Dire Straits - Brothers in Arms, Roxy Music, Prince coming to blu-ray Audio Dolby Atmos. Blu-ray: The New Ultimate Standard for Audiophiles?

[masterhw]

This is not a marketing gimmick, it is an objectively superior audio format.

and yet also meaningless to the overwhelming majority of consumer playback systems.

 

[JRR]

Yes it is completely different. As the aphorism goes, you are mixing up apples with oranges. Sample rate refers to frequency response, so that a 96kHz sample rate has a frequency response up to 48kHz, whereas a 44.1 kHz sample frequency response is limited to 22.5 kHz; which is fine because human beings cannot hear anything between around 20 kHz (or lower as you age) and 48 kHz, (therefore irrelevant unless you are producing music for bats or dogs). Thus, high sample rate files are a marketing gimmick more than anything else.

Bit rate refers to the quantity of data being transmitted each second. DD+ (the streaming standard) is generally 768 kbits/sec, it is lossy using clever algorithms to recreate the full audio experience, and as a lossy format it is excellent, they can cram 16 positions of audio (a 9.1.6 Atmos system) into that tiny stream. BUT it is lossy and it is missing data. That is why Dolby TrueHD is objectively superior, and in my experience, perceptibly superior. TrueHD has a data rate limit of 18 Mbits/sec, though typically blu ray discs are 7000-10000 kbit/sec with peaks up to 18000. Putting another way, TrueHD on a typical blu ray has over 10 times the resolution of the streaming version. This is not a marketing gimmick, it is an objectively superior audio format.

By the way, I own two of the discs mentioned, Roxy and Brothers in Arms and they are both superb.

You are missing the point which is: if music services can afford to spare internet bandwidth on 192/24 which, as you state, is a marketing gimmick surely they can spare that same bandwidth on atmos which arguably isn’t simply a marketing gimmick. Clear as mud?

The industry is a joke right now. Deutsche Grammofon is more interested in creating colored vinyls with accompanying T-shirts than providing either lossless streaming or blu-ray audio.

 

[tineared]

I'm particularly looking forward to mid December. I have preordered the Wish You Were Here 50th Anniversary disc remixed by James Guthrie (Pink Floyd's mixer and engineer since 1978) and the I Robot Atmos disc remixed by Alan Parsons (who also worked on DSOTM). They are two of my favorite albums and I expect both mixes to be of stellar quality.
I may even buy 2 height speakers in anticipation, but I'm not sure the wife would approve as my listening/theater room is my living room and speakers hanging from the ceiling or on walls would be a tough sell
Still, I expect great things with my 7.2 system

 

[aagstn]

Those are both great pick ups. I love both of those albums and will have to look those up. The only Alan Parsons Project I have with multichannel is Tales of Mystery and Imagination.

 

[pablolie]

.... Deutsche Grammofon is more interested in creating colored vinyls with accompanying T-shirts than providing either lossless streaming or blu-ray audio.

Or maybe they are just honest enough to admit "yeah, we had high recording standards all along, but if you are stupid enough to think you need the exact same sh*t at 24/192, we'll be glad to take your money again".

Many of those albums mentioned... come on. It's kind of getting "Kind of Blue" at 24/192 (I have it)... total audiophile mythos bs. It's just collectionist or "audiophile" psychosis, because they never sound better than the original.

 

[tineared]

Those are both great pick ups. I love both of those albums and will have to look those up. The only Alan Parsons Project I have with multichannel is Tales of Mystery and Imagination.

I already have the Ammonia Avenue and Pyramid Atmos discs and am hoping that Eye In the Sky is coming since I missed out getting the 5.1 blu ray release and it sells for silly money now.
Amazon currently has the best prices for the two other discs coming next month. Good times...

 

[levimax]

because they never sound better than the original.

Are you saying the original LP sounds better than the latest Atmos remaster

 

[danadam]

Or maybe they are just honest enough to admit "yeah, we had high recording standards all along, but if you are stupid enough to think you need the exact same sh*t at 24/192, we'll be glad to take your money again".

JRR's point about DG is that they don't want to take his money. From what I remember they restored/remasterd some pieces and released them only on vinyl.

But I'm not in sales, so it may be that by their analysis they expect to get more money overall this way

 

[JRR]

Yes. The point is more atmos blu rays and lossless atmos streaming. Less clear vinyl and t-shirts.

 

[pablolie]

Are you saying the original LP sounds better than the latest Atmos remaster

LPs? I never said that, that's ridicuoius. CDs? yes, most of the time, but not always possible given the original recording (check Motown stuff, as an easy example). Atmos? Certainly an unintended and totally artificial after the fact construct. Suddenly the "as close to the original recording" premise doesn't matter there...

 

[pablolie]

JRR's point about DG is that they don't want to take his money. From what I remember they restored/remasterd some pieces and released them only on vinyl.

Which makes my point. Why wouldn't they cater to an audience willing to waste money?

But I'm not in sales, so it may be that by their analysis they expect to get more money overall this way

 

[napfkuchen]

Yes lossless is still great when available, but it is a misnomer to assume EAC-3 works like each channel has a fixed bandwidth allocation. That would suck. I’ve been able to pass compressed audio tests before, but never for moderate bitrate EAC-3, it’s pretty good.

Bought a selection of music Blu-Ray discs, tried my best comparing them with Apple Music but failed noticing the higher bitrate. But since years ago I already failed a blind test comparing 192 kbit/s mp3 to cd quality that was to be expected. Nevertheless, it does satisfy me, because the selection of multi-channel music on physical media is small and expensive. In contrast, with Apple Music I simply open my iPad and have access to a comparatively huge music catalog. This allows me to explore genres I previously ignored completely.
Ultimately, the bitrate only defines the technical possibilities; whether the actual mix utilizes them is up to the listener (preference). Personally, I'm not a traditionalist in this regard and find it exciting when music seems to surround me. Why not, as with Michael Jackson's "Thriller," extend the stereo panorama to the rear speakers and add additional layers? This allows individual voices and instruments to be separated much more effectively from the rest of the sound. Sometimes, as a complement to this, a slightly more diffuse soundscape almost floats through the room (e.g., in Usher's "U Got It Bad"). This is impossible to achieve with a stereo mix.