|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
70.190.191.49
In Reply to: RE: Digital and difference in DACs posted by Crazy Dave on June 09, 2015 at 09:42:12
I did a demonstration for someone, who thought the Box Sets were the best sounding releases on CD.... We chose a song at random, "Piggies" from the White Album..... He was used to the boxed sets, so we played both first, then the Parlophone.....
While the Parlophone copy was playing (a stereo mix, BTW), he was visibly stunned..... The improvement wasn't subtle, it was huge. (If I had to describe the difference, the Box Set track sounded like a "recording of a recording", relative to the Parlophone copy.)
Follow Ups:
I have the new stereo mix, the mono box and the older jewel-cased Parlophone White Album. I will give "Piggies" a try on all of them. Were you comparing the stereo or the mono box set?
Dave
"Were you comparing the stereo or the mono box set?"
Both....
I forgot that I uploaded the wav files for comparison. The differences are easily heard, but not as dramatic as playing the CDs themselves.
"The differences are easily heard, but not as dramatic as playing the CDs themselves."
This would imply that the CD mastering/pressing is partly responsible (other than remastering). This was one of the marketing reasons to promote Blu-Spec (BS!!!) CDs.....
Regards Anthony
"Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty.." Keats
All CDs are 16/44.... All the fancy mastering in the world can't get around that limitation.
And "asynchronous" mastering for CD, using 24/192 masters, IMO degrades the signal, relative to direct 16/44 A/D from the original analog.
"The differences are easily heard, but not as dramatic as playing the CDs themselves."
Regards Anthony
"Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty.." Keats
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: