Hirez Highway used to about SACD sounding great. Now

The Emperor's new clothes? You are right when the preponderance of opinion is against you? Yeah, that happens on occasion, but not as often as romantic myths might have you believe. Before accepting such a conclusion, you need to stop and think. Is there something else going on, like maybe a component or system issue? Or, are you just into your own head and biases so much that it distorts your honest perception.

I do not know what kind of music you listen to, and that might be a factor. But, are you saying that the CD layer sounds better than the DSD stereo layer of the same recording after level matching? It might be hard to level match exactly on musical material, but you might start there. Try that with a Radio Shack meter. It is well known that people generally prefer the louder of two sources, but not always if distortion or other aberrations occur.

Personally, with a good CD player, I was never sold on the magnitude of improvement stereo SACD provided. But, I cannot say CD was better. To the contrary. The main reason for my support of SACD is multichannel, which is a whole lot better than stereo. That is not even close for music.

RE: Hirez Highway used to about SACD sounding great. Now, posted on July 3, 2014 at 09:29:01

AbeCollins
Audiophile

Posts: 46291
Location: USA
Joined: June 22, 2001
Contributor
Since: February 2, 2002

All I can say is, I own a number of SACDs and played around with the format for a while but never completely jumped in the deep end and never amassed a huge collection.

On well recorded and mastered material, I found that stereo SACDs didn't sound significantly better than the CD played on a high quality dedicated CD player.

And then high resolution computer audio and DACs came along (PCM and DSD) so physical CD and SACD media are just legacy formats taking up storage space in my basement.

As for Hirez Highway, I believe many inmates who have graduated to computer audio spend more time in the Computer Audio Asylum.

RE: Hirez Highway used to about SACD sounding great. Now, posted on July 3, 2014 at 10:02:27
fantja Audiophile Posts: 15519 Location: Alabama Joined: September 11, 2010	Sad indeed Abe. I would venture to report that all depends on the SACD player, as some, are better than others.

RE: Hirez Highway used to about SACD sounding great. Now, posted on July 3, 2014 at 10:27:28
TGT Audiophile Posts: 531 Location: Kentucky Joined: December 6, 2002	You said: "Personally, with a good CD player, I was never sold on the magnitude of improvement stereo SACD provided." Hell, I thought it was just me. In my collection, the quality of the original recording and the mastering process explains more variation in sonic quality than CD verses SACD.

Most people don't have good hearing (nt), posted on July 3, 2014 at 10:50:06
Soundboy Audiophile Posts: 954 Location: Northern CA Joined: May 5, 2000	.

RE: To quote TGT from his post above......, posted on July 3, 2014 at 11:40:29

AbeCollins
Audiophile

Posts: 46291
Location: USA
Joined: June 22, 2001
Contributor
Since: February 2, 2002

True, but TGT said it best in his post above......

"In my collection, the quality of the original recording and the mastering process explains more variation in sonic quality than CD verses SACD."

I would have to agree with him. And I would add that on high quality recordings, the difference between CD and SACD is not huge. I'm finding the same to be true with hi-res downloads. It has a lot more to do with the recording and mastering process vs the end format that we pop into our players or stream to our DACs. But I thought that was a universal truth.

I'm not saying that SACD doesn't sound better than CD but IMHO it wasn't a huge leap in performance.

What we experienced was remastered material that was made available on SACD also benefited the CD format. Given the same original source material I concluded that for myself, the new SACD format wasn't worth the small incremental improvement.

The other angle that most folks don't talk about are the SACD players that were optimized for SACD playback with the redbook section pretty much ignored. The manufacturers had nothing to gain by improving CD playback in a SACD player. So, it was often true that the SACD layer sounded significantly better than the CD layer played through the same SACD player.

But that's all water under the bridge for those of us who have moved on to computer audio and PCM/DSD DACs.

