Did you get the Dial of Destiny soundtrack on the CD format before it sold out?

[BB-8 3,481]

I'm wondering how many of us will be leaving the original CD sealed and continue listening to the (burnt) MP3s.

[Jurassic Shark 12,083]

Why not FLAC?

[JTN 2,038]

14 hours ago, Jay said:

I'm at work, I'm not at my house

That’s no excuse.

2 hours ago, BB-8 said:

I'm wondering how many of us will be leaving the original CD sealed and continue listening to the (burnt) MP3s.

By the time we get the CD, there won’t be players to play it on. 

[Pawel P. 738]

2 hours ago, BB-8 said:

I'm wondering how many of us will be leaving the original CD sealed and continue listening to the (burnt) MP3s.

 

Not me. At home, I almost always listen to music from CDs. Sometimes Spotify Premium - mainly new stuff I want to check. And let people say what they want, CDs sound better than streaming on my audio system.

[JTN 2,038]

7 minutes ago, Pawel P. said:

Not me. At home, I almost always listen to music from CDs.

Me too. If one day I get to have DoD on CD, that's the only way I will listen to it. 

 

8 minutes ago, Pawel P. said:

CDs sound better than streaming on my audio system

[Jurassic Shark 12,083]

1 hour ago, Pawel P. said:

CDs sound better than streaming on my audio system.

 

Of course it does when the streaming is of less than CD quality. 

[Jay 37,372]

I opened mine and listened to it through my CD player last night

 

No skips or glitches!

[JWisgreatestlivingcomposer 43]

3 hours ago, Pawel P. said:

 

Not me. At home, I almost always listen to music from CDs. Sometimes Spotify Premium - mainly new stuff I want to check. And let people say what they want, CDs sound better than streaming on my audio system.

Agreed!

11 hours ago, Brando said:

My copy arrived today without any damage!

I'm happy to hear you got yours in great condition!

How did Disney package the CD? (As per the discussion here the last few days...)

11 hours ago, Brando said:

My copy arrived today without any damage!

 

1 hour ago, Jay said:

I opened mine and listened to it through my CD player last night

 

No skips or glitches!

That's great!

[Jay 37,372]

6 minutes ago, JWisgreatestlivingcomposer said:

How did Disney package the CD? (As per the discussion here the last few days...

 

It was in a standard bubble mailer envelope, folded in half for double-protection on one side.

[BB-8 3,481]

2 hours ago, Jay said:

I opened mine and listened to it through my CD player last night

 

No skips or glitches!

How's the dynamic-range balance between tracks?

[JWisgreatestlivingcomposer 43]

35 minutes ago, Jay said:

 

It was in a standard bubble mailer envelope, folded in half for double-protection on one side.

At least they did something to try and enhance protection! Better than just dumping it in the envelope and shipping it out. Still not the ideal way to ship CDs, though...

[Jay 37,372]

17 minutes ago, BB-8 said:

How's the dynamic-range balance between tracks?

 

>shrug<

Everything sounded the same as what I'm used to from listening to the streaming release to me

[Brando 1,864]

1 hour ago, JWisgreatestlivingcomposer said:

How did Disney package the CD? (As per the discussion here the last few days...)

 

1 hour ago, Jay said:

It was in a standard bubble mailer envelope, folded in half for double-protection on one side.

Yea, in one of these bad boys: https://www.amazon.com/UCGOU-Bubble-Mailers-Envelopes-Shipping/dp/B06XJ3ML2T

[Jay 37,372]

Yeah

[BB-8 3,481]

2 hours ago, Jay said:

 

>shrug<

Everything sounded the same as what I'm used to from listening to the streaming release to me

Could be that burning MP3s onto CD is the problem if there is some kind of filtering software measuring spikes within tracks and adjusting to the range margins of each track.

[Marian Schedenig 8,207]

At least they put a massive sticker for protection* on the envelope.

(This one contained two Hunchbacks)

[Marian Schedenig 8,207]

 

*) …and patriotism.

[Andy 4,141]

When I obsessively check my tracking updates I get this…

 

 

 

[Foxfan 128]

21 hours ago, Brando said:

My copy arrived today without any damage!

 

Given how rare a physical copy is: "It belongs in a museum!"

[Brando 1,864]

37 minutes ago, Foxfan said:

 

Given how rare a physical copy is: "It belongs in a museum!"

Too late, I just opened it!

[mstrox 6,651]

I just got mine.

[KittBash 282]

Mine has made the journey to Atlantic Canada safe and sound.

 

On 26/07/2023 at 11:09 AM, Jay said:

 

It was in a standard bubble mailer envelope, folded in half for double-protection on one side.

 

I was expecting this same thing but mine came in a box, I thought, "hey must have been because I ordered a couple of other things alongside it, cool!" 

Then I opened the box and I had to laugh as there it was...... a standard bubble mailer envelope, folded in half for double-protection on one side LOL 

 

Hey at least it came without a scratch! 

Maybe the box was because it was an international order??

[Jay 37,372]

Must be

[Bellosh 3,419]

So they basically just forgot to fold my mailer....

 

 

 

 

 

[Bespin 8,484]

2 hours ago, KittBash said:

Mine has made the journey to Atlantic Canada safe and sound.

 

 

I was expecting this same thing but mine came in a box, I thought, "hey must have been because I ordered a couple of other things alongside it, cool!" 

Then I opened the box and I had to laugh as there it was...... a standard bubble mailer envelope, folded in half for double-protection on one side LOL 

 

Hey at least it came without a scratch! 

Maybe the box was because it was an international order??

 

You probably have the only copy of that CD that exists in Canada!

(As I write this, I am calculating the number of hours it takes to drive to New Brunswick...)

[TolkienSS 407]

I have mine

[BobaMike 17]

Mine arrived today!

 

I wasn't sure if I had ordered it- I thought I had when it first went on sale, yet when I looked because it ended up being sold out,  I couldn't find any email confirmation..and then I went and sent a polite but irritated email to Disney about not being able to buy it.  Oh well!

[GlastoEls 563]

16 minutes ago, BobaMike said:

Mine arrived today!

 

I wasn't sure if I had ordered it- I thought I had when it first went on sale, yet when I looked because it ended up being sold out,  I couldn't find any email confirmation..and then I went and sent a polite but irritated email to Disney about not being able to buy it.  Oh well!

Hilarious!

 

 

 

[thx99 1,740]

1 hour ago, BobaMike said:

Mine arrived today!

 

I wasn't sure if I had ordered it- I thought I had when it first went on sale, yet when I looked because it ended up being sold out,  I couldn't find any email confirmation..and then I went and sent a polite but irritated email to Disney about not being able to buy it.  Oh well!

[LB Makes Stuff 240]

I oughta check DiscDogs and EBay, maybe I’ll have a shot

[Marian Schedenig 8,207]

23 hours ago, Brando said:

23 hours ago, Foxfan said:

Given how rare a physical copy is: "It belongs in a museum!"

Too late, I just opened it!

 

Have you *seen* some of the stuff they display at museums?

[Manakin Skywalker 4,897]

2 minutes ago, LB Makes Stuff said:

I oughta check DiscDogs and EBay, maybe I’ll have a shot

 

[Brando 1,864]

31 minutes ago, Marian Schedenig said:

 

Have you *seen* some of the stuff they display at museums?

I think the last time I’ve been to a museum was 2016 and that was at the Smithsonian. They have Lincoln’s top hat so they could have a CD section 

[Jay 37,372]

Only 34 out of 126 voters (27%) successfully got a copy from Disney Emporium

 

78 voters (62%) missed out

 

14 voters (11%) didn't want one anyway

[dtw42 61]

Disney have not merely dropped the ball on this one, they have dropped the ball, stomped on it until it burst and deflated, and then pretended there never was a ball.

[Jay 37,372]

They made 4 major mistakes

 

1 - limiting the amount of CDs pressed to a much smaller number than the actual demand for a CD edition

2 - not making it clear that the edition sold on their website was limited to begin with, and not unlimited

3 - not making it clear that their website would be the only place it could be purchased

4 - not deciding to press more once it became abundantly clear there's a demand for many more copies than they initially pressed

 

It's too late to do anything about 1-3, but they could easily do 4 if they wanted to.

 

And every day that goes by without an announcement of a repressing makes it less likely it will ever get one, I think.

[Marian Schedenig 8,207]

7 minutes ago, Jay said:

And every day that goes by without an announcement of a repressing makes it less likely it will ever get one, I think.

