Is there a consensus as to blu ray sound quality?

The question was (is) are they BETTER at audio playback, better resolution in the audio domain, as they read more data because of a shorter wavelength of light?
It only seems logical, and maybe someone on this site can set me straight, that if it's reading more information then it's sending that information to the processor, so we should have better resolution of detail, therefore more harmonic structure and low level detail, all of which could or should portend more realistic sound quality. And further, once again, are any mfgrs looking to do audiophile quality blu-ray disc players aimed at both markets? Lexicon, for example, masters of digital manipulation in the studios, putting out a blu-ray player to replace their dvd player? Countless others...does anyone know?

Yes - I have seen a few audio titles published in BD (BluRay)

The production was by Lindberg Lyd of Norway, with distribution from a german company 2L

Cost was US$35 or so for the title - they have a half dozen

Neil Young is apparently releasing his entire music archive on BluRay in the next month or two - already available for preorder on Amazon but not inexpensive

This site (and perhaps others) appears to be dedicated to BluRay recordings

http://forum.blu-ray.com/forumdisplay.php?f=90

So yes its happening slowly

Depending on the master I would expect them to blow a traditional redbook disc away

Only Blu Ray and HD-DVD (bye-bye) are encoded with lossless audio (Dolby True and DTS Master). IMHO, the sound of these lossless codecs is way better than that of SDVDs, redbook CDs and even SACD.

As Ckorody wrote, audio-only BDs are coming slowly. I think the music insustry is waiting to see if consumers will change from SDVD to BDs.

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?

The Blu-Ray HD lossless formats are excellent but there are seriously few audio HD music releases. In any case, they do not blow away SACD as demonstrated by the 2L Divertimenti set which includes both. (One can argue what is better/preferable but there is no huge difference.)

As for the music on BluRay, it is generally multichannel and, no, there are no hybrid discs, afaik. Hybrid with what?

I have been writing about this, on and off, in my column: http://www.stereophile.com/musicintheround.

Kal