I have read the article and I originally was in the DVD-A camp.
DVD-A makes sense if you believe higher bit-rate is what it's all about. But despite oversampling and whatnot, we have seen zero sonic improvement in CD players the last two decades. I don't give a rat's you-know-what about what the mouthpieces say in the audio press. And the fact that the article refers to the lying sacks of you-know-what at Stereophile doesn't bring it more credibility.
The DVD-A is nothing more than a higher spec'd CD. It uses the same obsolete technology. It's the preferred format because it's cheap--no royalties to Philips and Sony.
The SACD isn't perfect, either. I believe it uses a 6th order filter. Again I believe it was more or less state of the art back when the format was developed. Today an 8th order filter would offer no problem.
Neither format would exist if it wasn't for multi-channel. The Redbook CD is enough for stereo. So your preference of DVD-A or SACD should be based only on what your ears tell you. Both are "good enough" as far as bit-rate and resolution go.
I don't know how Blu-ray and HD-DVD fit into this. I don't know what format is compatible to what. I don't think anyone cares. The DVD-A and SACD are virtually dead already. Home theater, not hi-fi, is a growth market.
It's kind of sad, though, that you can sell Blu-ray and HD-DVD on their improved image quality, but nobody cares if it's mp3 or SACD as long as it fits in their iPod.
Sorry for the rant.
DVD-A makes sense if you believe higher bit-rate is what it's all about. But despite oversampling and whatnot, we have seen zero sonic improvement in CD players the last two decades. I don't give a rat's you-know-what about what the mouthpieces say in the audio press. And the fact that the article refers to the lying sacks of you-know-what at Stereophile doesn't bring it more credibility.
The DVD-A is nothing more than a higher spec'd CD. It uses the same obsolete technology. It's the preferred format because it's cheap--no royalties to Philips and Sony.
The SACD isn't perfect, either. I believe it uses a 6th order filter. Again I believe it was more or less state of the art back when the format was developed. Today an 8th order filter would offer no problem.
Neither format would exist if it wasn't for multi-channel. The Redbook CD is enough for stereo. So your preference of DVD-A or SACD should be based only on what your ears tell you. Both are "good enough" as far as bit-rate and resolution go.
I don't know how Blu-ray and HD-DVD fit into this. I don't know what format is compatible to what. I don't think anyone cares. The DVD-A and SACD are virtually dead already. Home theater, not hi-fi, is a growth market.
It's kind of sad, though, that you can sell Blu-ray and HD-DVD on their improved image quality, but nobody cares if it's mp3 or SACD as long as it fits in their iPod.
Sorry for the rant.