I fear you've started another Teresa-type thread with this topic! [nt] ;-), posted on July 3, 2014 at 13:49:50
Chris from Lafayette Audiophile Posts: 26465 Location: SF Bay Area Joined: February 17, 2004 Contributor Since: February 6, 2012

RE: Hirez Highway used to about SACD sounding great. Now, posted on July 3, 2014 at 15:33:42
mark111 Audiophile Posts: 4699 Joined: April 12, 2002	Done right ,SACD or DVD-A ,or HDCD ,etc. can sound better than RBCDs. one problem is that some hi-rez offerings aren't produced with the care that they should have been. I have some DVD-As and a few SACDs that sound great. I have others that aren't anything special. enjoy, mark

The idea of "graduating" to computer audio .., posted on July 4, 2014 at 05:53:56
Dave Pogue Audiophile Posts: 11689 Location: DC Area Joined: October 9, 2001	... is kinda amusing. At least to those of us who have heard it and found it wanting, just like those who have heard SACDs and found them wanting. I'd suggest that the computer audio fans might try graduating to vinyl or, better yet, reel-to-reel tape. It helps, I know, to have a lot of space to house the "legacy" media :-)

It's not "Hearing", it's understanding/interpreting, posted on July 4, 2014 at 06:35:23
oldmkvi Audiophile Posts: 10582 Joined: April 12, 2002	what is heard. I listen to some CDs, but better than SACD or HIrez generally, I don't think so.

Oops…, posted on July 4, 2014 at 06:37:15
oldmkvi Audiophile Posts: 10582 Joined: April 12, 2002	I don't understand how anyone could prefer CD to HIRez, except that it's a BIG World!

CDs, THe Gateway Drug…, posted on July 4, 2014 at 06:45:17
oldmkvi Audiophile Posts: 10582 Joined: April 12, 2002	I like to have Vinyl and HiRez available, but to limit it to Vinyl or Tape, which I don't have, is too limiting musically for me. Very little music available in all formats.

I wouldn't sweat it., posted on July 4, 2014 at 07:10:29

Jim Treanor
Audiophile

Posts: 2167
Location: Pacific Northwest
Joined: June 1, 2003

Naysayers have been putting in their two cents here since Day One.

A comparison benchmark listeners might find useful is the Paul Paray/Detroit Symphony reading of Chabrier and Roussel on a Mercury hybrid SACD sourced from the original analog master tape. Two characteristics make this disc useful: (1) Unlike other labels who put out hybrids, Mercury chose not to "DSD-ize" and transcode to PCM for the CD layer. Instead, the 16/44.1 layer is what Mercury issued in its earlier CD-only release. (And to my ears the hybrid CD layer does indeed sound identical to the original CD.) (2) With regard to the mastering and production process, there's at least theoretical consistency in the fact that Wilma Cozart Fine--who'd been with Mercury since the 1950's--oversaw the transfers to both CD and SACD.

Jim

RE: The idea of "graduating" to computer audio .., posted on July 4, 2014 at 07:17:24

rick_m
Audiophile

Posts: 6230
Location: Oregon
Joined: August 11, 2005

"I'd suggest that the computer audio fans might try graduating to vinyl or, better yet, reel-to-reel tape."

On the other hand having had many years of experience with vinyl and RR tape, some of the most enjoyable sound I've heard has come using computers as the source!

Good sound is where you find it and even the lamest of media, which upon mulling over is hard for me nail down, probably does some things especially well. And outside of wire recorders I think I've heard 'em all and have extensive experience with most.

Rick

RE: CDs, THe Gateway Drug…, posted on July 4, 2014 at 07:43:35

Dave Pogue
Audiophile

Posts: 11689
Location: DC Area
Joined: October 9, 2001

I grant your point. But, determined to avoid dealing with yet another new medium (downloads, etc.), I figured I'd go for a more happy (for me) medium -- superior CD replay plus SACD/Blu-ray/DVD Audio -- via an Oppo 105 with ModWright tubed output and tubed power supply. Makes CDs sound great and SACDs even better. Vinyl and open reel tape are icing on my particular cake. So I have more musical choices than I'll ever be able to hear in my lifetime. Not saying it's the best route, but it is for me.

RE: The idea of "graduating" to computer audio .., posted on July 4, 2014 at 10:28:57

AbeCollins
Audiophile

Posts: 46291
Location: USA
Joined: June 22, 2001
Contributor
Since: February 2, 2002

"graduating" to computer audio was a poor choice of words.

I have my vinyl collection, CDs, and box of SACDs but since I'm getting outstanding performance from my computer setup, not to mention the convenience, the physical media is in storage.

I'll admit that vinyl is fun and I enjoy the outstanding audio quality it offers but I'm getting comparably great results from the computer, DAC, and hi-res music files.

Reel-to-Reel? I wouldn't know where to buy music on reel-to-reel, 8-track, cassette, wire, wax cylinder, or other ancient media. ;-)

RE: The idea of "graduating" to computer audio .., posted on July 4, 2014 at 11:17:56
Dave Pogue Audiophile Posts: 11689 Location: DC Area Joined: October 9, 2001	Just to address your last paragraph, and not disagreeing with your main points: there are almost 11,000 postings right now on Ebay's reel-to-reel site, many of which offer multiple tapes. I currently buy a couple tapes there each week.

RE: not to my ears, posted on July 4, 2014 at 12:35:02
bean	all things equal (quality players, system, yada yada), SACD always sounds better to me. IF the original material and masterings are up to it. A lot of crap material that simply can't sound better (by virtue of the quality of the extant recordings/sources) gets put on SACD anyway - because it sells.

Jim - could you check Track 5 on your copy?, posted on July 4, 2014 at 16:58:48

Chris from Lafayette
Audiophile

Posts: 26465
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: February 17, 2004
Contributor
Since: February 6, 2012

That would be the Suppé Overture to "Morning, Noon and Night in Vienna". What do you hear at the 7'14" mark? I hear (or rather DON'T hear) some missing music! For whatever reason, it sounds as if they made an edit there and bungled it - strange for the Mercury team. (I was listening to the SACD layer, but I suspect the problem is there on the CD layer too.)

Otherwise, this album is so great! Talk about your hand involuntarily starting to conduct as you listen! I also love the Järvi/Chandos 24/96 multichannel download of Suppé Overtures, but the microphones are further away on that newer recording, and some sections just don't have the visceral impact of this celebrated Paray/MLP recording. Wonderful stuff!

RE: The idea of "graduating" to computer audio .., posted on July 4, 2014 at 23:33:34
AbeCollins Audiophile Posts: 46291 Location: USA Joined: June 22, 2001 Contributor Since: February 2, 2002	Wow, I had no idea. eBay to the rescue.

RE: Hirez Highway used to about SACD sounding great. Now, posted on July 5, 2014 at 00:30:13

JBen
Audiophile

Posts: 3082
Location: South FL
Joined: May 18, 2008
Contributor
Since: July 26, 2010

Well, if you are happy, so be it. I understand. No one should blame you for what is your right to perceive.

Not that you should vent this as gospel, though. There are one or two of us that are deluded into perceiving a different reality. Nothing much, really; just a different reality.

LOL! My own delusion is seriously wasteful of my time on earth. On days when I have been listening mostly to my SACD & DSD recordings, I've listened continuosly for over 14 hours at times.

Fortunately, I waste less time on the days when all I have is the normal rez PCM stuff. Whether upsampled in the audio-dedicated PC, or played straight from a decent player, I may have hit the 8+ hours mark once.

So, on a certain "qualitative rating", PCM wastes 43% less of my time...

...or perhaps I should say that SACD/DSD provides me with 75% more enjoyment time? To me, THIS IS THE TRUE MEASURE...well beyond all the "objective" measurements (which I respect, & conduct myself also, btw).

