Thread: IS SHM~SACD The Closest We've Come To The Master Tapes?

Posts: 424
Page: prev 1 ... 32 33 34 35 36 ... 43 next

Post by audioholik May 29, 2012 (331 of 424)
raffells said:

DSD (Definite Sonic Degradation)

LOL - you couldn't be further from the truth with your trollish post.

See post 340.

Post by audioholik May 29, 2012 (332 of 424)
AmonRa said:

A very simple way of testing AD/DA converter chain (and the absolute quality of the system) is the run the AD/DA loop enough times to see clear detonation of the signal. Either measurable or audible. Has anybody done that with DSD?

Jared Sacks must have done such conversions hundreds of times. And, lo and behold, his recordings are considered absolute state-of-the-art by music lovers and audiophiles.

BTW, Hi-fi News has recently tested new KEF LS50 monitors using Jared's DSD recordings decimated to PCM (I wish they used native DSD files as well!), here's the excerpt of the review

"This speaker's ability to showcase transparently the superiority of hi-res sources compared with'standard' CD resolution 16-bit44kHz files was more than evident when played the often-mentioned recording by Channel Classics of the Budapest Festival Orchestra performing Stravinsky's Firebird Suite (our June classical album choice). 'Test' samples at 44.1, 96 and 192kHz can be downloaded at no cost from www.channelclassics.com.

Where with 44.1kHz playback the sound was clearly good enough to show that this is a splendid recording, balanced to sound open and spacious while possessing sufficient'oomph' to make the sound appear large-scale (never ceasing to cause visitors to remark, 'Wow - this little speaker has amazing bass capability...) the marked improvement when playing the 96kHz version of the piece was as clear as night and day. The orchestra sounded less'tight' and constricted, the image scale increased in width and depth, and the strings and percussion became smoother, more liquid, without the sound appearing to lose leading-edge'bite'.

MIDBAND SUPERIORIIY
Truly surprising was the imorovement observed when 'upgrading' to the 192kHz version of the track. Via my monolithic Townshend Audio Sir Calahad speakers the difference between the 96 and-192kHz files is subtle at best, while the improvement in tonal colour was more readily obvious via the diminutive KEF- testament to the LS50's fabulous midband clarity. Perhaps I should describe the
difference between the two source files as more 'vital' via the LS50. In that it appeared to further open up the image and highlight this baby monitor's ability to sound wa-ay bigger than it is."
http://www.kef.com/uploads/files/en/review/LS50_HFN_0712.pdf

Post by DSD May 29, 2012 (333 of 424)
Raffells why so negative? You have 238 Recommendations and have reviewed 168 SACDs. Did you find something you like better? If so, perhaps if you shared we would know where you are coming from.

I can't speak for others but it's not "blind faith" as ever since the invention of CD and Sony's false advertising of "perfect sound forever" I have not had any faith in Sony. I love DSD and SACD in spite of Sony. This is based on listening only, I also like high resolution PCM but not as much as DSD or analog.

To answer the thread's question, if we ever get a PURE DSD recording on a single-layer SHM-SACD, that would be likely be the closest to the master.

Post by tailspn May 29, 2012 (334 of 424)
raffells said:

Hi Tom,
The title of thread is ,The closest etc.
This implies using this in the process of sound replay, which includes a mandatory use of DSD technology as you and at least a few others clearly understand.

It does?

Sorry Dave, I have no interest in your data that shows the results of pushing DSD (or any system) into modes of operation that it was neither intended, nor actually intelligently used. I fail to see how your hypothesis applies to the remastering of old analog tapes, but I have no personal experience in that area. Perhaps you should address your concerns to people who actually do that. They'd be easy to locate, and they might entertain your interest, if presented in a non condescending manor. I seriously doubt however, any of the people doing these restorations use multi level DSD conversions in the way you imply. But if they do, as I said earlier, don't buy their stuff.

I use and champion DSD for original recordings, particularly ITU multi-channel. It's for me, its ability to capture and preserve the details and spatial cues that well chosen and placed microphones deliver from musicians in an acoustic place. And for which the ear/brain is so sensitive.

But for me, your campaign: over and out.

Enjoy, and have a great Olympics!

Post by audioholik May 29, 2012 (335 of 424)
tailspn said:

It does?

Sorry Dave, I have no interest in your data that shows the results of pushing DSD (or any system) into modes of operation that it was neither intended, nor actually intelligently used.

+1

Like I said, the proposed test has no relevancy to the real world.

Post by audioholik May 29, 2012 (336 of 424)
tailspn said:

I fail to see how your hypothesis applies to the remastering of old analog tapes, but I have no personal experience in that area.

There's no question about it that DSD is capable of producing superb sonics when the analog->DSD chain is of highest quality.

"It sounded exactly like the analog, both tone wise and ambiance wise. Very impressive. "

http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showpost.php?p=4596856&postcount=18

^That's high praise from a mastering engineer who spent his entire life restoring and remastering analog tapes.

Post by audioholik May 29, 2012 (337 of 424)
raffells said:

Yippee.Your nearly there.

.

Post by tailspn May 29, 2012 (338 of 424)
audioholik said:

Jared Sacks must have done such conversions hundreds of times. And, lo and behold, his recordings are considered absolute state-of-the-art by music lovers and audiophiles.

If you mean multiple successive AD/DA conversions to produce an original recording, I know of no one recording classical/acoustic music who ever does that. Once the individual or mixed microphones are A/D converted, they stay in a digital format until you play them. Pop/Rock may be different, but no one is selling or representing the sonics of that as being real anyway.

But Jared's process is more "purest" than most. He researched and invested in the best purpose built custom analog hardware he could find, from microphone cables, mic pres and mixing board. He then establishes a stereo session mix, even going so far as to copy the individual mixer mic fader attenuations back into the mic pres, so he can then remove the faders from the mixing paths. He then archives that mix, along with each mic pre output (for safety) in DSD on his Pyramix Workstation. The resulting session takes are then edited on the Pyramix (reverting to DXD for the editing interval), and authored for SACD manufacturing. For stereo, there is little or no mastering, as the levels are already set at the session in analog.

For the multi-channel mix, Jared combines the MS center array channels into one, and prints that, along with the L&R ambience mic channels into the Center, Left Surround and Right Surround tracks.

But Jared's sonic success is primarily from his years of experience, and his musicians' ear, to select the correct microphones, and place them to match the music piece, the venue, and the musicians.

Post by audioholik May 29, 2012 (339 of 424)
tailspn said:

If you mean multiple successive AD/DA conversions to produce an original recording, I know of no one recording classical/acoustic music who ever does that.

I meant to say hundreds of AD/DA conversions on hundreds of SACDs.

>Once the individual or mixed microphones are A/D converted, they stay in a digital format until you play them.

I realize that once he's made an A/D conversion with the Grimm he has the most transparent DSD capture possible and another D/A conversion takes place during the SACD playback.

Post by raffells May 29, 2012 (340 of 424)
tailspn said:

It does?

Sorry Dave, I have no interest in your data that shows the results of pushing DSD (or any system) into modes of operation that it was neither intended,
But for me, your campaign: over and out.

Enjoy, and have a great Olympics!

Sorry, what you have shown is you have no interest really in any test that shows up quite quickly the deficiencies of the DSD process especially against pcm hi rez. This was to be expected.
Once again, your wandering off into imaginary statement " remastering of tapes" shows your desperation in avoiding the test and the reason was clearly identified in advance by several of the PCM recording engineers who find the DSD process not good enough except for a very limited number of situations.
As they stated it may ok for the upper frequency deficient listener.
Going back to the original question.The test results would show that problems with noise and lower "us" sampling etc is detectable both by hearing and by looking at piccies.
The rather luddite attitude shown by not allowing very clear visual displays speaks volumes. In many ways it negates a scientific demonstration and therefore progress and therefore allows greater effect of the opinions of extremists who are not historically known for their scientific accuracy.
The fact that SH or any one person states anything is never concrete scientific proof except to the blind faith brigade. It is only an opinion and failing to understand that shows how credible or not , that persons postings are.
Interesting that one person states no one would do the test because etc and then the other contradicts this with,"Jared does it hundreds of times."
Error upon error.? Doesnt really matter.

Well now the bad news, The attitude by a few people on this site has had a detrimental effect on certain people who had been asked to consider releasing sacds from their hirez PCM masters and some still yet to be made.
No Tailspn not from tapes.
They had a number of issues they were unhappy with.This site included.
( One has to admit their predictions were somewhat correct.
ok one persons real technical contribution seems in inverse proportion to the volume of his post and I doubt if he will even be able to understand this comment or the damage he may have done to the cause.He doesnt seem to understand much)
A number of threads on this site and the attitude towards companies that had already released sacds was sited.Particularly the Chandos debarcle where those awfully nice people at HD Tracks attempted re sale of a genuine original 24/96 recording that had been re engineered.(Yes many thanks Arnaldo you t***)
A lot of detective work was needed on this to find out what really happened and it was commented upon that for someone who listens with cans, "he is in no position to ask for anything above cd frequencies".(ask an Audiologist why)

So its pretty clear that very few minor DSD extremists who seem to love all that "us" and rolled off noise and rolled off treble accuracy have soiled it for the majority.
So quoting the comments of one extremist, that if you prefer the technically superior and historically worldwide vastly favoured pcm system you are negative.? Great help to me that was.
This is another absolute classic case of blind faith,being unable to see the significance of her own comment.
Then again , the normal response that includes" what she prefers" as usual, it has little or nothing to do with the thread. YET AGAIN.
A preference for tube microfonics with cheap Chinese innards and faulty implementation of the circuitry once considered her "reference" gives little credibility either..Its great for guitar amplification but not for serious hi fidelity.
The history and histrionics of several years of bias and obsession using pretty mediocre equipment means very little to the people who suggested I challenge the jaundiced statements the above header alludes to.
Though I and most of the others do agree with the opinion of Sony and these people could even site better historic reasons.
The fact I may have reviewed x number (you got that figure wrong) of sacds does not mean I am obliged to praise all things DSD,Unless you want to consider the fact I did not review over 9 times that amount that have passed through my hands and I did not consider them worth a review.
test
As some high end musicians and people associated with issuing discs stated, prior to me presenting these set of responses and test suggestions.
"The more you open the door to facts on that site,especially DSD , the more rubbish gets in, perhaps a bit like its self generated noise."
note use of quotation marks.

So it is sadly probably "over and out" for that avenue.Thanks.

Tom,I probably will enjoy the Olympics even though Im off to Rome when its on
and touching the torch was a tremendous thrill.
Four great music venues in five days and some very nice knowledgeable
musical people was even more rewarding.
That was becoming very near impossible on what was described recently as a sometimes fanatics site. Too many good ones have gone Others like me are going the way of cleaner high resolution.
Bye

Page: prev 1 ... 32 33 34 35 36 ... 43 next

new post

primephonic