A couple of questions...which format do you think will be around in 5 years?

Second question. How would one extract the data from either format to a harddrive and if one was to try and compress that data into Ogg Vorbis or MP3, how big a file would one have? Would you first have to compress to a 16 bit 44.1 kHz wav file?

One reason for my first question, is that I just bought a player that can handle both formats but would hate to get stuck with a dead one, in 5 years....dunno.

I do know that Sony owns the SACD format and also owns a lot of music. Can they withhold conversion of what they own to DVD-Audio?

I think it will still be CD



There is no way. Both new formats are still physically unrippable.
You'll have to rip the standard audio part, that is also present for compatibility : AC3 for DVD-A, like ripping the soundtrack of a video DVD, and regular audio CD for SACD.

Discussion about SACD : http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....=ST&f=21&t=2934

I agree -- it will be the cd -- I think.

* There are no major improvements in sound quality -- unless the music industry decides to make lousy CDs on purpose (don't rule this out).

* SACD and DVD-A are not more convenient medias - on the contrary: They are only playable in special players -- not in computers or mobile devices.

* SACD and DVD-A players can play ordinary CDs -- there are not going to be fewer CD players around.

* If the music industry decides to stop producing CDs, a lot of people will turn to the Internet and download even more music -- or visit the nearest dark alley.

* The 5.1 sound feature of the medias is doomed. The current 5.1 setup for movies is not suitable for music. How many loudspeakers will people accept in their living room?

Yeah I'm not really interested in 5.1 sound for music. Why?

I'm old enough to remember Surround Sound. If it was classical, the engineers would put you in the middle of the orchestra instead of the best seats in the house. For rock, it was simply sound effects. Something to make your head spin.

Floyd could probably have went somewhere with it.

As to the formats in question...Some of what you posted above would be my point as to why the recording companies may go that route...it would be harder to copy their music.

Now I've read through that thread that Pio2001 pointed me too. Wow...interesting.

I wasn't aware you could make a wav 24 bit and 96kHz...

How would you compress such a monster into an mp3 or Ogg? Would it still have to be converted to 16 bit 44.1?