In Reply to: RE: Is this really the "First Release" of the two-channel masters in high resolution? posted by ted_b on June 26, 2012 at 16:11:47:
I do not have the MFSL SACD, so I am happy to learn that the cheaper and soon-to-be much more widely available Blu-ray is closer to the two-channel master recording than the SACD. And yes, the BD surround mix is icing on the cake. But I still have a question about the marketing claim that the BD is the "first release" of the two-channel masters in high resolution. Isn't a high-rez PCM to DSD conversion "high resolution"? And if not, why not? The "Modern Cool" SACD is considered reference quality by many. Just look at the reviews and ratings on SA-CD.net. So how bad could that PCM-to-DSD conversion have been, and how much can the BD improve on it? I guess we will have to wait for people with both versions to compare them.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: Is this really the "First Release" of the two-channel masters in high resolution? - Mudshark 16:51:30 06/26/12 (5)
- RE: Is this really the "First Release" of the two-channel masters in high resolution? - ted_b 07:16:02 06/27/12 (4)
- But the mch layer is what I'm REALLY geeked about. :) (NT) - Kal Rubinson 13:10:19 07/04/12 (3)
- RE: But the mch layer is what I'm REALLY geeked about. :) (NT) - ted_b 11:00:08 07/05/12 (2)
- Any comments about her voice in the various mixes? (NT) - Kal Rubinson 13:46:04 07/05/12 (1)
- RE: Any comments about her voice in the various mixes? (NT) - ted_b 13:18:38 07/06/12 (0)