Why bother with buying SACD/DVD-A in stereo? - Page 2

Danny Tse · 06-15-2006, 01:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Christopher_G

I just looked at my DualDisc DVD-A, it was originally recorded in The West Indies and originally mixed in New York.

At Air Studios on Montserrat. The studio was owned by some dude named George Martin, who used to produced some obscure band named The Beatles.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aaron Silverman

while Brothers In Arms was a huge hit in the US

BIA is currently certified by the RIAA at nine million copies sold in the US. When it hits ten million units sold, it will receive the "Platnium" award, which is only given only to albums selling more than tem million copies.

YiFeng, have you pick up Dave Brubeck's "Time Out" on SACD? This is an awesome SACD even in stereo. And if you are located overseas, look for the hybrid SACD that features a HDCD-encoded CD layer.

JediFonger · 06-15-2006, 02:55 AM

i have brubeck in regular CD. i didn't hear and difference when i borrowed the SACD stereo version from the library =(.

re: overseas, i noticed there's a much highr adoption rate of new technology in general. there's a TON of asian SACD albums. i don't own any, but i hope it's not just stereo with crazy surround sound fx dumped into SACD or DVD-A =).

Chris Gerhard · 06-15-2006, 05:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by YiFeng

wait so, even sound that was recorded live into DSD is not a good example of SACD vs CD? if that isn't i dunno what is! =).

i have DSoTM as well, but i can't hear diff between SACD stereo vs. CD stereo. i always prefer the 5.1 multichannel for that anyway.

ok, so i might just blind buy some of these recommends you guys have... and if they're no good, gonna hold ya'll responsible! =).

Absolutely, I will take responsibility if you don't like any of the discs I recommend. Let me apologize in advance if that happens. Despite what some here will tell you, I don't think it is the norm to find an enormous difference between CD stereo and SACD stereo. Subjective opinions about differences between formats don't mean much. With good equipment, you should hear some improvement with high resolution stereo compared to CD. I say the difference is minor and not at all comparable to the difference between CD compared to 8-Track. Someone with technical expertise can comment on measurable objective differences and if any data exists online in that regard.

Chris

dany · 06-15-2006, 10:19 AM

I dont need data to hear the difference. After listening to 8-tracks for years and moving on to the same stuff on cd's,i couldnt belive how clear and sharp it was. Well moving on to SACD was the same,so much more clear and sharp and hearing small detail i havent heard before. Breaths being taken,fingers hitting the strings,details like that.

Chris Gerhard · 06-15-2006, 10:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dany

I dont need data to hear the difference. After listening to 8-tracks for years and moving on to the same stuff on cd's,i couldnt belive how clear and sharp it was. Well moving on to SACD was the same,so much more clear and sharp and hearing small detail i havent heard before. Breaths being taken,fingers hitting the strings,details like that.

So your opinion is SACD is as much better than CD as CD was better than 8-Track. I have no problem with that opinion, I just don't think that is an opinion you will find much subjective agreement with or any technical measurements of dynamic range, S/N ratios, or frequency response can support. Whether SACD sounds any better than CD can get disagreement based on subjective opinions of listeners despite data to the contrary and I have no problem with that either. I fall somewhere in between those extremes. I absolutely agree with your high regard for SACD.

Chris

Rich Malloy · 06-15-2006, 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by YiFeng

i have DSoTM as well, but i can't hear diff between SACD stereo vs. CD stereo. i always prefer the 5.1 multichannel for that anyway.

This might be an equipment issue or something, because the difference between the CD layer and SACD layer of DSOTM is definitely pronounced, so much so that it has caused many "pro-Redbook" folks to accuse Sony of deliberately sabotaging the CD transfer, either to make it more notably inferior to the SACD or simply to add the compression and re-EQing that it believes a "mainstream audience" prefers (waveform graphs clearly show that the CD layer is more compressed, particularly on "Money").

Similarly, while I also like the surround remix, the two-channel is superior from a sound quality perspective. The reasoning, as I recall, is that the two-channel is a DSD transfer straight off the master reels, whereas the elements were converted to digital PCM to do the multichannel mix (I'm not sure if this has been confirmed, because many multichannel remixes are done without converting to PCM).

Back to your original question... multichannel remixes can be interesting, but a classic album has a classic sound that should be preserved. Just consider "Tommy". The multichannel remix completely alters the mood and feel of the piece, the ambience is dry as a bone and the whole thing feels quite antiseptic. The two-channel original mix, on the other hand, preserves that dripping wet, drenched in reverb sound that we associate with the album. I like the multichannel mix for a different perspective on a well-known album, but I alway go back to the stereo mix. In the end, the multichannel mix is simply not engaging to me.

And while it may be engaging to you - perhaps even more engaging than the original mix - certainly you will understand that preserving the historical mix of any album (particularly a classic one) is important, both to appeal to the fans and to maintain the legacy. Preserving the historical mix and mastering is one reason why people fled back to vinyl in the late 80s thru today... the piss-poor mastering techniques for CDs, and the urge to re-mix earlier music for a "modern" sound (now, all quite dated sounding), made mincemeat of the rock-n-roll legacy. This is also why there exists folks like Doctor Ebbets, who search out the original vinyl releases of (in his case) the Beatles albums, and transfer them without the crappy mastering and remixing that plague (nearly all) of the Beatles releases on CD.

Chris Gerhard · 06-15-2006, 01:02 PM

I just today got the hybrid stereo SACD "The Searchers Collection". I haven't listened to the CD layer yet, but may do so in my car today. The SACD is awesome, I haven't owned anything by this group since the mid 60's on vinyl. What a great job by Audio Fidelity with this simple pop music. I think this one is out of print and getting hard to find. I ordered it close to 2 months ago from Circuit City and just got it today.

Chris

John Garcia · 06-15-2006, 01:05 PM

More often than not, I find myself listening to the 2ch versions. For some reason some people seem to think that having all those channels means they need to try to give it some wow factor by putting some part of the song back there, and more often than not it just ends up sounding gimmicky and takes me out of the song.

Another excellently mixed m/c SACD is Roxy Music's Avalon (if you have a need for some moody 80s music).

DVD-A - Linkin Park's Reanimation is another very well done m/c mix with tremendous bass.

JediFonger · 06-15-2006, 02:25 PM

i'd've liked to see more modern pop music utilizing surround so we can get away from the "historic" argument. take techno. i'd love to see what they can do with multichannel. or r&b or any pop. remember taht Boyz II Men DTS album from waaay back where the voices come from all around? i'd rather enjoy nifty stuff like that. i hate the "airy" echoing nature of the surround. it's just like today's modern soundtracks for films, it's so sterile i can't tell it apart from mono. or most of the modern stereo CD's. i understand the need for "balance", quality of the recording, content, blah blah blah. ok, how about some creativity and play? remember the beatles and how they approached "stereo" with voice on right speaker, guitar on left and so on. and then the acoustic echos of instruments in the right would appear on the left and vice versa? that's AWESOME! how about making an album SO COMPELLING that you only DESIRE to listen to in multichannel because that's the way it was meant to be. sounds like Blue Man's Group (i don't have any of their stuff yet)'s DVD-Audio approach.

alas we're at the end of life for both of these formats =\.

John Garcia · 06-15-2006, 03:31 PM

Crystal Method - Legion of Boom is on DVD-A I believe. Surround is the perfect medium for techno, but the studios know there probably isn't enough of a market for most of those artists...