DVD-Audiobahn

New DVD-Audio music releases and talk about the latest players.

Return to DVD-Audiobahn

Message Sort: Post Order or Asylum Reverse Threaded

Watermark is in audio band where the ear is most sensative....

144.136.248.2
Posted on January 30, 2003 at 22:02:11
SnaggS
Audiophile

Posts: 1191
Joined: October 4, 2000
 doesn't this make it WORSE than CD within the 20-20k range ? Manufacturers have avoided putting crossover in this key audible range.... why stick computer data in there!!!

Daniel.

Give me

* Guaranteed 2 channel 96/24 mixes (no zany surround mixdown)
* Mandated labelling of the recordings present on the disk and watermarking used.
* Guaranteed non-watermaking of non-top 20 releases

and I'll convert to DVD-A. Anything less and sonics will be compromised if it goes mainstream.

 

Hide full thread outline!
    ...
More stringent requirements...., posted on January 31, 2003 at 05:24:54
oscar
Audiophile

Posts: 19517
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Joined: October 25, 2000
 24/192 stereo mixes (though I have not ruled out 24/96 MC yet)
actual music I want to listen to
Guaranteed non-watermarking of ALL releases.

Labeling of watermarked content ain't going to happen unless there is a huge consumer grassroots backlash against the watermark.. I wouldn't exactly call hi-rez adoption huge....let alone consumer ire.

The resolution labelling may actually happen but it probably still won't tell the full story on the recording heritage (mixing/down/up conversions, etc..). The smaller labels appear to be more meticulous/proud about publishing resolutions on their discs.

 

Provenance, posted on January 31, 2003 at 06:51:31
Jim Pearce
Audiophile

Posts: 20649
Joined: January 4, 2002
 The provenance of a recording is seldom clear with SACD, unless the disc is from a DSD master. With DVD-A, lower resolution PCM recordings are usually encoded as originally recorded. However, I do have a few discs which sound upsampled - and you've got to think upsampling and dither when you see 88.2/24. At any rate, I would say that DVD-A is closer to the angels on this one than SACD or CD.

 

Re: Provenance, posted on January 31, 2003 at 07:09:56
oscar
Audiophile

Posts: 19517
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Joined: October 25, 2000
 I didn't say a word about SACD. I don't agree that SACD is any worse than DVD-A with regards to published information on resolution (if anything, DVD-A is worse about misleading the consumer (e.g. passing off 16/48 as "Advanced Resolution").

OTOH, I have been looking with suspicion on releases which don't explicitly state "pure DSD"; even those derived from analog even though these transfers can be quite good.

 

Provenance, posted on January 31, 2003 at 07:29:14
Jim Pearce
Audiophile

Posts: 20649
Joined: January 4, 2002
 Oscar,
I wasn't criticizing your post so much as augmenting your remarks based on my own experience as an audiophile shopper. I generally find it easier, in the absence of clear information from the label, with DVD-A than with SACD. The sleaziest trick is the upsampling to 96/24 - I'd rather they left it at 48/24 or 44.1/24. However, why would you set a higherv standard for DVD-A than for SACD?

 

I don't recall setting a higher standard..., posted on January 31, 2003 at 07:43:07
oscar
Audiophile

Posts: 19517
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Joined: October 25, 2000
 Anyway, it wasn't what I tried to say or imply. I want pure DSD and maybe in the future 'pure' 24/192. In the meantime, I have to deal with older recordings from analog masters or older (relatively low) PCM masters. I would like to know what I am dealing with but don't always know and I will probably assume the worse (e.g. I now hesitate to buy Sony Pop releases from the 1990s.)

I'll agree upsampling sucks if we don't know about it and are expecting better sonics than what we get. Guess we probably have to do more digging to find out the true recording heritage (easier said than done).

 

How can you tell if a record has been upsampled?, posted on January 31, 2003 at 08:45:40
Eric LeRouge
Audiophile

Posts: 3060
Location: France, Paris
Joined: October 7, 2002
 Are there any simple ways to identify upsampling?
Best

Eric

 

Re: How can you tell if a record has been upsampled?, posted on January 31, 2003 at 09:00:43
Jim Pearce
Audiophile

Posts: 20649
Joined: January 4, 2002
 I don't believe that there is a PCM signature, but I do think that you can hear the difference between upsampling and high resolution. I find that upsampled material has the HF smoothness of high resolution but lacks the detail, timbral accuracy, separation of voices and musical sense of high resolution. One real tipoff on orchestral works is the missing warmth on violins. If the violins sound like CD, I suspect upsampling.

 

Rubbish....., posted on January 31, 2003 at 18:59:00
SnaggS
Audiophile

Posts: 1191
Joined: October 4, 2000
 With SACD, you always know your getting the BEST possible. You always know your getting stereo, You always know its watermark free, You always know its at full resolution.

Speculating on masters is pointless, fact is, if you like the album, it will have been remastered from the best source available, even if that is a 78 rpm record, 48khz PCM, then that is the best source they could find.

 

Watermark is in your head, which seems to be more sensitive than your ear., posted on February 1, 2003 at 04:30:25
9fold


 
Don't even try to tell us that you can hear the watermark. As Dustin Hoffman said in All the Presiden't Men, total bullshit.

 

Page processed in 0.011 seconds.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2013, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ] [ Take5 ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]