18.02.2013 Views

UHF No 70 (Net).indd - Ultra High Fidelity Magazine

UHF No 70 (Net).indd - Ultra High Fidelity Magazine

UHF No 70 (Net).indd - Ultra High Fidelity Magazine

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

How SACD Won the War<br />

tles? Should you buy a Palm<br />

handheld or a PocketPC?<br />

Should you pick a PC or a<br />

Mac? Should you go for Beta or VHS?<br />

In the latter case, of course, even<br />

technophobes know the answer. We<br />

also know the outcome of the cassette<br />

vs 8-track rivalry, not that it matters<br />

so much anymore. And we know that<br />

consumers who guessed wrong got little<br />

sympathy from the merchandisers of<br />

failed standards.<br />

Of course, there have always been<br />

alternatives to the clear knockout of<br />

the Beta/VHS battle. Half a century<br />

ago, when RCA launched its<br />

45 rpm discs against Columbia’s<br />

microgroove LP, both standards<br />

won, and they stayed around<br />

for decades. On the other hand,<br />

when Philips’ DCC digital cassette<br />

went up against Sony’s<br />

MiniDisc, there were two ways you<br />

could lose.<br />

So what about DVD-Audio versus<br />

SACD?<br />

Despite claims by numerous audio<br />

mavens, including a<br />

majority of specialty<br />

magazines, we have<br />

long known that the<br />

CD Red Book standard of 16 bits and<br />

a 44.1 kHz sampling rate wasn’t even<br />

giving us what the LP had offered,<br />

never mind the “perfect sound” that<br />

digital promised. promised. Over the years crack<br />

designers have have found ways to optimize<br />

the imperfect imperfect standard: better fi lters,<br />

mapping systems that minimized (or at<br />

least optimized) optimized) mathematical rounding<br />

errors in the digital bitstream, bitstream, and even<br />

HDCD encoding, a way of giving 16<br />

bits the performance of 20 bits or more.<br />

Of course, course, we all suspected there was a<br />

better standard in our future…but what?<br />

And when?<br />

Nuts&Bolts Don’t you love technology bat-<br />

A disc that holds more<br />

The emergence of the DVD gave us<br />

hope. The new medium was conceived<br />

primarily for movies, to be sure — the<br />

22 ULTRA HIGH FIDELITY <strong>Magazine</strong><br />

“V” stood initially for “video.” Still, a<br />

storage medium was a storage medium.<br />

The new disc would have nearly seven<br />

times the storage space of a conventional<br />

CD, more than enough for a superior<br />

digital music system. Doubling the sampling<br />

rate to 96 kHz* would of course<br />

take twice the data space, and bumping<br />

the 16 bits up to 24 bits would increase<br />

size by another 50%. That would be<br />

easy to handle, and in fact we could<br />

even double the sampling rate again to<br />

192 kHz. Perfect sound would fi nally<br />

arrive.<br />

But of course movies was where the<br />

money money was, and it was on movies that<br />

the DVD Consortium (later renamed<br />

the DVD Forum) concentrated. There<br />

was plenty to concentrate on, because the<br />

DVD was an amalgam of two incompatible<br />

technologies, and the consortium consortium<br />

had to listen listen to many dissenting voices.<br />

The result was that the audio-only disc<br />

became an afterthought.<br />

Indeed, it nearly got derailed. As<br />

Or, to put it another<br />

way, way, how DVD-Audio<br />

blew it big time.<br />

members of the consortium tested different<br />

film sound systems on human<br />

subjects, they became convinced that<br />

one of the eventual winners, Dolby Digital<br />

(then called AC-3) was to all intents<br />

and purposes perfect. Then why not<br />

use a similar system for DVD-Audio?<br />

Even though the DVD had huge storage<br />

capacity, it wasn’t quite enough. If<br />

we wanted to add surround sound, with<br />

5.1 channels, we would need to increase<br />

space by another 275%, taking us to nine<br />

times the CD’s storage space. Too much.<br />

Compression was inevitable.<br />

For some time it looked as though<br />

the new medium would be crippled<br />

by the same compromises that<br />

affected DVD-Video, and there<br />

were letter-writing campaigns<br />

by audiophiles, arguing for a<br />

lossless system. Finally, one<br />

was proposed, Meridian’s MLP<br />

(Meridian Lossless Packing)<br />

compressed the signal by as much<br />

as half but could reconstitute the<br />

original signal bit for bit. With its adoption<br />

in late 1998, DVD-A seemed to be<br />

on its way. There were more than 160<br />

member companies,<br />

many of them eagerly<br />

waiting to release<br />

DVD-A discs…or so<br />

we were told.<br />

In the meantime, there was action<br />

elsewhere.<br />

The “other” superdisc<br />

The original CD standard had been<br />

developed by Sony and Philips, which<br />

had made a good deal of money over<br />

*Obviously, 96 kHz is more than double<br />

44.1 kHz. It is in fact double the 48 kHz sampling<br />

rate that most first-generation digital<br />

masters were recorded at. The master would<br />

then be downsampled to the CD standard.<br />

That required an unwelcome transformation.<br />

Most DVD-A mastering is today<br />

done at 96 kHz. Some producers argued for<br />

88.2 kHz, which would downsample nicely<br />

for CD. That rate was adopted as a DVD-A<br />

option, option, though it is seldom used.<br />

The truth about the new formats<br />

This has always been true of <strong>UHF</strong>: what you read in its pages is not what the<br />

best-known audio (and home theatre!) magazines tell you. This is even more<br />

true when it comes to the new media, such as SACD and DVD-A. Our goal is,<br />

and has always been, to help you make the choices best for you. Oh…by the way,<br />

the subscription information is on page 3…page 5 of the PDF.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!