CD vs DVD audio??

Does anyone know the difference between the music quality? I understand that the music is compressed (or something like that) when put onto disc, but I was hoping someone might know the specifics. Thanks.
so, what is your understanding of which format is compressed (or something like that)? and what do you mean by "music quality"? are you referring, that is, to the quality of performance or the sonic quality of the "pressing"? do you have any particular dvd-a's versus redbook cd's in mind re: "specifics"? -cfb
Well since I bought a new Panasonic DVD player that also plays DVD-Audio I too was curious about the sound quality and ordered ERIC JOHNSON - AH VIA MUSICOM on DVD-A and found out for myself what the difference was in sound . I took the cd version and put it in the Mark Levinson NO. 37 cd transport and then put in DVD-A in the Panasonic and listened to it back to back . Everything I read is true the DVD-AUDIO sound is better with more details coming from your surround speakers which is kinda odd at first but you get used to it . And then when you switch back to cd then it sounds kinda flat in comparison . Another interesting thing is that the volume level of the DVD-Audio when compared to cd is a lot higher. When switching back and forth between the No. 37 and the Panasonic the volume of the DVD-A is a lot louder . One other interesting thing is that the DVD-A menu has three different modes 1. DOLBY DIGITAL 5.1 2. DOLBY DIGITAL 2 channel 3 . Advanced Resolution My advice is to skip the Advanced Resolution mode because it sounds like crap!
Well my understanding is that with the DVD format they can pack more information than on a cd therefore the sound will have more detail . Well it is kinda funny that my cd player which costs 10 times as much as my DVD player has better sound with the DVD-A but when I placed the same disc I had in the Levinson in the Panasonic then the truth was revealed that the cd sound from the Panasonic was that of a cheap cd player ! Judging from what I have heard the future looks bright for DVD-Audio . Just hope all the discs are not so expensive in the future! JB
First, neither CD nor DVD/A is compressed. CD has a fixed word length and sampling rate: 16/44.1. DVD/A 's offer much higher resolution (although keep in mind that they don't have to--a recording could use all that storage space to increase playing time or the number of channels, rather than the resolution).

On a technical level, the benefits of higher resolution are debatable. Also, direct comparisons are tricky, because you don't know whether the CD and DVD versions of any recording were identically mastered. It wouldn't take much EQ to swamp any perceivable difference in resolution.

Finally, louder almost always sounds better. I wonder what JB's impression would be if he tried a comparison after level-matching his CD and DVD machines. I'd bet the differences would be a lot more subtle.
As long as you have a good d/a processor on board, the difference between CD and DVD-A is like AM Radio to FM Stereo. Not just a small but an undeniably huge difference! I have a standard 5.1 setup with a simple Onkyo receiver (TX-DS474). The DVD player is a new Panasonic DVD-CP72. Even at low volume you can hear the entire range of frequencies, this is not common with a CD source. By using the newer D/A processor in the DVD player and not the amp, I get an exceptional sound with DVD-A discs utilizing the 96/24bit process (Advanced Resolution). Just like CD’s there is a huge difference of quality between DVD Audio titles. Some are dynamic and full, others are mediocre at best. The good news is that there are going be a huge number of titles released this year (2003) and the price of DVD-A is going down. (Disturbed latest “Believe” DVD Audio for $16.99 at Tower Records)
The reason some people have a problem with Advanced Resolution is their receiver tries to accommodate the higher resolution by down sampling. Most DVD-A discs have a secondary 5.1 Dolby track. When the Dolby track is played the receiver uses its internal processor if you have the Optical or Coaxial digital input. However, if you use the 6 discrete analog outs on the back of your DVD player you will be using the onboard D/A processor. And yes, cables DO make a difference.
The biggest drawback to DVD Audio is, it makes the rest of my CDs sound compressed, dull and flat. It also seems that Warner Bros. is the only major record label releasing DVD-A. So I sit, hope and wait for the future of DVD Audio.
The area DVD-A really shines is in multichannel with complex source material.. what i mean by that is recordings with many instruments playing at once. There is no denying the added sense of space and sound quality. I have a very good CD front end but i get much better more natural midrange with DVD-A.. hell everything is better. As for 2ch i dont think the benefits are as big. The big complaint with
DVD-A around here is the way the extra channels are utilized... i have to agree that some of multichannel releases are annoying with the way they use the back channels but on the other hand on some of the "good ones" i have never heard music sound more real and natural. As far as setup goes... If your willing to shell out the Frog$ for a good multichannel amp or whatever it takes and you add speakers capable of handling the back channels properly it
can be a beautiful thing.

I hope it catches on also..
For what ever it's worth my kids Pioneer DV-440 DVD player sounds better playing 2 channel DVD's than CD's.