So, on your own scale, that which draws you to enjoy the music for a longer time, points the right direction for you. Just make sure that you look at the hidden variables.

RE: Jim - could you check Track 5 on your copy?, posted on July 5, 2014 at 05:17:35
Jim Treanor Audiophile Posts: 2167 Location: Pacific Northwest Joined: June 1, 2003	Chris, I think you're talking about the Suppe-Auber disc, an equal delight. I'll check my copy and get back to you. Jim

RE: The idea of "graduating" to computer audio .., posted on July 5, 2014 at 05:53:30

Dave Pogue
Audiophile

Posts: 11689
Location: DC Area
Joined: October 9, 2001

Yeah, when I started checking eBay for open reel tapes, not that long ago, there were only about 3,000 entries on any given day and the tapes were going for a, er, song. Now you're lucky to get a 4-track copy of Miles Davis' "Kind of Blue" for under $200 (twice that, at least, for a 2-track version). Yet I just picked up a pristine "Pal Joey" by Andre Previn, Shelly Mann and Red Mitchell, recorded by the iconic Roy DuNann, for ten bucks. And its sonics just blow away those of my vinyl copy.

It helps if you're a lover of 70s-era pop (Jim Nabors, anyone? I thought not), And the sound quality does run the gamut from quite stunning to quite awful. But there are gems to be found if you're patient, and the currently buyer-friendly policies of eBay make it pretty easy to get your money back if you wind up with a loser. As, believe me, I have.

Yes - Sorry! - I was talking about the Suppe/Auber SACD [nt], posted on July 5, 2014 at 17:40:46
Chris from Lafayette Audiophile Posts: 26465 Location: SF Bay Area Joined: February 17, 2004 Contributor Since: February 6, 2012

RE: Hirez Highway used to about SACD sounding great. Now, posted on July 5, 2014 at 22:48:51
Disbeliever Audiophile Posts: 1877 Joined: June 1, 2012	I agree, furthermore to hell with downloads, Mch SACD is the best for me, sounds the most realistic especially for classical music.

RE: Oops…, posted on July 6, 2014 at 19:37:32
ahendler Audiophile Posts: 5151 Location: San Antonio, Texas Joined: January 24, 2003	depends a lot on the players involved. I play redbook on my Audio Note gear and Hi Rez on my Mytek dac. The Audio Note is much better Alan

Checked the SACD layer of the Suppe, Chris..., posted on July 7, 2014 at 14:52:25
Jim Treanor Audiophile Posts: 2167 Location: Pacific Northwest Joined: June 1, 2003	and after three successive close-up listens I don't detect anything missing at or around either side of the 7'14" mark on my copy. It's a fast-moving section, but everything there seems to be intact melodically and rhythmically. Jim

OK - Thanks, Jim!, posted on July 8, 2014 at 00:21:50
Chris from Lafayette Audiophile Posts: 26465 Location: SF Bay Area Joined: February 17, 2004 Contributor Since: February 6, 2012	I may try to show graphically what I mean with a piano score - that might make things clearer (if I can cut and paste like I want to and then upload the file). Thanks again for checking - I appreciate it!

I might sweat a little bit, posted on July 9, 2014 at 08:34:41

Botanico92007
Audiophile

Posts: 729
Location: San Diego
Joined: March 15, 2006

I just checked the technical notes of my Mercury SACDs. Wilma Cozart is credited (produced, musically supervised & 2-channel conversion) with the CD transfer. However, the DSD transfer & 2-channel conversion is credited to Andrew Wedman and other associates. Wilma Cozart is thanked for her "advice" on the preparation of the SACD transfers, but that's hardly a hands-on participation.

I was always struck by the difference between the two transfers, not so much about the superiority of one over the other, but the differences in soundstage width, distance of perspective, and the sharpness of transient attack.

For superiority I still stick with the original Mercury 2-track tape issues. Of course, there are a limited number of titles (35), and most listeners will never hear these tapes. It indicates to me that we need better digital transfers. Too bad Cozart is no longer with us to do it.

Not to put too fine a point on it..., posted on July 9, 2014 at 11:49:33

Jim Treanor
Audiophile

Posts: 2167
Location: Pacific Northwest
Joined: June 1, 2003

but in addition to her "advice" on the SACD transfers, comparisons were made to the original masters played back on the Ampex 300 that, as the technical notes put it, "previously" belonged to her and to the CD transfers prepared by her. So whether or not--and to what to degree--the SACD transfers may have deviated from the production values embedded in those earlier efforts, her work and its working context constituted a reference point for those transfers.

Jim

RE: Hirez Highway used to about SACD sounding great. Now, posted on July 9, 2014 at 15:34:25
jamestavegia@gmail.com Audiophile Posts: 275 Location: Atlanta, GA Joined: November 26, 2013	I only own 2 Sony DVP-NS 755's but the SACD layer always beat the CD layer. I am old (67) and my hearing isn't what it used to be, but I love SACD's. I will say that some are better than others. Jim Tavegia

The proof is in the listening, posted on July 10, 2014 at 08:26:10

Botanico92007
Audiophile

Posts: 729
Location: San Diego
Joined: March 15, 2006

We can all make our own judgments. The fact that the engineering team used the original Ampex 300 to compare doesn't necessarily guarantee that all the subtle decisions needed in the transfer would have been the same if Cozart had been intimately involved. It's certainly not the same as when Classic Records reissued six Mercury titles and Cozart sat at Bernie Grundman's elbow, insisted he use tube equipment, and urged him to cut another master when she thought it necessary. There's a great account of this in the December 1997 issue of Fi magazine.

With good recordings the goal of any transfer should be transparency to the original source. I'm the first one to admit that this is a subjective judgment and is system dependent. We often end up talking about different experiences. I'm only relating mine. I relistened to some of the recordings last night. I hadn't heard some of them in several years. I did notice that the digital transfers tend to diminish the acoustics of the recording venue. On the tapes and LPs it's easier to identify the characteristics of the various locations used by Mercury.

" I've listened continuosly for over 14 hours at times", posted on July 12, 2014 at 11:10:04
hifitommy Audiophile Posts: 15387 Location: canyon country califiornia, orig from buffalo ny Joined: June 9, 2000	which illustrates that the DSD layer is a more relaxing/fulfilling presentation. it's what i use as the illustration of the diff between LP/analog and RBCD (16/44.1) discs. not instantly recognizable always but it proves out over a period of time of listening. ...regards...tr

the differences aren't black/white, posted on July 12, 2014 at 11:54:41

hifitommy
Audiophile

Posts: 15387
Location: canyon country califiornia, orig from buffalo ny
Joined: June 9, 2000

but in the long term, hi-rez (24/92 and above) are listenable for longer. the fact that sacd discs aren't usually found at budget pricing slows ME down a bit and likewise the HR downloads with their added cost factor.

it will take a while for that to normalize. meanwhile, i will listen to a fair number of CDs in that much of what i love is not available on sacd or vinyl. CDs do sound better on sacd players with their upsampling (some more so than others).

i bought into the sacd in the early days hoping they would be encouraged by sales of them which then sold for about the LIST price of CDs and were seen by me as more worth the outlay than paying list for a CD. i did not unload CDs just as i hadn't unloaded LPs when CD became the seeming law of the land.

which brings up the apparent sonic superiority of LP, even if only very slight, over sacd. it is close though.
...regards...tr

I think we've all learned a lot of things. , posted on July 13, 2014 at 12:05:57
StephenJK	One of them being that the format is far less important than the quality of the original recording. As HD (supposedly) downloads become available at hopefully a decent price, the SACD market will likely splinter into a number of other options.

Hi-Rez Highway

Hirez Highway used to about SACD sounding great. Now

108.220.54.45