AfterDawn: Tech news

Creative Audigy2 brings DVD-Audio standard to PCs

Written by Lasse Penttinen @ 29 Oct 2002 12:08 User comments (4)

Inclusion of DVD-Audio on Creative Technology's Sound Blaster Audigy 2 Soundcards Signals the High-Quality, Versatile Audio Format's Move Toward Widespread Adoption
Even though I am an old school audiophile, I have my doubts about the DVD-Audio standard, which should bring us improved audio quality and added functionality (multimedia etc).

Transition from C-Cassette and vinyl to Compact Discs made sense due to the outstanding features of the CD technology. Similarry DVD is much more handy and provides better quality than a VHS tape. But what does DVD audio give us? It doesn't seem to be anything revolutionary in any way - there is nothing we haven't seen so far. Also I am very sceptic about the 'audio quality improvements'. Does Joe Average hear a significant improvement? Can Joe Average afford a sound system required to properly benefit from the new higher resolution sound?

SAN FRANCISCO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Oct. 29, 2002-- Dolby Laboratories, the world leader in multichannel audio technologies, announced an important expansion of the DVD-Audio format with the recent introduction of Creative Technology Limited's Sound Blaster® Audigy(TM) 2, the first soundcard with technology to provide DVD-Audio playback on the personal computer platform. Dolby, which licenses DVD-Audio MLP Lossless(TM) technology, heralds this milestone as further reinforcement of growing acceptance of the DVD-Audio format as the next-generation replacement of the compact disc as well as the importance of Dolby® technologies in the transformation of the PC from a productivity device into a home entertainment gateway.

Previous Next  

4 user comments

130.10.2002 14:44

test


Petteri Pyyny (pyyny@twitter)
Webmaster
http://AfterDawn.com/

231.10.2002 1:03

Yes, it works now. And now... (rumble, rumble)... The comment itself, a mustn't read: Well, maybe dogs will appreciate that "improved sound quality". For instance, why do we need over 44.1 KHz? I don't know anyone who can hear anything beyond 20 kHz, that is, it would be enough with 40 kHz for us humans, wouldn't it? And, going further, is anyone able to say whether 16 or 24 bits were used in a recording with just listening to it? Maybe the people at Dolby Labs are genetically improved to appreciate ultra-sounds and every subtle change on them, but I think all the effort should take place during the recording stage. That is, the CD quality is enough already. Recordings won't be more faithful to the original no matter any additional bits or growing sampling rate available in the equipment of the customer. Of course, this is only a personal thought. I might be wrong. (So might them ;) Sorry, I had to do it O:)


"You know, it seems that quotes on the internet are becoming less and less reliable." -Abraham Lincoln.

331.10.2002 1:39

I still don't get a clue about what that "DVD audio support" might be. They mention "a DVD-Audio capable DVD-ROM drive on a PC." (http://www.soundblaster.com/resources/read.asp?articleid=57, bottom). So a special DVD ROM is needed. Some recent DVD burners claim to support DVD A, but I don't know if they fully support them, or just play them as a DVD video player would. The same page mentions "a device that does not convert the analog signal back to digital for internal processing ". This would mean that DVD ROM capable of DVDA support would output the sound as analog, then the Audigy 2 would amplify it directly in analog. Back to the old CD ROM 4x + SB 16 ! Or it just means that the Audigy 2 is the first soundcard to support 192 kHz playback and has no special DVDA features. This is really unclear.


Pio2001

431.10.2002 2:28

Neither do I understand that couple of points. One thing I forgot in my other post: Of course, the (upcoming?) DVD-A standard will support more than two channels of sound. That's an improvement over CDDA for real, but it's built into every DVD player already. What else does DVD-A have to offer beyond current DVD formats? Maybe it's all about the waste of space implied by such a weird sampling rate? I know that Nyquist sampling rate is only a threshold but, does the achieved SNR worth the amount of needed disc-space? Another thing I'd like to know is how are sound engineers supposed to remix two-channel-only "popular catalog titles" from up to 44.1 kHz and 16-bit digitally mastered data into six channels, with 24-bit and 96 KHz/channel. Quick answer: It does not matter, because anyone will ever feel the difference X-) Btw, see what happens if you click in the link you posted as is, with the trailing comma: > Microsoft OLE DB Provider for ODBC Drivers error '80040e14' > [Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver][SQL Server]Line 1: Incorrect syntax near ','. > /resources/read.asp, line 30 Not my fault, I swear! This must be my bug-finding week! :)


"You know, it seems that quotes on the internet are becoming less and less reliable." -Abraham Lincoln.

Comments have been disabled for this article.

News archive