to realize the potential sales boost.

Just think, if you could get a free dvd-a with every cd you bought. Just buy a mult-format player for under $100, then you can put the CD in your car, and listen to the DVD-A at home.

F1nut

I have to question if the benefits of the hi-rez formats on a $100 player.

AsSiMiLaTeD

Originally posted by F1nut
I have to question if the benefits of the hi-rez formats on a $100 player.

Well, I've had extensive experience with SACD on my $150 Pioneer, and it sounds really great.

My friend has a $2000 CD Player (Meridian 508 I think). He brought it over a while back and we did a shootout with six or seven CDs and SACDs and and the SACD playback won every time. It was funny becuase my player sounded better than his expensive CD player with the same music on SACD...

Of course that MEridian trashed my player on CD playback, but we don't need to discuss that

Could they make a $100 player do SACD good? I don't know...but I know they can do it for $150...

fireshoes

I don't give a damn about dual-disc, but did you see the Polk Audio speaker giveaway in the audio/video revolution newsletter? One of the new RM sets.

TheReaper

Originally posted by F1nut
I have to question if the benefits of the hi-rez formats on a $100 player.

If you want a hi-rez format, you should be pimping this stuff. Because if the hi-rez formats don't start selling soon, they will die. Then you will have to wait at least another five years for music DVDs with DTS sound tracks to start filling the void.

F1nut

LOL....good point you have there.


Alright everybody, buy those $100 SACD players...they are GREAT!!!

Danny Tse

Actually, big name hi-rez players are available for about $100.00....

Panasonic has the S47 single disc DVD-Audio/Vidio player for less than $100.00 at Best Buy. Stereo DVD-A only though.

Add about $20.00 and you can get Panasonic's F87 5-disc DVD-Audio/Video changer. It will do multi-channel DVD-A and will decode HDCD on redbook CD as well.

Toshiba had the SD-4600, which is a multi-channel DVD-Audio/Video single disc player, for about $80.00 at Best Buy until their new universal players showed up.

Sony is set to release a single-disc DVD/SACD player with a MSRP of $140.00....which means street price will be about $120.00.

The players are there, now we need more, way more, software.

madmax

Originally posted by F1nut
I have to question if the benefits of the hi-rez formats on a $100 player.

I question this as well but it is very important that every CD player down to the walkmans be able to play SACD even if they do not sound any better than a standard CD. That is if you want SACD to survive...

madmax

danger boy

dual disc launch

Danny Tse

It will be very interesting to see what reception DualDisc will get when it's released. I am thinking DVD-A, as we know it today, will no longer be relevant. And what impact will DualDisc have on SACD.

Despite the release of DualDisc, I am still seeing announcements of upcoming releases on SACD....5 classic Elton John albums alone in October. Not to mention his new studio album will be on SACD as well.

Call me old fashion, but if I want to watch videos, I would buy a DVD.

danger boy

you're old fashioned.

steveinaz

Somebody please read my post about 9 months ago when I predicted the fall of DVD-A, SACD, and any thing other than Redbook CD.

"Technology Saturation" is going kill'em all off. Consumers don't want format confusion, and definitely don't want something that will be bettered in 2 yrs, rendering their existing software useless....again. Remember, many in our generation have gone thru numerous formats already; Turntable, 8-track, Cassette, CD. Thats alot of replaced music. (not to mention reel-to-reel and DAT).

I said it before, and I'll say it again...these formats are going no where, thanks to poor marketing, no consistency, and scarce software. SACD/DVD-A should go in the business record books as the most poorly executed marketing in history; what a failure. I bet if you ask 10 people what SACD/DVD-A is, 9 of them won't have a clue....

It's "DAT" all over again.

pixiedave

Originally posted by steveinaz
Somebody please read my post about 9 months ago when I predicted the fall of DVD-A, SACD, and any thing other than Redbook CD.

"Technology Saturation" is going kill'em all off. Consumers don't want format confusion, and definitely don't want something that will be bettered in 2 yrs, rendering their existing software useless....again. Remember, many in our generation have gone thru numerous formats already; Turntable, 8-track, Cassette, CD. Thats alot of replaced music. (not to mention reel-to-reel and DAT).

I said it before, and I'll say it again...these formats are going no where, thanks to poor marketing, no consistency, and scarce software. SACD/DVD-A should go in the business record books as the most poorly executed marketing in history; what a failure. I bet if you ask 10 people what SACD/DVD-A is, 9 of them won't have a clue....

It's "DAT" all over again.

Yes but DAT has found a very vigorous and loyal niche following in the world of concert taping.

Danny Tse

Remember, many in our generation have gone thru numerous formats already; Turntable, 8-track, Cassette, CD.

You forgot MiniDisc and DCC (Digital Compact Cassette).

Minidisc still has a fanatical following, witness Sony's recent introduction of Hi-MD.

danger boy

Originally posted by steveinaz
It's "DAT" all over again.

If i remember right.. i think you're point is that DAT never really had much of a following here in the USofA. I think other countries embraced DAT more than we did. I never bought into DAT.

I think the writings clearly written on the wall now.. DVD-Audio and SACD are doomed. It's to bad... but I think alot of people would have embraced it more.. had they been given better exposure to it.

Danny Tse

I think it will be interesting to see what impact DualDisc will have on SACD. On a worldwide basis, new SACD titles are announced daily....19 titles have been added to sa-cd.net for the first 2 days of September already. And this doesn't include the announcement of upcoming Genesis SACD releases. I believe Sony is in talks with Bruce Springsteen's management to release his complete catalog on SACDs.

F1nut

The lasest news from the DualDisc camp.

"The new web site provides examples of the approved logo packaging placement(s), how to describe disc content by way of a mandatory ‘content grid’ and advice on how to word the standard compatibility disclaimer, which is also mandatory.

“DualDisc carries the DVD logo and complies with DVD layer specifications. While the DualDisc CD audio side has been designed to play on almost all existing CD players, it does not technically meet the CD specification and accordingly, does not use the CD logo.”

The DualDisc book states that: “DualDisc packages shall carry a disclaimer regarding the DualDisc’s playability and compliance with disc specifications.” It goes on to say that “Each individual licensee should consult its own counsel concerning the appropriate disclaimer language that should be included concerning the playability of DualDisc on all CD and DVD players. While all licensees are free to expand the disclaimer based on their own policies, legal analysis and disc manufacturing experience, at a minimum, the disclaimer should read: This disc may not play on some CD and DVD players.”

The DualDisc book also lays out the minimum content requirements for DualDisc, they are:

CD Side
Redbook-compatible audio
DVD Side
Entire audio contents of the CD side in stereo/mono and/or surround sound versions at an audio quality no less than that of the CD side.
At a minimum, the audio shall be in the DVD-Video zone in LPCM stereo/mono (16-bit).
It’s important to note that the DualDisc specifications do not mandate any high-resolution audio or a dedicated stereo track (where surround is present).

The book continues to give various examples of how the audio content can differ from disc-to-disc.

The physical specification details the parameters within which discs shall be manufactured, and is clear to point out that the DVD content shall not be accessed through the CD content (ie. a dual-layer design) but rather on individual sides of the disc."


You can cover that steaming pile with all the sugar you want, it will still smell like BS!

aaharvel

my concern with DualDisc (or my question)

Is the "high resolution" part of a dualdisc a watered down/inferior Dolby 5.1 version of a true DVD-A mix?

if it is- then that would make it TWO LEVELS below SACD Quality! (if you're like me and think that SACD is superior to DVD-A)

What the hell?!? I can get that sound quality by putting in my Eagles Hell Freezes Over DVD Video Disc.

F1nut

From what the article says, it looks like there may or may not be a hi-rez side.....up to the individual licensee it would seem. I'll never buy one no matter what comes out on that format.

aaharvel

it "may or may not" have a high-rez side?
it "may or may not" be compatible with any given player?

well jesus, then what the hell are we talking about then?
who are the morons that came up with this format?

i agree f1. i'll never buy one either. i hope it's dead by xmas.

Danny Tse

If there's hi-rez on the DualDisc, then it will be DVD-A. So, in another words, no hi-rez on Sony Music-issued DualDiscs.

A DualDisc can have a surround sound version of the album on one side but that surround sound mix may be just a Dolby Digital mix. The other side is supposed to be a CD-compatible version of the album. It's not a true CD, as defined by Sony and Philips, since that layer is too thin. Which can cause compatibility issues with CD capable players, like car CD players, computer CD-ROM drives, portable CD players, etc....

DualDisc is an attempt by the DVD-A camp to duplicate SACD's hybrid disc. While some CD capable drives do have problems playing back the CD layer of a hybrid SACD, there are no "advisories" released by hardware manufacturers concerning possible issues.

http://www.highfidelityreview.com/news/news.asp?newsnumber=12610938

BTW, SACD crossed the 3,000 title mark last night. Now at 3,008 titles.

aaharvel

as much as I love SACD- after hearing the DVD-V of the Eagles Farewell 2disc DTS mix tonight- that's good enough for me.

but long live SACD.