|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
209.157.148.112
In Reply to: well, no posted by Bruce from DC on November 10, 2006 at 08:48:26:
a pretty good recording, and a pretty good mastering job on SACD to beat out redbook with some of these "top tier" redbook players. Peter Gabriel's SACDs are not too disparate from his redbook remasters on the Meitner player. Something that probably isn't worth the cost of the purchase difference per CD vs SACD. Same with Diana Krall. I have not found her SACDs to be much better than redbook...I know that there are only two examples there, but I am betting that in your experience, you've come across some poor SACD implementations...
Finally, good sound at any event, be it acoustic or otherwise, is a happy rarity. Mostly, - venues suck for sound quality. It was a real eye opener to me to go to the SF Opera: the sound was worse than more than a few "Rock" shows that I've been to...
Thoughts from above hit the people down below. There are people in this world who have no place to go
Follow Ups:
I agree completely with your contention that a well-recorded Redbook CD played on a top-tier Redbook player (single box) or transport with a high-quality DAC often equals or even exceeds the sound of SACD. Granted it is often very hard (and probably unfair) to compare the Redbook and SACD versions on a hybrid disc, since you never really know exactly whether the different versions were mastered the same, etc. But I've found in most cases the difference to be negligible and often a draw between sonics of the two formats - the SACD may excel in some ways, whereas the Redbook may actually do better in others. There are certainly some SACD recordings that when compared to previously-issued Redbooks of the same do sound much better, but in this scenario, you most likely have to factor in any subsequent improvements in the mastering process itself, or conversely the fact that the older Redbook versions may have been recorded using outdated PCM technology. I would also argue that I have not been completely convinced of the technical superiority of the DSD encoding process in general, given my somewhat negative impressions of many native DSD recordings.With regard to the future of SACD or for that matter any so-called hi-rez formats, I would not mourn their demise or relegation to niche status if this meant that more effort were re-directed toward producing the highest quality Redbook CDs - we know this is already possible - and it is not that expensive. Redbook is also relatively easy to convert to a number of excellent lossless file formats that can be loaded to hard drives or iPODs - something that currently cannot be done at all with native SACD/DSD recordings - and probably never will be.
HowdyIt sure depends on the players involved. There are some very good CD players out there that just don't do justice to SACD IMO. Conversely I don't think I've ever heard the same material on CD and SACD where the SACD wasn't very noticeably better (once again IMO) with CD and SACD players I enjoy.
It is very easy to compare red book and SACD sound using hybrid disks. Whenever I did such comparisons, SACD was always clear winner. I am speaking of purely acoustic music.For music created elecronically, SACD indeed does not add much on top of what regular CD can do, unless a band wants surround effects as a part of presentation.
I agree that not all SACDs are equally good. Particularly, I dislike DG mixing. But it was the same bad on their CDs and LPs as well.
I don't think SACD will become extinct in the near future. First, sound quality of SACD hardly needs any improvement. Second, the format is well established now, and for a sizeable group of people who appreciate it, there is no way back. These folks will create a sustainable demand, which, if not met by major labels, will be met by minor manufacturers. Third, downloads of classical music, although available, just don't appeal to consumers, and it is not going to change anytime soon.
One should not heap everything in one pile. SACD is a future of classical, jazz and other kinds of acoustic music. Ipods and downloads is a future of pop/rock.
and I do often like to play the devil's advocate; throw things out there and see where they land...The thing is that we amount to a small minority of music consumers.
I've heard some pretty crappy jazz recordings on SACDVinyl isn't really "dead" and it isn't going away... but more slowly than I overexaggerate, vinyl is getting harder and harder to find. And, - more and more vinyl junkies are becoming impressed with some of these SOTA Universals that everyone is raving about. (Yes, many are really expensive, but at least some heads are being turned).
Redbook, in reality, is a lot closer in quality than many manufacturers will have you believe. In fact, some Universal player manufacturers are making strides to pay a lot more attention to their redbook section to make a more SOTA player. I cannot PROVE this, but it is my belief that many SACD makers, - especially a couple of years ago, purposely built and/or paid less attention to their Redbook sections in order to make their SACD sections sound better. IMO, this was the case with more than one unit, - to call out Marantz, - IMO, their SA-11 had a very nice SACD sound, but their Redbook was crap. If one went and stuck a $950 Benchmark DAC on that player for Redbook, - one improved it greatly. The Marantz with a Benchmark on it brought Redbook a LOT closer to SACD. Grab yourself an Audio Aero Capitole MKII SE redbook CD player and play it back to back with any $4k or $5K SACD player and play the hyrbrid CD/SACD of Patricia Barber: I've done this, and the difference was not that dramatic or evident...What you say about pop/rock is true for sure. It doesn't have to be that way, but it is the reality.. It's not the format itself, - it's the old money making paradigm of the majors. Some artists are becoming aware, PG, Bjork, Sting, and others are caring more about compression, and their recordings.. It's not the genre, it's the people in it...
Quality downloadable higher resolution digital files are here, - just so obscure that it's not really worth mentioning. But, it is something that is coming to a computer near you. As it is, - my downstairs neighbor and I have 1000 + CDs, playlists, movies, etc, on a file server in the basement that links to 6 different and very quiet laptops located around the house that control 6 music systems. When we're having a party in the backyard, we can turn the music up or down with a laptop, look up the band information, change or create a playlist, pick a song that someone wants to hear,... so many options... Upstairs, playing ITunes through my APL's AKM DACs, - it's extremely difficult to discern any difference at all between the CD and my Apple Lossless computer. I have a friend who has Gordon Rankin's Wavelength brick: he's sold every single one of his redbook CDs.
Thoughts from above hit the people down below. There are people in this world who have no place to go
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: