XXHighEnd

if the George Martin 'remix' Love album is the Beatles to you. I picked up the DVD-Audio used (~16 bucks shipped http://www.amazon.com/Love-CD-Audio-DVD-Beatles/dp/B000JJS8TM/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1250144708&sr=8-1).

It is depressingly hard to find info about what resolution is on any dvd-a discs ... this beatles was a cr*p shoot, and I almost lost. Usually there is a surround mix and a stereo mix. This time when I loaded it into DVDAExplorer it only showed a 96/24 surround mix; arrrgggg I only have two channels. But wait, there is an info heading in DVDAExplorer that says, "Copy Control Info Copying: Freely; Audio Quality :2ch/48kHz/16bit" ... ah cr*p wth I'll try it... so when I go to rip I select "Get stereo downmix" and guess what! They lied! Kinda how they lied when they said Roy Orbison was in 192/24 except it was 96/24,,,but! this time it was in my favor. The stereo 'downmix' was 96/24!! yea! Just started it up and my dog is looking for the birds and crickets opening the first track.

Anyway, some of these dvd-a discs can be worth it.

Yeah, I have been working my way through Amazon.de for DVD-A's but it is really a tough job to judge in advance what you will be getting. I have composed a rather large list but I'm a bit afraid to order. That Beatles is one of the albums I did not trust and I laid it aside. So, I guess I can get it allright.

;)

http://www.hdtracks.com/index.php

some HD music,

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/taxonomy_menu/4/19

Another nice link to HiRez and info.

I should have come back and reposted after a few listens back and forth between the CD and the "Get stereo downmix" of the DVDA I made using DVDAExplorer... It really didn't work out as well as I'd hoped.  There was some clarity that came through on the downmix, but something is not right about the mix... things left out and balance/mastering just didn't sound right compared to the already nice sounding CD rip.  oh well.

I guess by now I know how hard this is, unless you have a completely pre-cooked prescription on how to do it (which I have not btw).
Also, try to keep this in mind :

A 5.1 (etc.) can have emerged from a normal 2.0 recording, but, the separate channels (mike lines etc.) are still available, thus a "remaster" just does this. Since this is about redistributing the music over 6 (etc.) channels, there won't be a normal 2 channel balance anymore. Jst think about echoing (few ms) the front into the back speakers, just to create some surround effect (this is just a tiny example); When this is mixed down again to two channels, the echo will still be there, and there is no way to get the 2 channel normal sound back.

Of course with the above example you can leave out the back channels, but of course much more happened, like (e.g.) the sax playing from one of the back channels. So, what to do ?

A worse case is when during the remix the bass has been pumped, or whatever they did to smug up the sound.

Personally I would stay away from downmixing, because theoretically it can't be done good. Not if the origin has been a 2 channel recording.
When it is just a concert, not available on 2.0 it is another matter. The material may be unique to you, and thus why not try to make a 2.0 out if it.

I think I said it earlier in this thread, it is the most hard to judge from "a distance" what's actually on the DVDA. Or, whether it is a DVDA in the first place. Or, whether a movie DVD may contain 2.0 hires material.

Or maybe wait for 0.9y-4. I will make a topic about that later ... :teasing:

If the group channel Assigment is Lf,Rf,Ls,Rs I don't think it can't be done properly.

But if you have something like this: (not many of those, but only if there is no normal 2ch on there)
(http://img269.imageshack.us/img269/1953/capture1qm.jpg)

It can be done by pulling down just Lf and Rf using "split Groups" in DVDAExplorer (output in mono wave)
And just keep Lf and Rf, and dump the rest.
And use "Audacity" to glue those together as stereo.
My "distance" is not so big, right now, haha. ;)
Those mixed with movie, is no problem either, only you have to know for sure that there is a HiRez on there, before buying.(not dts only)
I realy don´t think the `industry` takes Highenders serious, this comes in mind when working on this. (all those logo´s and still you know NOTHING)
There is no info what so ever, not even if its a 48 or 96 (it just says 24Bit for eg.)
If I´d spend like 20-50 $ on a DVDA, I would sure wan´t to know the details of what I get.



What have you done, hmm, but keep in mind Peter things follow up rather quickly, lately!
It must be good,  :)

As Roy just pointed out beautifully : if there is the option of a 2 channel mix being in there (this is the "Group 1" in his example), this of course has been mixed for normal stereo in the first place. This is not related to my above quote, which by now may be confusing. I guess my point was :

Once you buy a DVD(A) which is multi channel *and* it is just a 24 bit version of a normally existing album on red book, chances are fair there is no 2 channel mix in there because ... well, buy the red book then. I guess this is also the theoretical difference between DVD and DVDA, where the first obviously is for movies and surround, and there's no big chance there will be a two channel version on there. It gets even more vage (or complex) knowing that DVD will have a relation to DTS, that never being 24/96 in the first place (not talking blu ray of course) BUT if you extract it (like you could extract an MP3 to .wav) ... how to tell whatever it is what's really in there. Just play an MP3 in XX and you'll know what I mean (once the UnicodeTrack0001.wav etc. is found).

Maybe I am wrong, but often those disks contain the explicit remark "plays on every DVDA player", I think only in that case you're good.
If it says "Plays on every DVD player" you know nothing much except for the chance that it's 5.1 in there.
I must add that it is a tough job to look for the "real" DVDAs on the internet in the first place, since "a DVD with Audio" sums up under DVD-A (often). And worse, a DVD-Audio *is* a DVD type ...

Since DVD-As (the real ones) are rather tough to find in shops here, can anyone aknowledge that they actually always have the dimensions of a normal CD ? (I feel this is a stupid question).
And the other way around : did anyone see DVDs (music only or not) which do not have the dimension of a normal DVD case ?

And ofcourse keep in mind,

It all depends on the original recording, as in what to expect from a certain DVDA.

- Audio-DVD (contents are AUDIO_TS and VIDEO_TS, audio is mixed in the movie, so AUDIO_TS will be empty) Use DVD Audio Extractor for this
- DVDA (both folders can contain audio-files, but MLP is in the AUDIO_TS folder) use DVDAExplorer in this case, but always check the VIDEO_TS, because sometimes the 24-96 will still be on there.

- Now checking the Blu-Ray section, but there is no problem either. most contain 2ch 24/48 or 96

- Only thing left is digital transfer of SACD. (will be done next year)

That All Folks

Look for the onces that says: "Advanced Resolution Stereo" or "This disc plays 3 Ways,............" (when there is no further info) or MLP 2.0 or LPCM 2.0
DVDA is still a DVD.
So you can get a image of that using DVDfab and play on PC, or in my case made 2ch 24/96 FLAC and play in XX.

Grtz

Illegal R

And this is how a Music Blu-Ray Disc looks like: (its only 40GB BIG) ;)
(http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/3218/capture10h.jpg)

Like Peter said there can never be multi-ch 24/96 on a normal DVD (because max. bitrate of dvd is 9.8 MBps)
And look at the multi-ch bitrate on the BD. (thats only sound)

Lots of music Dvd's have 2.0 LPCM on them but not that many in 24/96, most are "just" 16/48.
David Gilmoure - in Concert, has 24/48
Most Queen albums have 24/96 like this.

Thank you Roy.

PS:


:rofl:

I Hope,

but new version xx???

This is all because, I can.(in my situation that is)

There was no hunger for HiRez material, still enjoying 16/44 thru xx. (maybe even more)
Hope you can give us a decent explanation on this matter, Peter.
Referring to your new version.

I know you do (want) ;)