New Studio Tool Expected to Bring More Super Audio Titles (1 Viewer)

[Justin Lane]

Michael,

Let's narrow this down a little further. Or how about naming a single Sony release which was originally mixed/recorded to DSD.

J

 

[Phil A]

While not totally in the pop vein (as many other things), Alison Kruass and Union Station live was I believe totally DSD as is David Elias' (davidelias.com) "The Window." Martha's Trouble is just stereo but done in DSD. I'm sure there are others. Sony to my knowledge has not released anything and then again they've released so few things recently.

 

[Phil A]

While virtually all of the DSD recordings are classical or jazz, come to think of it, Jorma Kaukenan's "Blue Country Heart" on Sony is a 5.1 DSD recording. I don't think just because something is DSD automatically makes it a great recording either, my Dire Straits (import) "Brothers in Arms" XRCD2 is better than many SACDs out there.

 

[Michael St. Clair]

Folk and acoustic can be done with very few tracks, even live-to-2-track and live-to-six-track.

Where are the 24-track and 48-track pop/rock recordings done strictly in the DSD domain. Are all of my excellent-sounding pop/rock 5.1 discs PCM sourced?

I have to wonder if Sony was considering switching their pop/rock emphasis to DualDisc, and using DSD/SACD as a strictly jazz/classical/boutique format.

DualDisc may return, but I'd like to see high-res on all discs. I'd also like to see the discs include MP3/WMA/AAC for dumping into your portable player.

 

[Lee Scoggins]

Sony has released a few pure DSD recordings but I don't have time right now to find the link...

 

[Justin Lane]

That says numbers about DSD being used as a recording format. A few titles out of 200-300 discs just goes to further establish SACD as a re-release format/new stream of royalties.

J

 

[Lee Scoggins]

Not really. Sony is just a part of it. There are hundreds of DSD recordings out of the almost 2,200 titles availble. Stephen Best's website as SACDinfo.com calculated the number based on his fairly accurate title database. I was actually surprised how many DSD recordings have been done. I think the YoYo Ma and Joshua Bell recordings are recently all DSD for instance. On the reissues in jazz and classical Sony went from analog tape to DSD which also sounds good.

We should remember that DSD is a new technique that is getting established. It takes time and money for people to get on board, but most of the major US and European studios have DSD recording capability.

 

[Justin Lane]

Looking at the list of DSD recorded titles, there were zero pop/rock titles, and only a handful of titles from Sony. Just goes to underscore Michael's and my point that neither Sony nor mainstream pop/rock groups are using DSD to any degree for recording purposes. These groups are where the money is made in the industry, so it is very telling IMHO.



I have heard differently regarding the Jazz titles. Where a recent 24 bit PCM master was made for CD release, Sony just recycled these for the SA-CD. Makes sense as they already went through the time/expense to remaster these discs to PCM, and it saves wear on some master tapes that are getting long in the tooth. Chesky did the same thing on a number of their SA-CD releases, utilizing pre-exisiting PCM masters. PCM sounds great and is the industry standard for Hi-res recordings, so I have no problems with this practice. I would perfer if they were a bit more forthcoming about the signal chain throughout a recording however.

Regardless, I would think that if Sony were serious about DSD, they would attempt to get at least one of the pop/rock groups in their stable on board for a single album. If the results were good, they could use the success as an example to get other bands on board with DSD recording.

J

 

[John Kotches]

Lee,

Instead of trying to "logic" your way out of a hole of your own digging, why not just admit the error by saying "I mis-spoke" and move on.

Instead, you continue the misrepresentation through a convuluted path and try to pretend you're the victim of a personal attack. Why don't you focus on getting the facts right in the first place?

The facts are, that this product does nothing to further your cause of "DSD Recording". It makes delivering SA-CD images easier, and that's it.

How much of an impact this will make on the market has yet to be determined.

 

[Lee Scoggins]

Let's be fair here. Most of the titles releases so far have been at serious music fans and audiophiles primarily in jazz and classical. This is also a new format. As a result of these two things, the DSD recordings started at specialty labels like Groove, Channel and Telarc (and some really big name places like Bob Ludwig's Gateway) and then widened to more & better recording studios.

Having fewer pop DSD recordings represents a combination of (1) people in pop record musicians at different times and then mix down through all sorts of circuits, (2) the format is young and growing, and (3) the DSD community is more focused on jazz and classical. It says nothing about the future impact of DSD on pop and rock recording. Look at Steve Hoffman, one of the most respected mastering engineers in the world. He does a wide variety of music including pop and classic rock. His format of choice? Super Audio and DSD.

 

[John Kotches]

Lee,

Are you saying that you didn't state that this tool created "DSD recordings"?

That is a deliberate misrepresentation of the product and its capabilities. It transcodes a PCM stream to DSD, and outputs a disc image. It doesn't create DSD recordings.

These are no more "DSD recordings" than Steely Dan's Everything Must Go is a "PCM Recording". All of this work was analog through mixing, with only the mastering stage done in the digital domain.

The Philips ProTools Plugin have even less time as DSD than the above mentioned Steely Dan recording, since only the final, mastered output is DSD.

If you feel this is a "personal attack", then that is strictly your problem.

 

[Michael St. Clair]

That is a potentially very misleading statement.

To my recollection:

1) Steve Hoffman has stated on his board that he is not claiming superiority for either of the two high-res formats (DSD/SACD versus High-Res-PCM/DVD-A).

2) We have no idea of the details of how the labels Steve is doing work for (Audio Fidelity, Analog Productions, etc) arrived at the decision to release SACD, and if they are receiving any kind of incentive from Sony to do so.

3) Sony provides Steve with free time with a DSD console and a DSD engineer, for mastering purposes.

Also, audiophile remasters of vintage pop/rock on boutique labels is a completely different market from new pop/rock.

This starts to remind me of the claims last year the David Chesky greatly prefers DSD to PCM.

Sure, there is a segment out there who would be more willing to buy an 'audiophile' release if it is DSD recording (or they are tricked into thinking it is), but who out there is not going to buy the new Justin Timberlake or Linkin Park album because it wasn't produced in PCM?

New albums from mainstream pop/rock (incl. R&B, rap) artists is the industry cash cow. If those albums aren't going to be produced in DSD, then DSD is never going to become the standard. And I don't see any evidence of that happening. Again, name one new mainstream pop/rock album that was produced in multitrack DSD. For bonus points, name a vintage pop/rock reissue whose new 5.1 track was produced in DSD.

I think PCM will remain the de facto standard.

 

[DaveDickey]

I love to read a good spat The participants get bloodied up a bit, but the result is quite educational for the layman. I've learned more about hi-rez recording in this thread than in any other. Thanks men!

 

[Lee Scoggins]

See above but I think you can say that DSD is becoming more and more accessible as more tools become available and more workstations become available.

I spoke with Bob Harley, editor of The Absolute Sound, is also fairly open to both formats. He feels that Super Audio will become the main audiophile format. He says as long as titles in this niche market remain available he feels it should enjoy some longevity.

I also spoke at HE2004 with MusicDirect's owners. I asked them the ratio of sales of SACD to DVDA. The said it was "10 to 1 in favor of Super Audio."

That tells you something. I asked the booth assistants at Chesky Records what was selling and I heard Red Books and SACDs.

Clearly there is a healthy if small market for Super Audio. That works for most of us fans here on the board. Even Justin Lane who has a very negative view lately on SACD IMHO is still buying the product based on his recent posts in other threads.

I think DSD will definitely be around for a while.

 

[John Kotches]

Lee,

The techniques for transcoding PCM to DSD are not new, and the only advance is in ease of use and pricing. While these are nice, no one knows yet whether or not this will have a material impact in the marketplace.

Your equating the production of a disc image with a recording is troubling to say the least. Why not just admit you were mistaken and go forward?

 

[Lee Scoggins]

John, I'm not sure what value there is for arguing ad nauseum on this detail. I never said that the translation process was equivalent to an original DSD recording so I'm not sure where my mistake was. I also never said that translating PCM to DSD was new either, only that it was not available at this price point before.

In any event, you have not answered my question above regarding the accusation of intential misleading. I have never misled people here.

Why don't we put this behind us and move on and maybe discuss the music? That's what is all about after all.

I think if you are honest about the news, you will admit that this will make SACD production much easier and likely lead to more titles. Or we can just wait and see what happens...

 

[Michael St. Clair]

I'm always happy to move on.

But you did say
Calling this 'DSD recording' is misleading. I also think a lot of other forums and mailing lists would be a lot less accepting than HTF has been, and you'd have had a lot more than three people calling you on it.

Go ask at SH, AA, r.a.high-end, or even better one of the several pro audio forums and mailing lists if they consider recording, mixing, and editing in standard-resolution PCM, then converting to DSD to be 'DSD recording'. I know what the response will be. Also note that Philips doesn't claim this is DSD recording.

If you really have the amount of studio experience that you imply, it is certainly reasonable to think that you would have done it on purpose. Whether you did intentionally or not, I'm certainly surprised either way.

 

[Lee Scoggins]

:rolleyes

I already explained I was refering to DSD datastream creation.

Of course, this is not creating an original datastream but it is also true that the translation process from PCM to DSD is often referred casually, if incorrectly, as "recording".

As far as studio experience I think my record speaks for itself.

 

[John Kotches]

Lee,

You're the only person I'm aware of that refers to PCM to DSD as recording.

I've seen many professionals refer to it as transcoding, downsampling, transferring or even decimation depending on which direction you're going. I've never read or heard anyone refer to this process as recording, except right here in this forum by you.

Now granted, I've only talked with a few people on this topic, but some of them are fairly well respected in the industry, but I'm not going to get into a "name dropping" contest.

Truly amazing that you can't simply admit to a mistake and go forward...

Cheers,

 

[Lee Scoggins]

Truly amazing that you won't apologize for your personal attack that I was intentionally misleading people.