|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
80.176.73.121
In Reply to: RE: Karajan's Beethoven on BluRay posted by srl1 on July 18, 2016 at 07:53:55
I seem to recall that the SACD issues were not a hi-rez remastering from the analogue tapes but just lower rez files files upsampled. Is there any evidence that this is not the case?
The provenance of the BluRay issue isalso open to question. Note the "weasel wording" of the sticker on the package, no reference to the analogue original master tape.
On the whole UMG seem very reticent about the provenance of their remasterings, for example the recent vinyl recut of the Karajan Debussy La Mer/Ravel Daphins and Chloe Suite disc is described by them as "mastered from original sources" which can mean just about anything. The result certainly sounds very inferior compared to the 1965 pressing.
Follow Ups:
Sometimes a new remastering in hi rez from an older digital master, even RBCD, is both necessary and can yield excellent results. For example, the Solti Ring BD-A at 48k had to be done that way because the analog masters were unplayable. And, I found the results superb. IMHO, that set of recordings never sounded better. I see no reason whatsoever to get out the LPs.
It is likely the 1963 Karajan analog masters are in the same fix, as all analog masters everywhere are slowly deteriorating. Eventually, there will be none. Analog tape is just not the archival medium we would like it to be. Digital is of course "perfect sound forever." Well, it might not be perfect, but digital can be made to last forever with care.
So, hopefully they have done a good job with the Karajan set, whatever the source.
Good post. Yes, a good remastering is a good remastering irrespective of source. You make me open to trying the BluRay Karajan just to find out how good it is. However I cannot figure any way of integrating a BluRay player with my audio system due to the need for a screen to navigate the disc, without even considering the connectivity issue.
Digital recording moves on and one difficulty concerning digital archive material produced from analogue originals is the technology that was available at the time. This means that much material is archived at 16/48 or 20/48. But, as good is good, my objection is really with some record company's weasel words used to trick punters into buying something that they are not actually getting. 16/48 in a 24/96 downloaded wrapper is not 24/96 IMO.
It is also worth remarking that the oxide shedding that affects many old analogue tapes is not universal and relates particularly to one brand. Furthermore it seems that analogue masters deemed unsuitable for playing one day ( e.g the stated need to use digital masters for The Beatles Stereo and Mono CD re-issues) somehow become playable later (the mastering of The Beatles Mono on vinyl box set).
OK, analogue tapes won't last forever. But we haven't yet quite reached that point for everything and I believe that mastering solely from digital sources, irrespective of the purpose, is often just company policy rather than a judgement on the state of the particular analogue master in question.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: