How many years does DVD have left?

Like most people, I'm just starting to amass a home video collection because
of DVD, but they love pushing new obsceletizing formats in Japan. Luckily,
we Americans love slowing down their progress (i.e., ignoring their
minidiscs in favor of CD's), so I'm not too worried about DVD going away,
but I hear they're coming out with HD-DVD soon? Is that going to make my
current collection seem flaccid and impotent, or will it be more like
DVD-Audio is; basically ignored?

 

People worry that DVD will go the way of VHS, which is ridiculous. VHS
was a bad format. DVDs are a good format. They don't look nearly as
sharp and detailed as an HD picture, but they don't look bad either.
They are optical discs, so well-cared for they will last a few
lifetimes, plus the picture is good. Not excellent like HD, but good.
Throwing away all of your DVDs for HD-DVD's sake is like getting rid of
all your old CDs and videogames, just because SACD and Gamecubes and the
like are out now.

--
"Get rid of the Range Rover. You are not responsible for patrolling
Australia's Dingo Barrier Fence, nor do you work the Savannah, capturing
and tagging wildebeests."
--Michael J. Nelson

Grand Inquisitor
http://www.dvdprofiler.com/mycollection.asp?alias=Oost

 

The main point is CONTENT! Even current releases on DVD won't
necessarily appear (as reissues) on HD-DVD for many years if ever.
That's just the same as with laserdiscs, where they are still
collected for the TITLES that haven't yet seen reissue. So don't
worry, stick to the non-best sellers and "B" titles and your
collection will be valid for a long time, and in good quality,
regardless of any upcoming format wars.

. Steve .

 

HD-DVD is coming. So what? Do you have an HDTV yet? Are you willing
to spend more money for HD-DVDs? I will guarantee you they will cost
more than the current DVD prices. Think "laserdisc" pricing. Also as a
reminder, most of those TV series available on current DVD's won't be
getting any better on HD-DVD. Most are as good as they get on current
DVD technology. Maybe if it's a newer show., but most aren't.

No, I wouldn' worry too much about HD-DVD. It's still a few years off.
Sure, it'll look great and sound great. It will also be more
expensive. I was sold on current DVD technology because of

A) widescreen anamorphic image
B) digital sound
B) low pricing

I never collected VHS tapes. But now I could finally buy a movie uncut,
uncropped, usually with some bonus features all for a reasonable price.
They work in both home players and computers. DVD's are a great value.

When HD-DVD arrives it will also take awhile for content to build. If
anything, I might buy a very few of my all time favorite movies, but for
the most part I am quite content with the current DVD format. I do own
a true HDTV myself, but I'm still not all hyped about HD-DVD.


Steve

 

From on top of The Wall I yelled "YOU! YES YOU tungstorm!

Personally I'm not too worried about whatever HD-DVD format that
comes since at this point it will be YEARS before it will finally hit the
market place. First they'll agree upon a disc format - which will take
a long time. Then it will be copyright protection - which will add more
time. Finally it will be marketing, getting content, etc etc etc... again,
more time. Then - if - and a BIG if - will retail stores even want to carry
it when DVDs are flying off the shelves faster than a speeding bullet?

At most in my opinion HD-DVD, much like SACD, will be at best
a cult format like Laserdisc and Minidisc are. Not a bad thing, and
to the people who use them they do serve their purpose (as I just
listened to several SACDs tonight).

 

Actually, it might be the older shows that look better. The original
Star Trek series had all the editing and optical effects done on film,
so it was able to receive a HD transfer. Star Trek: The Next Generation
meanwhile had the editing and effects done on video, so a HD transfer
isn't possible.

-Jay

 

OT, but how do SACD's compare to DVD-Audio?

 

<<Like most people, I'm just starting to amass a home video collection
because of DVD, but they love pushing new obsceletizing formats in
Japan. Luckily, we Americans love slowing down their progress (i.e.,
ignoring their minidiscs in favor of CD's), so I'm not too worried about
DVD going away, but I hear they're coming out with HD-DVD soon? Is that
going to make my current collection seem flaccid and impotent, or will
it be more like DVD-Audio is; basically ignored?>>


Your DVDs are more likely to rot before they become "obsolete." As far
as obsolete formats are concerned, some LaserDiscs will never become
obsolete, such as the original _Star Wars_ (Episodes 4, 5 & 6) and any
other LaserDisc titles which are not available on any format other than
VHS or Beta.

My opinion is that DVD has now reached "critical mass" because the
players and disks are affordable to ANYBODY. Players are available for
under $50 and big-studio DVD titles are now being sold for as little as
$5. The proof of my argument can be seen in the tremendous upsurge in
the demand for RF converters. It is obvious that people with antiquated
TVs are now buying DVD players and disks. Some of these people are being
reluctantly pushed into the DVD format because their beloved VHS format
is becoming increasingly hard to purchase and/or rent. (This lack of VHS
availability may also account for the current upsurge in the demand for
"fullscreen" DVDs and the proliferation of DVD/VHS combo players.)

The fact that people with no interest in home theater are purchasing DVD
players indicates that the format has hit prime time. Any replacement
format is going to be very expensive and very slow to achieve DVD's
current catalog of over 35,000 titles. If there is a high-definition
format war, high definition DVD will be caught in the same quagmire
which is now holding back the acceptance of DVD-Audio and SACD.

The main problem a new, hi-definition DVD format will have to overcome
will be the average person's perception of its importance and value. For
example, the tremendous improvement audio CDs had over LPs was obvious
to anyone. The tremendous improvement DVDs had over VHS and LaserDiscs
was obvious to anyone. However, the seemingly-minor improvements that
upcoming high-definition DVDs have to offer will be hard for the average
person to appreciate and very difficult for the average person to
afford.

For example, the average person perceives today's high-bitrate,
anamorphic DVDs as looking nearly-perfect when played on a progressive
scan player and seen on a digital TV. The average person will not
perceive the improvement that high definition DVDs will have over
current DVDs to be anywhere near as dramatic as the improvement that DVD
has over VHS. As a result, high definition players be very expensive and
high definition DVDs will also be very expensive and there will be very
few titles available.

Without the acceptance of the average person, the replacement of current
DVD technology will not happen anytime soon.

 

:
: OT, but how do SACD's compare to DVD-Audio?
===================

They are both excellent.
They each have their own merit.

 

You are corret Jay. Old shows shot, edited and finished on film do have
the potential for HD transfers. They have showed select episodes oh
"Hogan's heroes" and "Mission Impossible" on HDNet. Just what we
need...new HD transfers of "Gilligan's Island". ;-)

Steve

 

As Richard said they are both excellent. Personally I prefer SACD
due to most of the discs I own are CD/SACD hybrids, and the fact that
I actually find trying to work through menu's on DVD-A's kinda annoying.
Fine for films and all, but for music I want to get right to the music.

But both formats are great even with their weaknesses.

 

Brian,

I personally think the current 480-line DVD format will be around for at
least another ten years before it is slowly eclipsed by the now-approved
Toshiba/NEC HD-DVD after 2008. The problem with HD-DVD right now is that
equipment will be quite expensive initially, and prices will take at least
five years to fall to reasonable levels.

 

<< Personally I prefer SACD
due to most of the discs I own are CD/SACD hybrids, and the fact that
I actually find trying to work through menu's on DVD-A's kinda annoying.
Fine for films and all, but for music I want to get right to the music.

But both formats are great even with their weaknesses. >>

It also depends on what you like to listen to... the guys on "Screen Savers"
recently interviewed a guy from Home Theater Mag or some-such who said that
DVD-A is more pop-oriented while classical music tends towards the SACD format,
so it depends on what the majority of you tastes run to as well.

 

<< For
example, the tremendous improvement audio CDs had over LPs was obvious
to anyone. >>

A statement like this could start some shit if there were any audiophiles
around to read it... I agree, by the way, with you... but there are those out
there who maintain that CD's 20kHz ceiling is an aberation before God and Man
the same way we feel about fullscreen crops (the dynamic range on an LP
technically IS wider).

Just a thought, certainly NOT an argument.

 

Yes, and they are braindead to think this. The basilar membrane of the
inner ear determines maximum frequency resolution...and that is
physiological and not changeable.

 

From on top of The Wall I yelled "YOU! YES YOU Wade365

Strange since I got a number of pop-oriented albums on SACD, but yeah
DVD-A has a stronger lineup for pop than SACD does. But my tastes are
more towards jazz and more mature material (not mature in the sense of
the warning label type but mature in the sense of mature song writing). I
do enjoy some of the today's stuff, as I was just listening to 3 Door Down's
latest album (my copy happens to be a SACD hybrid disc).

 

From on top of The Wall I yelled "YOU! YES YOU Raymond Chuang

By then however the video market might be a little different then the way
it is now, but at this present time as I have said before I feel that HD-DVD
at best will be the equivelent to Laserdisc. Great format, the really best
video
and sound, and aimed towards the ultra high end crowd with wallets the size
of Alaska.

 

I'm much more sanguine than you are. This is mostly because within the last
few years we're seeing more and more above US$1,000 CRT TV sets and
projection TV's supporting 720p and/or 1080i video inputs, and that means
there will at least be a base of customers to sell HD-DVD to once we see it
on the market circa 2005.

 

From on top of The Wall I yelled "YOU! YES YOU Raymond Chuang

Very good points you have made. To me its not so much of when its
available but more of it hurting the current video market... but like I
said HD-DVD will be the equivelent of Laserdisc, but that's not a bad
thing since Laserdisc did very well as a cult format.

 

<<A statement like this could start some shit if there were any
audiophiles around to read it... I agree, by the way, with you... but
there are those out there who maintain that CD's 20kHz ceiling is an
aberation before God and Man the same way we feel about fullscreen crops
(the dynamic range on an LP technically IS wider).>>


I should have said "tremendous advantages "instead of "improvements."
The obvious advantages CDs had over LPs was their small size, large
capacity, resistance to damage and ease of track accessibility. It took
several years for the sonic potential of CDs to mature.

When audio CDs were first introduced, many of them were improperly
mastered. Bad mixing and bad noise reduction techniques left sound that
pumped extraneous bass while hiss filtering caused high frequency
master-tape anomalies to fluctuate wildly. On top of that, early CD
players weren't nearly as advanced as current models.

However, the hassles of dealing with tapes as well as turntables, tone
arms and styli needed to playback comparatively-fragile vinyl disks had
been eliminated. Yet 20 years later, audiophiles still proclaim that the
LPs they play on their expensive turntables and tube amplifiers produce
far better and more natural sound than any of the "brittle-sounding" CDs
that 99% of the population prefers.