DVD-A through 2 channel setup experiment

First, this is my humble system...Decware preamp, Pioneer DVD-A/CD, Bel Canto Dac1, no name tube 60w monoblocks, B&W DM602, Audioquest cables, and factory power cords. Frankly, it sounds OK, but I am unhappy. Ok, onto the stuff.

I tried an experiment to compare DVD-A to CD. I used Deep Purple's Machine Head. I have 3 versions; the original CD release, the 25 Anniversary Remaster/Remix, and I bought the DVD-A version.

1. The original didn't sound too bad, but it had alot of background hiss and I had to crank it up a bit.

2. The Remaster sounded really good and thick and loud. Ritchie Blackmore was right up there. I did not compare the Remix version.

3. The DVD-A was a disappointment. I did everything to try to get it to sound better. I ran it straight from player to preamp, from player to DAC to preamp, changed every setting I could find on the player, and either way the bass sounded boomy and Ritchie's guitar was tinny and small. There are two versions of the songs on this CD; Surround sound and stereo. I compared both of them to the other CDs.

What happened here? What did I do wrong? Is two channel dead? Is it going the way of the LP? Do I need a true Surround Sound setup to make DVD-A disks sound their best?

Personally, I have a hard time listening to music in surround sound. I don't get the feeling of being at the concert when at a concert the music is in front of me and not all around me.

One more thing, the extra stuff on the Deep Purple DVD are a big ripoff. There are two videos on it, Lazy and Highway Star, and both of them are not in full length...AND...if you can believe it, Ritchie Blackmore is nowhere to be seen in the video. Yes, they actually show everyone and even during the guitar solos, Ritchie is not shown. What BS!!
I'm not surprised by your conclusion. Almost all of the DVD-A disks I have purchased are seriously flawed. Even with a 5.1 setup, the mixes range from hokey to annoying.
I have heard that DVD-A was a poor recording and I have
not bought it for that reason. If im not mistaken the
original recording was done with loaner equipment
and a less than perfect recording setup. My friend is a HUGE DP fan and he told me the whole story behind the recording. I think he said thats their worst one.

Excuse my "redneck sounding" analogy but i think it applies to this one:

You cant polish a turd!

I wouldent use that DVD-A for a 2ch test.
Voodoochile, a polished turd is a polished turd. Even if it is their worst recording, it is still a comparison of oranges to oranges and in this case the CD orange sounds better than the DVD-A orange. I actually think that the Remaster/Remix sounds really good, regardless of what I hear.

I understand what your saying 100%. Unfortunatly
though when they transfered that recording to DVD-A
they did very a poor job. Even DVD-A and SACD
can sound BAD. As you found out...

Try a good DVD-a like Hotel California against the
any redbook version and let me know what you think?
www.edn.com published a very good scientific article in their January 9, 2003 magazine proving that DVD-audio technology is superior to SACD. Implementation is another thing.