What Hirez Discs Have You Purchased Recently? (1 Viewer)

[Greg Bright]

Mahler
Symphony No. 8
San Francisco Symphony et al
Michael Tilson Thomas, conductor
SFS (2009)
This goes to the top of my M8 recordings.

 

[Paul.S]

Oh, Greg--"stop!"

I'm still working my way through my Mahler cycle, stuck on the 4 for not entirely favorable reasons. Here I'd decided that the balance of my purchases would be Zander, Bernstein and maybe a little Dudamel . . . I already have three 8s (Chailly/Concertgebouw/London on DVD-A; Shaw/Atlanta/Telarc; and Solti/Chicago in Vienna/Decca) . . . and you come and deliciously further complicate things with ebullient praise of MTT/SFSO 8! Stop it!

Do you have others in the MTT cycle? If so, how does his 8 compare to his others? (I of course remember you are quite taken with the Fleischer/Budapest Festival/Channel Classics 2 . . .)

 

[Greg Bright]

Originally Posted by Paul.S /forum/thread/176763/what-hirez-discs-have-you-purchased-recently/2190#post_3639313
Oh, Greg--"stop!"
I'm still working my way through my Mahler cycle, stuck on the 4 for not entirely favorable reasons. Here I'd decided that the balance of my purchases would be Zander, Bernstein and maybe a little Dudamel . . . I already have three 8s (Chailly/Concertgebouw/London on DVD-A; Shaw/Atlanta/Telarc; and Solti/Chicago in Vienna/Decca) . . . and you come and deliciously further complicate things with ebullient praise of MTT/SFSO 8! Stop it!
Do you have others in the MTT cycle? If so, how does his 8 compare to his others? (I of course remember you are quite taken with the Fleischer/Budapest Festival/Channel Classics 2 . . .)

Actually this makes my MTT cycle complete. I have them all. I think it is his best work in the cycle. The others seem too slick and smooth at times although the playing is flawless, and the sound is superb. My other 8s are the Solti/Chicago on LP, Abbado/Berlin on DG CD, and Nagano/German Symphony Orchestra Berlin on Harmonia Mundi SACD. The Abbado is OK, I enjoyed the Nagano but have been told on another forum that I shouldn't have. Ebullient is a little strong, but it's a fine performance.
And you're stuck on the 4th? Get on with it and move to his (IMHO) masterpiece - 5.

 

[JohnRice]

With you Mahler junkies going on, I'd appreciate a couple suggestions. I have found the Zander 1st to be a real favorite. I also believe the 1st to be Mahler's true masterpiece. So, anyway, I'm open to suggestions on the 4th and 5th on SACD. To date, my favorite 4th is Solti/Chicago with Te Kanawa, but I don't know if that is on SACD and I'd rather get a newer recording anyway rather than repeat the same one. I don't think I've heard a 5th that blew me away, so any suggestions on those two is welcome.
Also, my favorite 2nd has always been Slatkin/St. Louis (mainly for Kathleen Battle) but I am also open to suggestions for newer recordings of that.

 

[Paul.S]

Greg: LOL re enjoying the Nagano even though some feel you "shouldn't have." I can't help but think the choral work of the MTT/SFSO will not impress me as much as Robert Shaw's.

John: Oh geez--first, you "dis" Ray Charles . . . and now you lionize the "Titan" over the Mahler 3? Sigh.

There's a Mahler appreciation thread around here somewhere. Let me see if I can find it and post a link, lest non-believers' eyes here glaze over from the pathos (and contention!).

 

[gene c]

Eric Clapton's Slow Hand SACD. I've heard good things about it so thought I'd give it a shot. Won't get to it 'till after the Holidys though.
Not sure this qualifies but also picked up (at Frys) A Charlie Brown Christmas in what's called High Definition Surround Sound. It's also labeled a Super Disc /img/vbsmilies/htf/confused.gif. A little latitude there perhaps. There is a DTS 96/24 label on it so maybe....

 

[JohnRice]

Gene, I suspect that is a regular DTS CD. If you don't have any of those, you just put it in your CD or DVD player with a digital connection and your receiver decodes it.

 

[gene c]

Gene, I suspect that is a regular DTS CD.

Ya, I havesme of those. But the first disc, which contains the DTS 96/24 is a dvd as it also contains a DD 5.1 layer and only plays in dvd players. There is a second disc which is a cd (a SuperDisc, actually /img/vbsmilies/htf/rolleyes.gif ) and it only has a "High Definition Stereo tracks which are an exact duplicate of the studio master files".Also...
This is a Monster[COLOR= #ff0000]Music disc! /img/vbsmilies/htf/smiley_jawdrop.gif[/COLOR] Oh no! I've feed the machine! /img/vbsmilies/htf/eek.gif Well, Monster is a local company so I guess I can fool myself into believing I've somehow helped the local economy, but really.
I need to be more carefull from now on.
Good thing my nieces and nephews got a kick out of the Charlie Brown Christmas music (so did I !).

 

[Danny Tse]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2762/4196070717_4873a1f66c_m.jpg">

 

[Frank A]

gene, I have that monster disc also that I bought from Fry's ($10.00). If you read and believe all the hype that is with the disc, you will enjoy it. I can not tell any difference really between that disc and other sacd's. I really like it. If you like that one, you might also try the George Benson/Al Jarreau set "Givin It Up", I think is the name. I also have it and REALLY like the surround sound on it. It's a very good disc.

I realize it is a "Monster" disc and they really hype it as a "super disc", but for someone like me (certainly no audiophile-can't really tell the difference between good/bad recordings, no audiohile equipment, but decent, etc.), I really like it, the price really is reasonable (both hd dvd and cd in the package) and I was/am looking for something else to help supplement the choices available in good surround sound discs. I hope that Monster or some other company continues making a variety of these discs. My HK avr does show up 96/24 on the OSD display when it plays. It is supposed to be high def.

Now back to the "Hi Rez Disc" purchases: On Thursday (I do a Phoenix run 1 or 2 times a month and stop by Fry's Electronics on the north end of town to "eat" (lunch break from my job) and also look around at their stuff). I purchased a stereo only version SACD, "Thelonius Monk-Straight, No Chaser". I'm disappointed in that it is not a hybrid (couldn't listen to it driving home), but, so far I really like it having only heard the first half of the disc so far. It is one of those where they used the original tapes to make it.

 

[Paul.S]

Originally Posted by gene c
Ya, I havesme of those. But the first disc, which contains the DTS 96/24 is a dvd as it also contains a DD 5.1 layer and only plays in dvd players. There is a second disc which is a cd (a SuperDisc, actually /img/vbsmilies/htf/rolleyes.gif ) and it only has a "High Definition Stereo tracks which are an exact duplicate of the studio master files".

As you allude to, it's not a traditional/"regular" DTS CD in that there are a couple of other distinguishing things going on there (mixes from different aural perspectives, pre-ripped MP3s). Ironically, I just was describing this release a page ago in post 2163.

 

[JohnRice]

It is an audio DVD, isn't it? I have a couple of those. Not the same thing as an official DVD-A

Now, as I've followed this thread a bit I'm hoping for an honest answer. Is what has attracted most of you to SACD the multichannel audio, rather than simply higher resolution 2 channel?

My player will be here Monday, so I'm anxious to finally listen to some discs the best I can and find out if they actually sound better than my regular CD set-up.

 

[gene c]

Ironically, I just was describing this release a page ago in post 2163.

Thanks for the info Paul.S. I just read 2163 and I'm still not sure what to call this thing. A DVD-A without video? No matter. I think it still qualifies as Hi-Res though, correct? And what would be considered H-Res? Anything over basic cd?
Anyway, I'm hearring a lot of hiss or noise in the first part of a couple of tracks. Not sure if it's supposed to be there or just the consequences of an old made for tv recording.

gene, I have that monster disc also that I bought from Fry's ($10.00). If you read and believe all the hype that is with the disc, you will enjoy it. I can not tell any difference really between that disc and other sacd's. I really like it.

Frank, it's not much the sound quality I liked (it's O.K. but nothing special) but the old whimsicle Charlie Brown Christmas music.
BTW, I saw a Concord Music version of the same recording at Target this morning (still X-Mas shopping /img/vbsmilies/htf/tongue.gif ) but I think it's a 2 ch cd. Didn't really look too closely at it.

Is what has attracted most of you to SACD the multichannel audio, rather than simply higher resolution 2 channel?
My player will be here Monday, so I'm anxious to finally listen to some discs the best I can and find out if they actually sound better than my regular CD set-up.

I first bought DVD-A for surround sound from DD and DTS so I guess MC is what firs attracted me to hi-res. I've since up-graded my equipment to get the quality sound as well, within a reasonable budget. But to be honest with you, SACD/DVD-A didn't provide the increase in SQ that the specs would lead you to believe. As with all formats, some are better than others but over-all I've been a bit disappointed. A good MC mix like Porcupine Trees In Absentia or Donald Fagan's Nightfly (good to me, anyway /img/vbsmilies/htf/smile.gif ), has provided more enjoyment to me than h-res. But I still want everything in hi-res anyway. Every little bit helps. Maybe music on BluRay?
It sounds like your cd setup is quite good and you may have to get an SACD player of the same price/quality as your expensive cd player for the comparison to be fair. A $200 ($1000 MSRP) player, even with i-Link, may not be in the same league. Just a thought.

 

[Dan Lassiter]

Just found a couple of used DVD-Audio titles and got them cheap. Got Fleetwood Mac Rumors and Doobie Brothers The Captain and Me. Now I have decide if I'm really gonna want the Mobile Fidelity SACD of the Doobies disc when it comes out. My guess is I will need it too. Recently got the Moody Blues On the Threshold of a Dream SACD. I really like the surround mix on their music and just ordered A Question of Balance. A few weeks back I got the two King Crimson DVD-Audio titles and am looking forward to the next one in January. And I just got an e-mail confirmation that a RCA Living Stereo title I ordered about 2 months ago from Deep Discount has finally shipped: Dvorak's New World Symphony, yum!

 

[JohnRice]

Thanks for the input Gene. We'll see what happens. I got the Pioneer 59avi because it is nearly the only option I have available without spending multi $K, which simply isn't going to happen. The receiver I have now, 56TXi, does sound quite good and since the audio quality will actually be up to it, rather than the player, I'm hoping to hear a benefit. The only other real option to that I see is something like a $5K Marantz SACD player. Like I said, that is not going to happen. The Pioneer equipment, while good, is definitely the weak point in the system, but that is a sacrifice I made to get surround sound. Still, I'm not convinced D/A technology, in terms of pure sound quality rather than other bells and whistles and BR audio formats, has actually improved over what my receiver has.

In the end, spending less than $200 on the 59avi is pretty cheap, as audio experiments go, and all the discs I have gotten so far were in the $6-9 range each. Since they are hybrid, only 3 are albums I already had and, with the exception of the Genesis, all sound GREAT as regular CDs, it's still a safe experiment. I'm anxious to hear how it all comes together.

Oh yeah, I grabbed a Tilson Thomas Mahler 3rd nice and cheap, which is on the way to me now.

 

[PaulDA]

DTS-CD and MCH audio on DVDs via Dolby Digital or DTS (regular or 96/24) are NOT "hi-res" as that term is defined. They are all LOSSY encodings (though that does not prevent them from sounding great in and of themselves--by nature, lossy encodings cannot be defined as "high resolution" which, at the barest minimum, need to be lossless with better than 16 bit/44.1 khz rate).
DVD-A (DVD-Audio) is a separate format from DD/DTS on DVD-V (DVD-Video). It can contain video, but it is not simply a DVD with audio recordings. The nomenclature is extremely confusing, particularly as authentic DVD-A discs are rather rare in the grand scheme of things. For example, I have a DTS-CD of Sting's Nothing But the Sun. It is MCH but it is NOT "hi-res". I have to send the bitstream to my receiver to play it. I have the Charlie Brown "SuperDisc". It is a DVD-Video disc with a MCH mix encoded (along with other things mentioned above). It is NOT "hi-res" as it is lossy. It does contain a "hi-res" 2 channel mix. ALL DVD-Video discs can carry a "hi-res" (24bit/96 khz LOSSLESS) 2 channel mix (they are sometimes called DADs (Digital Audio Discs) but they cannot carry a MCH LOSSLESS mix. DVD-Audio, Super Audio CD and Blu-ray can carry such lossless MCH mixes in hi-res.
As for JohnRice's question--I am primarily attracted to discrete MCH audio mixes. DVD-A and SACD (and now Blu-ray) offer such mixes in a lossless format, which makes them even more attractive, but I own a number of lossy MCH mixes that I consider quite satisfactory (given a choice, I prefer a lossy MCH mix over a lossless 2 CH mix of the same material--I recently bought the 83-98 Genesis box set for 14$ (I have the other two studio sets in SACD format) and I find the MCH mixes more pleasant, even though they are lossy, to the lossless 2 CH mixes). YMMV.

 

[Frank A]

These last several posts have been very good reading for me (and very educational--whether I will remember it is a different matter--age/img/vbsmilies/htf/smile.gif">). I did go back and delete the word "lossless" from my prior post. PaulDA, I don't know what the term Hi Rez definition is, but apparently it has been misused quite a bit (especially by me) thinking that it means lossless. The Monster disc set is in "high definition surround" (HDS) (same/not the same as "hi rez"?) according to the flyer that came with the disk. But they did not say lossless in their hype.
For John, I went with SACD/DVD-A for the multi-channel sound myself, not necessarily because of it being a higher resolution (although that, too--even though I can't really hear it?). I enjoy the surround sound. But, there are times when I like to sit down and listen to 2-channel. I also have a Pioneer "universal" dvd player that plays sacd/dvd-a, I think it is the dv-588a (I think bought 4-5 yrs ago for $130).
In fact, I just recently went to a small DIY speaker convention in Tucson where a dozen or two people showed up some with various home made speakers. I was really impressed with these speakers, but, what really impressed me was some home made amplifiers (and commercial ones also) that were used to play these speakers with. Listening to these 2 channel setups with some nice equipment really is impressive to me and makes me want to upgrade all of my stuff (don't think it will ever happen, though

 

[PaulDA]

In the end, what matters is the music. Pristine sound with music I don't like is wasted while even an AM broadcast over a clock radio of a favourite song is more enjoyable than not hearing the song at all (granted, these are extremes and I will not settle for clock radio sound for very long).

It's the same thing for movies (for me). I prefer a BD or HD DVD of a favourite title on my wall mounted screen and hi-def projector with the full surround sound experience but I can still enjoy a late night TV showing of something on the living room SDTV. Content first, delivery method second is my motto.

 

[Paul.S]

Originally Posted by Dan Lassiter /forum/thread/176763/what-hirez-discs-have-you-purchased-recently/2160#post_3637865
. . . And as for the Definitive remasters, they are another nightmare. I wish I had never "upgraded" my original releases. All of the definitives, except for Then There Were Three suffer from varying amounts of no-noising, which has sucked the life out of most of the albums. The worst, is probably Duke, which is so muddy, it is almost unlistenable. I'm keeping my eyes open for old versions in the used CD stores.

I had a similar experience when I got the Duke remaster: at first I thought I had gotten the discs mixed up during my A-B listening comparison because I preferred the original CD. The aggravation there is exacerbated by the fact that the remasters' more colorful liners printed on cardstock are much more attractive than the originals' liners.
I suggest searching Wherehouse.com and/or Amazon Marketplace (by UPC is best) to get those original CDs back.

Originally Posted by Mike Frezon /forum/thread/176763/what-hirez-discs-have-you-purchased-recently/2160#post_3637799
FWIW (which probably ain't much), I liked the 5.1 mix of Trick of the Tail (that's MY fave Genesis album). I think the whole thing sounds very "alive"--like it could have been recorded this year.
I've got the DVD-A...not the SACD.

Not to be nit-picky, but in the interest of keepin' it accurate given recent discussion . . . My understanding of the confusing U.K. SA-CD versus U.S. CD/DVD Genesis re-release situation is that the CD/DVD boxes that were released in the U.S. feature DTS 96/24 tracks on the DVDs. Tasty surround from what I've read, but NOT true blue DVD-A discs.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

Originally Posted by PaulDA /img/vbsmilies/htf/laugh.gif">). I got into SACD mainly for the best 2-channel playback I can reasonably afford (and use) of great recorded performances (mainly of classical music, but also a bit of jazz, et al). But unfortunately, most of the recordings that interest me aren't readily available in (or seemingly could make quite that much use of) the hirez format so far -- and probably most of them never really fit the criteria of the serious audiophile anyway.

There is a fine balance to consider (along the lines of what Paul suggests) between great recorded performances and great technical sound quality/fidelity so that we do not lose sight of the real goal and merely, effectvely become "measurebators" (of sorts to borrow a term from the camera world) rather than music lovers. And that balance will differ some for each of us here.

And truth is no recording is gonna match live acoustic music, especially up close, anyhow. Even as an adult amateur beginner, I can pick up almost any 2 violins I might come across, play something simple and hear a substantial diff between them that rarely, if ever, comes across in recordings -- and that was something I really didn't expect before I got into that "hobby". And a lot of that diff can get lost for the audience even from a mere 10ft away too. I guess all that is partly why musicians are typically not as hung up on audio gear as non-musician audiophiles -- but the music instruments themselves would be a different story for them of course.