Idea: Merging Into One High Resolution Format (1 Viewer)

[John Kotches]

Lee said,

Interesting quote from Warner on the problems with SACD. It is clear that copy protection is a big deal for the label.

Do you think that copy protection isn't a big deal for Sony, BMG, EMI and Universal? That's what you imply with this statement.

Most of us here know that it's a big deal for all of the major labels. It's a big deal for the smaller labels as well, as they have far fewer sales to be concerned with losing.

Perhaps you meant something different with your wording, but that isn't what came across.

Regards,

 

[Lee Scoggins]

Perhaps you meant something different with your wording

I did. My belief is that copy protection is a big deal for all the labels. It is news though that Warner is listing this as a key success factor for hirez.

On one hand, I would like the copy protection issue to help push high resolution.

On the other hand, I think we consumers should be able to keep our "fair use" rights.

It is hard not to think that the best solution might be a two pronged approach: (1) low price MP3 quality tracks, and (2) higher priced high resolution tracks. This is driven by the fact that consumers will pay more for more value which IMHO is the far better music quality of hirez. Maybe some type of extra features on the disc also help.

My belief is that MP3 will not stop soon or be stoppable. So I feel the sooner the labels embrace the reality of that, the better. And the RIAA should halt the legal gestapo as well.

 

[Jeff Ulmer]

A single format would be nice, but there are limitations to SACD that make DVD-A more attractive, namely the video and navigational aspects (which are also a limitation depending on the intended usage). As for hybrid and multichannel, yes to both, but there should also be a two channel hi-res version as well, which may not all fit on the current SACD/DVD-A disc.

A lot of pop albums are being done originally in DSD now that the editing workstations are widely available.

I curious what workstations you are talking about? Not even Sony's machine can process in DSD. Unless things have radically changed in the month since I investigated all of the available workstations out there, there is still no way to process audio in DSD, meaning any plugins (of which hundreds are used on a typical pop album) have to operate in PCM mode or some other conversion process. There is still no pure DSD stream.
Pyramix is the only software that currently allows multichannel recording and processing, and that converts to PCM for every process. If you have other information, please share.

 

[Lee Scoggins]

There is still no pure DSD stream.

I'm quite surprised by this statement. There have been several pure DSD recordings done recently. Plus, you don't always need processing if you are doing live to 2 track unless I am not understanding you.

You have to give Super Audio a chance to catch up on the established PCM format.

I will try to find you some links.

 

[Lee Scoggins]

Here ya go Jeff...

Neve DSD recording console:

http://www.highfidelityreview.com/ne...umber=12166188

DSD Production at Studios:

http://www.highfidelityreview.com/ne...umber=12038027

Sadie's New System:

http://www.highfidelityreview.com/ne...umber=13231145

and http://www.sadie.com/home_set.html (note language of "full editing of 64fs DSD signals" and later "The integrity of the 64fs DSD signal is fully maintained throughout the editing and signal processing operation.")

Genex and others:

http://www.highfidelityreview.com/ne...umber=13096881

 

[Lee Scoggins]

I believe the Genex recordes also do pure DSD like on this session, in addition to 192k with no PCM crossover...

http://www.genex.co.uk/press/release...22_May2003.pdf

And they used my buddy George Cardas' mic cables!

 

[Jeff Ulmer]

I will try to find you some links.

Please do.

In looking at the formats Gateway accepts:
Genex (on their flagship 9048) does not allow any processing to the DSD stream other than a low pass filter. This is stereo only as far as I can see.

Sony's Sonoma claims DSD processing, but is limited to compression and EQ, and these functions are further limited by only being a single design, unlike the dozens of options available to PCM systems. This is also a bit on the spendy side, since AFAIK you can't even buy it. Yes, Bob Ludwig has one, but everyone else has to borrow it from Sony.

Pyramix is another option, but again it converts to PCM for signal processing.

Tascam's DS-D98 is a 2 to 8 channel, tape based hardware box. No option I can see of doing DSD based processing. This is a glorified ADAT IMO. Doing anything more than 2 channels of DSD requires multiple machines.

What am I missing?

Updating after Lee's links:

Sadie only offers EQ and optional compression, and is limited to eight tracks total. All other processing (reverbs, specialized tools, etc) are external. This is a mastering option only.

The Neve console looks nice, but isn't shipping, and for the price (which I suspect is in the million and a half or more range), I wouldn't exactly call this "widely available." I'll take one though if you're buying!

 

[Lee Scoggins]

For those who want to work in the DSD domain at 2.82MHz sampling rate for SACD production, Pyramix has a unique answer.

In DSD (Direct Stream Digital) for SACD production Pyramix has a unique solution. It is the first system in the world to offer multi-track record/editing and mixing as well as mastering while maintaining all the real-time audio processing including of FX such as EQ, Dynamics, Reverb and Surround Sound in a DSD compatible quality level up to the final SACD master.

Quite simply, to have only a mastering capability for DSD is not enough. Unless you can record, edit and process the signals in a true multi-track configuration, mastering makes little sense.

Pyramix is the first system with enough processing power and resolution to handle in real time a complete digital mixing console capable of operating in 32 bit floating point at 352.8 kHz, which is the minimum requirement to preserve all the intrinsic original quality of 1 bit 2.8MHz DSD signals.

With real-time EQ, Dynamics, Reverb etc, and with full SACD scarlet book specification for mastering, we can truly state that “Pyramix is the only commercially available system on the market that is capable of a complete multi-track source to master project for Super Audio CD production."

The current Pyramix software will handle 8 channels of DSD recording, using 2 MYK-MB1 DSP cards.

So the question may be the following:

"Even with PCM conversion on an early generation editing station, can you hear the difference at 352khz sampling rate?"

I have been playing with 88.2K and there is a big step up to 192K, but after that the sonic differences are pretty small. I find that sampling rates must be super fast to capture transients for a real natural, non-fatiguing listening session. At 352K, you are probably golden except for the most goldened eared listeners with very high resolution systems.

 

[Jeff Ulmer]

My understanding is that it offers more, but in any event why do want so much processing? It only degrades the sound by taking it away from the natural sound at the event.

In your opinion. Processing is a way of life, especially when one gets into sound design or large multitrack mixes where all the elements can't be heard until they are all recorded, which is where judiscious use of effects and processing can enhance the sound. Sonoma does not offer anything outside its proprietary EQ and compression, everything else is outboard.

As for degrading the sound, that assumes that the original recording has no technical deficiencies, which, while possible to achieve, is not available to everyone. Many if not most recordings are done under less than ideal circumstances, so having the ability to address technical shortcomings is a necessary evil. If you are editing, you are taking away from the pure performance. I doubt Barbara will let you leave in that one off note in her recording.

There is nothing you have noted that indicates that all processing is done on the DSD stream, only that editing functions (splicing and crossfades) and a limited amount of EQ or compression is available. If you read the market speak carefully, they are refering to simple editing as "processing" not what most record producers would call processing.

Exciters aren't really an option here.

 

[Lee Scoggins]

Jeff,

Here is a story on one of my favorite pure DSD recordings the MTT Mahler 6:

http://www.sfsymphony.org/templates/...2782&callid=16

I'll take one though if you're buying!

Even if I had the money, I would not buy you a mixing console as they just encourage you to use too many mics and do too much mixing!

At Chesky we would bypass the million dollar Neve in the old RCA Studio A for a

 

[Lee Scoggins]

Exciters aren't really an option here.

That's a good thing!

 

[Jeff Ulmer]

How long ago was that? Neves are some of the best analog boards out there, even though their controls are upside down.

It ain't the number of mics, its the number of instruments a single guy has gotta play at once.

 

[Lee Scoggins]

It ain't the number of mics

More mics, more circuits and more mixing are required. It is also usually an indicator of musicians not being in the same room together which hurts the synergy of any acoustical based effort.

 

[Javier_Huerta]

Back to the point made by Lee on the original thread...

Before I owned SACD's (any SACD) I owned 5 or 6 DVD-A. The reason? Multichannel sound mixes.

I was about to buy a DVD-A player. Whatever made me buy a SACD one, I'll never know. All I do know is, I'm happy about my decision. Suddenly, I realized there were 10 or 20 DVD-As I wanted, and lots more SACDs.

Music Direct's catalogue is an eye-opener... for each DVD-A, there must be at least 4 SACDs.

Sad thing is, I don't think there'll ever be a truce. I don't know how DVD-A can prosper with so small a music catalogue. And I don't know either how Sony plans to keep on marketing SACD, with single layer, stereo discs all through their catalogue.

Maybe they should simply make DSD and PCM D/A converters standard in all DVD players and simply call the thing... well, whatever they want to call it. But make it a standard. Make *evey* player an universal one. I can live with it.

Ah, dreams.

 

[Lee Scoggins]

Make *evey* player an universal one. I can live with it.

We seem to be headed in that direction. While I really like the newer 24/192 releases like Steely Dan, I think the DVDA marketing council is going to have to hit a home run for DVDA to survive.

Maybe there would be value in promoting a "universal" standard that allows both formats to survive like the various movie theater sound standards.

This will likely be more difficult than if there is just one format for the consumer.

Another crazy idea: Find a way to brand the "universalness" of a universal player. Create a Burr Brown "HiRez" brand for its chip that handles both...

Advertisement:
Introducing the new Sony "HIREZ" brand players. In July 2003, the audio industry introduced its replacement high definition audio standard to create a new way to listen to your favorite music. The new HIREZ players play all newer HIREZ CDs and your favorite videos too.

For this to work of course, it would be important for labels to offer the same HIREZ branding on the package, make everything hybrid and do only single inventory HIREZ CDs going forward.

Maybe the BIG FIVE could make a statement and say (and immedaitely do): "We have decided to only produce the new HIREZ CDs going foward. Your older, lower quality CDs will still work in any player, but we encourage you to step up with new low-cost HIREZ players that also offer superior DVD playback. Here is a list of 12 manufacturers offering an entry level $150 player..."

Well I can dream, no?