|
|
|
|
|
|
DSD said:
I didn't believe it then and I don't believe a word of it now! I wouldn't be so kind as to say outdated information, Öhman's presents misinformation. At no time is DSD noise at -40dB in the ultrasonic region, I have Audacity and measure this stuff myself, it is -90dB or better at 50kHz, and I have some Telarc DSD recorded SACDs where the ultrasonic noise is -140dB at 50kHz.
Raffells has polluted yet another thread with more anti-DSD and anti-SACD propaganda. I don't know what Raffells is trying to pull but it won't work.
During the days of format wars (SACD vs DVD-A) there were many articles written by press-titutes simply for the purpose of misinforming and confusing people about SACD. I'm fully aware of that.
Why would anyone want to bring back the misinformation disease yet again?
|
|
|
Post by DSD June 11, 2012 (53 of 366)
|
|
raffells said:
...SACD has not more resolution than CD above 10kHz...
Lies and misleading measurements, CD sound is getting better but it still sounds cold and strident especially with string instruments played "arco" with a bow. Take your anti-SACD propaganda somewhere else, you will get NO converts here.
I like DSD because it sounds smoother and more analog-like than PCM. Although I do like 24/96 PCM it doesn't come close to the sonic realism and the feeling of being in the presence of the performers as DSD does.
I don't come to SA-CD.net to see SACD and DSD constantly attacked, I want to know about new SACDs and new 'POSITIVE' developments such as the Grimm AD1.
|
|
|
Post by steviev June 11, 2012 (54 of 366)
|
|
DSD said:
... CD sound is getting better but it still sounds cold and strident especially with string instruments played "argo" style. Take your anti-SACD propaganda somewhere else, you will get NO converts here.
I like DSD "BECAUSE" it sounds smoother and more analog-like than PCM. Although I do like 24/96 PCM it doesn't come close to the sonic realism and the feeling of being in the presence of the performers as DSD does.
Just cut the treble a bit (okay, A LOT) and most CDs will sound as warm and fuzzy as any old LP or sock.
Argo? I thought it was "arco."
Oh yeah, and:
SACD RULES!
|
|
|
Post by DSD June 11, 2012 (55 of 366)
|
|
steviev said:
I thought it was "arco."
You are correct, I fixed my post. Thanks! /(*_*)\
|
|
|
|
|
|
DSD said:
Take your anti-SACD propaganda somewhere else, you will get NO converts here.
Fully agree, we should be encouraging SACD labels to upgrade their DSD converters ultimately making our SACDs sound better, instead of suggesting reverting back to pcm (truly hilarious idea). I heard many SACDs sourced from pcm and none of them sounded as good as native Grimm DSD recordings.
|
|
|
Post by Arnaldo June 12, 2012 (57 of 366)
|
|
jeff3948 said:
OK. I heard from Chandos. Here is their response:
[...] Chandos itself only has equipment to record in 24/96. Recordings done for us by outside people sometimes use DSD.
Therefore we cannot always promise DSD. We are very clear on our packaging now to indicate which SACDs are recorded in which format as in the past there was a confusion between recording in DSD and processed in DSD. All SACDs have to be processed in DSD but can be recorded in any format, but of course the higher the resolution the better which is why Chandos uses 24/96.
Dean Austin
Chandos Records Limited
My responding e-mail to the one above was this:
Are you saying that even the SACDs that say recorded in DSD where Ralph Couzens, employee and one of the founders of Chandos, was the recording engineer were actually recorded in PCM 24bit/96kHz? For instance, the recent Delius SACD (CHSA 5094) says on the back "Recorded in DSD" and inside the booklet it says that Ralph Couzens was the recording engineer. Ralph Couzens is not an outside company [...] So, was the Delius SACD recorded in DSD or PCM 24/96? Please let me know.
Chandos' reply reads like an attempt to redress their reputation, without openly admitting any intentional wrongdoing. The fact is that after being outed on these pages for a few now (in)famous "Recorded in DSD" claims, they seem to be trying to abide by stricter disclosure practices. In other words, it's better to play it safe and label all of their new releases 96/24, irrespective of whether they were in-house or outside projects, recorded in DSD or high-rez PCM. This policy appears to be symptomatic of their past failure to realize that an original DSD recording converted to 96/24 for editing, could not have been advertised and sold as pure DSD. In the meantime, looking forward to their "clarification."
|
|
|
Post by raffells June 12, 2012 (58 of 366)
|
|
DSD said:
Lies and misleading measurements
Yep, you would know about that.
As usual no evidence.
I do feel like Im watching King Canute up to his knees in water with someone bouncing up and down on the beach behind him saying "I want I want" the sand smoothed out and all pebbles removed?
If you cannot understand the message,This site is not about you by now.
Or maybe better still " Im appearing at a last Luddite meeting as the messenger."
Well if you want to shoot at this messenger ,so be it.
If you want to shoot at those doing harm to the last dregs of sacd new areas of production then look no further that the telephone kiosk of winging posters on the threads.
Yep, ...
telling high quality recording engineers who have used exceptional equipment and heard their 24/96 etc results processed by DSD64 and understand why its not really suitable for them are told that the 1 bit chips are the real cause of the demise ? By whom?...and oh yes they are scattered about all those sacd players. Doh.
once upon a time sacd had no real competition.How things have changed.
Seemed pointless asking anyone to go that way nowadays.
Its hardly likely that CERTAIN Types of music recording is likely to go DSD convertors using one bit technology now are they?.
As regards some of the silly arguments about old results.
They did not change when re tested at later dates under very stringent supervision.
Sad to say they highlighted another problem that Ive hinted at.
|
|
|
Post by Claude June 12, 2012 (59 of 366)
|
|
steviev said:
Oh yeah, and:
SACD RULES!
CD (Claude Debussy) has never been surpassed ;-)
|
|
|
Post by seth June 12, 2012 (60 of 366)
|
|
jeff3948 said:
Are you saying that even the SACDs that say recorded in DSD where Ralph Couzens, employee and one of the founders of Chandos, was the recording engineer were actually recorded in PCM 24bit/96kHz? For instance, the recent Delius SACD (CHSA 5094) says on the back "Recorded in DSD" and inside the booklet it says that Ralph Couzens was the recording engineer. Ralph Couzens is not an outside company. Isn't Ralph Couzens one of the founders and owners of Chandos? So, was the Delius SACD recorded in DSD or PCM 24/96? Please let me know.
Thanks,
Jeff
Even though Ralph Couzens was the recording engineer they still could have rented an outside company's recording equipment.
|
|
