Audio Asylum Thread Printer
Get a view of an entire thread on one page
|For Sale Ads|
As much as the CD has always been an audiophile (and personal) favourite, I'm not sure how well high resolution will work with this. And as the original recording was 16/44.1Khz wouldn't it be like getting blood from a stone?
Edits: 12/20/16Follow Ups:
The sound is superb.
As you say, it's 16/44.1
being one step closer to the master without the dumbing down to 16/44. also, mastering techniwues can but not always, affect the result in a big way.
this is why that the LP of this recording is superior to the CD.
Sometimes a SACD player will make room RBCD sound better than a standard cdp. When I got my 1st sacd player, and Sony ns500v at a bargain price, suddenly ALL my CDS sounded better. I attributed but ed it to the fact that RBCD is up sampled prior to processing and any ringing was now above frequencies that we sense by ear.
This particular album was recorded at 16/44. How can you dumb it down to 16/44 when its already *dumb*.
I love SACD, and have dozens of them, But I don't see the point of this one.
dat is recorded at 48k, not really much of a dofference BUT, still you get it right from the master, one step closer to the original.
the real test would be to directly compare the cd to the SACD.
Or, you could buy the hybrid and compare the two different layers.
Let us know your findings.
As I recall the R-DAT was set to 16/44.1, but I could be wrong.
Digital Audio Tape (DAT or R-DAT) is a signal recording and playback medium ... DAT has the ability to record at higher, equal or lower sampling rates than a CD (48, 44.1 or 32 kHz ...from wiki.
We'd have to accept the idea that DSD playback of a CD is superior to PCM playback. Of course, there might be some good stuff in the mixing etc. of this release. I'm on the fence which is why I asked who has heard it.
And that MAY be the case, after all.
Seems PSAudio is converting PCM to DSD in their Direct Stream DAC (10x DSD, whatever that comes out to) with good results. I prefer R to R ladder DACs with lots of PCM1704's working together but, if I was forced to trade my $2,000 Audio-GD Master 7 for the $6,000 PSAudio Direct Stream for even money, I would not be that angry. Yes, I've heard them side by side at a local audio meetup. Maybe the PSAudio is less 'veiled', maybe my DAC more relaxed, maybe the levels were not exactly the same? That close.
Also the folks using HQPlayer software like to take PCM and up-sample to ridiculous DSD resolution (DSD 256 or higher) and then use a DSD DAC to convert to analog. I can't play that game as I don't have a DSD DAC, but I am in no position to argue about the sound.
I have SACDs that folks could argue have NO REAL JUSTIFICATION to exist as SACDs other than to make the labels more money, but they sound pretty good,
Sometimes better than the original CD. A product of a good remastering job or?
Also new Marantz SA10, 4x DSD only.
They are staking their reps and profits on it.
All too much $ for me, and the trickle-down isn't really there.
The new GUSTARD DAC-X20U PRO 2*ES9028 does DSD 512 if you can figure out how to do it. Uses the new ESS Sabre ES-9028 chip, the ultimate in Delta Sigma DAC chip design with all kinds of filters, etc.
Early reports is that it sounds good, much better than the identical box/board with the older ES-9018 chip.
At less that $1K, who knows, even a cheap guy like me might end up with one?
My brother's Meridian 208 used the Phillips 3 - 256x 1 bit bitstream DAC - back in 1990. Still the best CD player I've heard in my system. Oddly enough it was developed by Phillips to go in cheap portable equipment.
"For comparison, imagine that you were assigned to fill a bucket with a known amount of water, using measuring cups varying in size from one ounce to 64 ounces. Even if you use care in filling the largest cup, it might contain 63.7 or 64.5 ounces instead of 64; you can't be sure that it contains exactly 64 times as much water as the smallest cup. But there is a way to obtain an exact result: use only the one-ounce cup, and transfer its contents to the bucket 64 times."
Best explanation of 1 bit processing yet!
It says "Remastered by Ryan Smith at Sterling Sound from Original Analog Tapes."
The original recording was to DAT.
Yep- miss DAT. Still, the SACD will sound fine.
eaten by the mechanism.
Really? Did you have ever your deck tuned up/calibrated by a technition? I had half a dozen DAT decks, of different models & manufaturers, from the mid 1990's > early 2000' and save for first one I purchased, a Sony TCD-D7, very rarely had issues with any of them. Put a lot of hours on those DAT decks, although I made a point of cleaning their heads regulalry & sending them in for a tune up/calibration once a year.
is SOOOOO much better, I don't miss DAT at all!
From the notes on the vinyl re-issue:
"Yes, this is a digital recording. True to our company principles, Analogue Productions in almost all cases reissues recordings only where the analog master tape is available. However, there are rare exceptions that whether digitally recorded or otherwise, a recording is so outstanding it's worthy of the highest quality vinyl reissue."
Post a Followup:
Post a Message!
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: