Just for the record:
DVD-Audio is a high resolution audio format that uses PCM at up to 24 bit/192 kHz data rate, with up to six channels. All six channels have independent resolution levels. This means you can save space on the disc (for example) by using lower resolution for the rear channels, which are generally not as critical.
MLP - or
Meridian Lossless Packing is a compression algorithm used in DVD-Audio to compress file size
without sacrificing resolution. The process is similar to a RISC processor; it uses shorter commands in place of long strings of redundant data. For example: if eight zeroes appear back-to-back, rather than write a space-consuming (for no good reason) 00000000 MLP writes a shorter command like 0x8 telling the DACs to repeat zero eight times in a row. This is a bit of an oversimplification, but you get the gist of it.
SACD is a different animal entirely. It uses one-bit Direct Stream Digital to record audio. Whereas PCM takes "snapshots" (the number of which per second is determined by the sampling rate - so, 44.1 kHz translates to 44,100 snapshots
per channel, per second and the bitrate determines how "fine" the image resolution of each frame is - 16 bit means you get ~96db dynamic range, 20 bit is ~120 db, etc.) DSD one bit - that bit simply tells the DACs increase or decrease the amplitude of the signal - and it does so to the tune of 2.8 MHz (2.8
million times per second). This has the potential for far greater low level detail resolution (background noise, harmonic activity) and dynamics (more accurately tracks the rise and fall of the waveform). The only trouble with this system is that all the internal switching noise requires a great deal of noise shaping and filtering to be rendered inaudible. But PCM, no matter how high-res,
always requires low-pass filtering.
So the debate continues on which is superior for sound quality. I have not had a chance to sit down with an SACD player in my system, but I do own a DVD-Audio player. I can tell you that close harmonies, close mixes, and bass in general benefit from high resolution PCM. Many people who have heard both say that SACD is far superior - includng Richard
Vandersteen, who has both the ears and the hardware to know the difference.
In terms of market positioning - right now, it's still very close. Both formats keep getting cheaper, and the software grows more plentiful. It seems that SACD
is pulling ahead...imagine...a Sony format that actually took off! :smilewink
)
If your wondering, that's a lot of tracks. From what I've heard, tracking in this high resolution environment is absolutely increadable. The detail and dynamic range makes standard CD's sound like am radio... Ok, maybe not quite that bad, but the jump in technology is tremendous.