 

Basically true, but keep in mind that all the standard replies state that their policy is not to reveal any information about possible future stock. *If* they press another run, I wouldn't be surprised if they just do it out of the blue, and probably not right away (they seem to have a rather limited CD production pipeline, judging by how long some of the Legacy releases seem to take before coming back in stock).

[Bespin 8,484]

In fact, when you produce such a limited release, the correct way to sell it would have been to organize a lottery.

 

Anyway, I can't wait for their 500-copy limited release of the movie on Blu-ray!

[crumbs 14,318]

9 minutes ago, Bespin said:

Anyway, I can't wait for their 500-copy limited release of the movie on Blu-ray!

 

You're more right than you know.

 

Semi-related news: Disney discontinuing physical media in Australia and New Zealand.

 

Which means Dial of Destiny isn't even being released on Bluray in Australia (GOTG Vol. 3 will be the final Disney title released on home video here).

[Marian Schedenig 8,207]

17 minutes ago, crumbs said:

Semi-related news: Disney discontinuing physical media in Australia and New Zealand.

 

Again? Didn't they just dis-discontinue releasing their films on Blu-ray?

[crumbs 14,318]

25 minutes ago, Marian Schedenig said:

 

Again? Didn't they just dis-discontinue releasing their films on Blu-ray?

 

It seems like physical media is being phased out by regions. It won't be long before this happens in the US market.

[Marian Schedenig 8,207]

11 minutes ago, crumbs said:

It seems like physical media is being phased out by regions. It won't be long before this happens in the US market.

 

This is bad. I understand the demise of physical audio releases (although I'm sad about it), but streaming reliability and quality has a long way to go to catch up with Blu-ray (and 4K even more so I imagine).

[Jay 37,372]

Completely agreed.

 

The physical CD format is from the 80s, when it was deemed 16bits and 44.1khz was good enough to go with for consumer release and it turns out yes, 40+ years later, those quality levels are still perfectly fine to go with.  Plenty of online digital music stores sell music at identical quality to what is on redbook CDs.  While many online digital music stores also sell higher quality music (24 bits, sometimes 32 bits / 48khz, 96khz, 198khz, sometimes higher), I completely understand why physical formats that tried to replace CDs like SACD and DVD-Audio never took over and replaced redbook CDs as the next ubiquitous format.  The upgrade in quality is just not relevant enough to the average joe, through a combination of many people not even hearing it and not having the right equipment, or desire to upgrade equipment, to even output it properly to begin with.  Additionally, replacing vinyl records or cassettes meant replacing media that was no longer playing the same as it was when first purchased with new media that played identically every time (barring severe scratches), while upgrading to SACD meant no change in that aspect, only a sound quality gain they might not notice.  I am glad the SACD format lives on a a niche market for the subset of consumers who do want this quality level.

 

Video, meanwhile, kept getting better and better.  The DVD format of 854x480 resolution and especially mid-90s compression technology was almost already outdated by the time it arrived and replaced VHS.  1920x1080 and late 2000s compression technology were huge upgrades, but it became a lot larder for the average joe to want to replace their movie collection again after already having replaced VHS with DVD.  Much as the CD format is "good enough" for the average joe with music, the DVD format became "good enough" for many people for video as well.  Not only that, but streaming was just around the corner, and many people adopted the idea of paying subscriptions to immediatly flick on movies included with subscriptions than maintaining a physical collection in their homes.  The fact that streaming content is compressed more than the data on blu ray discs was also not noticeable to many average joes, making the next upgrade to 4K discs even harder to gain traction especially with streaming services now being the norm in everyone's home by the time it launched and most people's TVs not being big enough for the 1080p to 4K difference to really be seen.  There are other benefits to 4K discs like HDR, but again the average joe probably doesn't care or have the equipment for it.  I had hoped the studios would embrace the 4K disc format for the market that still wants physical movies, but Disney abandoning it is a huge blow to that idea.

 

Maybe things will change back if the streaming bubble bursts and each studio can't run their own streaming service anymore and the remaining ones start getting content from muliple studios blended together again.  Who knows

[Holko 9,529]

Streaming is also sometimes just not even available. You buy a DVD/bluray/4k, you have a player or software to play it, you put it in, the movie's there and plays (for the couple of decades until the disc physically works at least).

 

As far as I know for movies there's no widespread equivalent to digital music downloads whatsoever, you can't buy the latest mainstream moves as a 1080p/4k mp4 download where you get a file to keep forever like you can buy CD quality FLACs where you receive the exact same data as would be on a CD. With streaming you're completely dependant on the momentary whims of the rights situations between megacorporations, you now have to spend time figuring out what service you can watch them on, if you even can at the moment, if you even can at all, if that service is even available in your region, if that content is even available on that service in your region, maybe one day the owner at the moment decides to start censoring movies that don't represent their current ideology (which is mostly bullshit anyway, they all have the same 100% profitgrowth-oriented corporate hypercapitalist ideology), replacing old good restoration with new worse ones, or just make it unavailable to watch.

[enderdrag64 624]

28 minutes ago, Jay said:

The physical CD format is from the 80s, when it was deemed 16bits and 44.1khz was good enough to go with for consumer release and it turns out yes, 40+ years later, those quality levels are still perfectly fine to go with.  Plenty of online digital music stores sell music at identical quality to what is on redbook CDs.  While many online digital music stores also sell higher quality music (24 bits, sometimes 32 bits / 48khz, 96khz, 198khz, sometimes higher), I completely understand why physical formats that tried to replace CDs like SACD and DVD-Audio never took over and replaced redbook CDs as the next ubiquitous format.  The upgrade in quality is just not relevant enough to the average joe, through a combination of many people not even hearing it and not having the right equipment, or desire to upgrade equipment, to even output it properly to begin with.  Additionally, replacing vinyl records or cassettes meant replacing media that was no longer playing the same as it was when first purchased with new media that played identically every time (barring severe scratches), while upgrading to SACD meant no change in that aspect, only a sound quality gain they might not notice.  I am glad the SACD format lives on a a niche market for the subset of consumers who do want this quality level.

Not to mention, it's debatable whether anyone can even hear a difference between 16/44.1 and 24/48, and a certainty that no one can hear anything greater than 24/48. The difference between 16/44.1 and 24/48 is so minimal it's not worth a format change. And anyway, such a format change would've probably been better suited for something like introducing lossless compression to allow fitting double the music on a single disc

[Jay 37,372]

Oh I dunno, I think on my setup, with a FiiO DAC and quality Sony headphones, I can tell the difference between ACTUAL 24/48 content in its native file and a version downmixed to 16/44.1

 

But of course, listening through the DAC built into my laptop, through bluetooth in my car, casually on small speakers or through earbuds, etc, of COURSE 16/44.1 is good enough and having 24/48 files stored on those devices would be a waste of space, indeed.

 

But I do find it a bummer that our specialty label heroes working on these amazing master recordings of film scores get to master their new albums in 24/48 or higher, but then the labels can only sell their work to us in 16/44.1.  I wish there was a way to sell the 24/48 to those who want it

[Andy 4,141]

Perhaps the mighty Nolan can still wield some power. 
 

Quote

“There’s much less compression, we control the color, brightness, and all these things. Streaming is like broadcasting a film, we don’t have much control on how it goes out.”

 
Source

[enderdrag64 624]

20 minutes ago, Jay said:

Oh I dunno, I think on my setup, with a FiiO DAC and quality Sony headphones, I can tell the difference between ACTUAL 24/48 content in its native file and a version downmixed to 16/44.1

 

But of course, listening through the DAC built into my laptop, through bluetooth in my car, casually on small speakers or through earbuds, etc, of COURSE 16/44.1 is good enough and having 24/48 files stored on those devices would be a waste of space, indeed.

 

But I do find it a bummer that our specialty label heroes working on these amazing master recordings of film scores get to master their new albums in 24/48 or higher, but then the labels can only sell their work to us in 16/44.1.  I wish there was a way to sell the 24/48 to those who want it

I used to think based on this article that 24/48 couldn't be heard at all vs a proper 16/44.1 down-conversion.

I've since learned what dither actually is (random noise added to the high frequencies) and I believe that such noise should be audible since those frequencies are audible. If your 16/44.1 file was dithered it's possible that that's the difference you can hear. I would be curious to know if you could tell apart an undithered 16/44.1 file. But then again, for reasons I don't entirely understand that article above claims that the noise floor of a 16-bit file lowers with dither, so an undithered file might actually still have less dynamic range than the 24-bit file. 

[Andy 4,141]

Mine arrived damaged. Just say no to Crack. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯. Oh well, I feel very fortunate. 

[Jurassic Shark 12,083]

It's an original crack, the way JW wanted it.