Naturally I'm no insider on the subject of high def video discs being used as audio ONLY discs... but does that really make much sense overall?
I'm thinking the BR disc format was set into place for it's advantages in storage space which yielded the province of greater video fidelity or resolution. I sort of think the better audio came along as a matter of fact given the greater available disc space.
I seem to feel the format was pointed. Directed towards an appeal to mass market video.
I'd also be curious to know at this point what the numbers reflect as to BR sales v. rentals. $30 - $35 a pop seems to me as inordinate IMO, but it might be justified given the recent hikes in overall retail pricing. That's really too bad.
As high a price I consider BR discs being, it would be still greater to have to pay that amount for solely audio reproduction, wouldn't it?
AS to Neil young's forthcoming releases... I pray if these are any of his golden era productions they got cleaned up really well. Neil young, among others recordings' sound like they were done in a Bathroom or phone booth somewhere. they are mostly pretty noisey, eg., After the Gold Rush, Zuma, Decades, Journey Through the Past, and some other earlier works with 'Crazy Horse'. Many of his efforts weren't produced with high end audio in mind what so ever and they just don't sound too good when played on better gear.
yeah... for $35 I should hope so.
BTW... are these supposed BR audio discs done in stereo only, or are they done in multi ch? or is there some choice as in hybrid discs?
Also, are you Blue Ray owners using just the HDMI OR are you using the analog paths?