|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
69.138.175.19
In Reply to: Ok, so I will try this without being snotty posted by Dr. S on May 16, 2007 at 20:49:50:
I have 4 versions of Brubeck's "Time Out" -- the SACD, two LPs (early and late), and the prerecorded 7 1/2 ips reel-to-reel tape.Every once in a while, for guests, I cue up the SACD, tape and an LP and switch among them via the remote on my linestage. Guess which one is CLEARLY the best sounding.
Follow Ups:
You are absolutely correct ... I am sure the analog versions trounce the early issue SACD. The Brubeck was one of the very first of Sony's single-layer SACD releases.MY point is that someone could come along now, such as MOFI, and instead of a rapidly deteriorating analog tape, they have the original recording preserved in DSD.
DSD chip sets, converters, etc. all continue to improve for playback, even while the recording industry is still finding it's way with DSD.
And since very few listeners (in the general population) now have either open reel or analog capability, and many fewer have access to those recordings in their original forms the irony is, to some degree, moot.
To understand the early issues of SACD's, just take a trip back down memory lane to CD's, in the eighties REGARDLESS of their technology of origin... brrrrrrrrrrr.
I will state this unequivocally ... to lose DSD as a recording and archiving medium is profoundly tragic, whether or not the "regular" folks get it, or not, AND whether or not they ever buy or listen to an SACD disc.
To celebrate this loss, is disgusting.
Well, as to a "rapidly deteriorating analog tape," this one is going on 50 years of age and shows no signs of deteriorating. Nor do my 300-odd other tapes except for the ones their previous owners mishandled or the very few with oxide/binder issues . On the other hand, I think it's anyone's guess whether there will be playback hardware that can handle SACDs in 50 years. Lasers appear to be very perishable items, as I've discovered more than once. I'm not into celebrating losses. I enjoy my SACDs. And the Brubeck SACD is "preserved in DSD," or so the label and packaging claim.MY point is that we're only now able to -- or are figuring out how to -- get the most out of every medium (well, maybe not 8-tracks) Those 1980s CDs that give you the shudders aren't nearly as bad as we thought they were -- some are, granted -- and vinyl is a glory. As I said, I'm not celebrating losses. I'm celebrating wins I never thought we'd see.
Estimates are that half the movies made before 1950 are forever gone, largely due to stock deterioration ... some indications that the situation may be comparable in audio ... references to analog tape made after the ban on whale products being especially prone to deterioration.DSD, just as PCM exists as data, and archival mastering and reasonable care should give us significantly extended life, and for DSD, life that includes the best the master tape has to offer.
For new recordings, well ... I am one of few who has had that direct experience ... being there when DSD recordings are being made, it is simply amazing. Imagine recording a 20 piece jazz band producing 130 dB plus at the microphones ... setting the levels, and then not touching them for the balance of the performance, because you have so much dynamic range, you don't have to worry about saturation ... and even when there is clipping, it bears absolutely NO resemblance to that horrible tearing effect you get with PCM.
If we get the best on the original recording, put on a medium that is stable enough to last ... we can worry later about how best to extract it.
For me, I think of seeing Jimmy Hendrix live in Seattle, and comparing that memory to his recordings, and I weep.
| ||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: