SACD fundamentally flawed?

Discussion in 'Audio Hardware' started by WVK, Dec 18, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. StyxCollector

    StyxCollector Man of Miracles

    I would agree to some degree. As an owner of a DV-45a, and then got a Marantz SA-8260, I can say the difference in SACD was night and day. I *thought* the DV-45a sounded good on SACD. I was wrong. If I had never heard the Marantz, I would have been satisfied, but when you step up to a better machine, you do hear the difference. I'm not denegrating the DV-45a or the 563a, because I think both are/were good value for the money. Heck, I would have rather paid $179 than the $500 I did for the 45a, but I don't regret the money. I think DVD-A playback on the Pioneer DV-45a was stronger than SACD was, but now I have a decent DVD-A and a killer SACD.
     
  2. Dave

    Dave Esoteric Audio Research Specialist™

    Location:
    B.C.
    You guys are totally right in as far as an upgrade would be beneficial to my listening enjoyment. However, after I learned from Steve how to listen, and what to listen for, I'm sorry but SACD has not impressed me other than Steve's own work. In fact I'm still ever impressed with the majority of "first-pressings" I am encountering that sound like they're mastered flat without any digital artifacts from the ever evil NR and EQ. boost. Pre 1987 that is.

    Jeff, I'm curious as to your outcome of comparing DSOTM. Please fill us in.
     
  3. Gardo

    Gardo Audio Epistemologist

    Location:
    Virginia
    I learned on this here forum how to make sure the pre-emphasis bit was set to "on" so that I could make faithful CDR copies of this title and the Toshiba-EMI Abbey Road. I own both originals and both do indeed have pre-emphasis "on." EAC lets me turn the bit on if I want to make a "backup" copy.

    I've always tested any backups against the original to make sure the pre-emphasis bit is set correctly. Otherwise, A/B comparisons are meaningless.

    The old Toshiba sounds much better to my ears than the new SACD 2-ch. Forum wisdom says the Toshiba of DSOTM and AR were made from Pro-Use tapes that were 30ips straight dubs of the original stereo master tapes at EMI. Second-generation, then, but unfutzed with.
     
  4. Gardo

    Gardo Audio Epistemologist

    Location:
    Virginia
    Dave, I do know about volume controls.:sigh: That's not the limiting factor in that early pressing of Avalon, IIRC.

    As for your first question, let's put it another way. If Steve's SACDs sound good to you, then obviously SACD is not fundamentally flawed and DSD is not the culprit.

    Are the "in your face mastered SACD's" you mention the same as the ones that smear the highs? I don't hear the latter, but I do have several SACDs that are mastered hotter than I like, and with EQ choices I don't like much. DSOTM stereo is one. Tommy is another. But those are mastering problems, not format problems, and for every SACD I don't care for I have fifteen I do. That's a much higher yield than I'm getting from redbook these days. I'm sure SACDs will eventually become "dirty" like the rest of the digital world, given the way mastering is done these days, but so far on balance it's been a dream come true for me, not a ruse perpetrated on a credulous public, which is what I infer you believe. Or is that too strong?

    At any rate, this thread has elicited plenty of testimony that SACD can sound great, and usually does. Some of that testimony comes from folks whose ears have been pretty much in sync with yours heretofore.;) Isn't that worth the benefit of the doubt, and less dismissal?
     
  5. thomh

    thomh New Member

    Location:
    Norway
    Can us mere mortals also become privy to this lecture or is it considered classified information?

    ________
    Thom
     
  6. Holy Zoo

    Holy Zoo Gort (Retired) :-)

    Location:
    Santa Cruz
    I haven't done one. :)

    To be honest, I've heard DSOTM a few dozen times too many. When I put it on, I don't really hear it any more. I'm much more excited about the surround mix - it makes it fresh again. :thumbsup: Plus, I like the eq choices for the instruments better - particularly the sax and guitar solos.
     
  7. Dob

    Dob New Member

    Location:
    Detroit
    As I'm sure you are aware, SH also does EQ...so what I'm reading is that you are differentiating between Steve's EQ cuts, and others EQ boosts. Is that correct?

    Also, didn't you say that you liked some of the MFSL SACDs?
     
  8. Dave

    Dave Esoteric Audio Research Specialist™

    Location:
    B.C.
    Gardo: All I have are my two orifices on either side of my head to make any claim. Yes I do believe that you have it pegged...it is the s****y mastering decisions that essentially turn me right off. I do know what "real instruments" sound like in person and I'm sure not getting that through my SACDP except for Steve's work (SACD only statement). Yes, the smeared highs are on these crappily mastered SACD's. Heck! I get better imaging/depth on my redbook player. :sigh: Gardo, I'm the biggest skeptic I know. Maybe if I can drop by one of the members homes my opinion might change, but so far not happening as I don't live close to anyone's ears I trust 100% except my own with one exception and I haven't been invited yet. Besides, being the biggest skeptic/critic isn't too conducive when trying to hear one thing on someone elses set-up. :D Needless to say I don't get a lot of invites to hear peoples systems. ;)

    thomh: Steve gives us a lot of info on audio mastering, listening, equipment etc. In this regard Steve hasn't changed...just the size of his audience has. Search the older threads from the old DCC forums and read. Then do lots and lots of listening and one day the light will come on....and you're corrupted for life. Once you know it's never the same again though, so be forewarned. ;)

    HZ: Gotcha! :) The Sax sure doesn't sound very appealing in my system when compared with the Toshiba. :sigh:

    Dob: Yes I am totally aware of what Steve does with recordings and you are correct my friend, it's the boosts that kill me. Yes, I do like a couple of the MFSL's (SACD layer of Patricia Barbers) that I've heard because they are honestly better than their redbook counterparts (less boosted signals), but I'm 1000% sure that Steve could make them even better. Sometimes we must settle for second best because that's all there is...so far. :)
     
  9. therockman

    therockman Senior Member In Memoriam

    I have the new Yo-Yo Ma disc entitled OBRIGADO BRAZIL on SACD, and I think that this disc is pure DSD through out the recroding and mixing chain. The disc sounds great, and I don't hear any high end smear. My only real problem with high end smear comes from the Norah Jones SACD, COME AWAY WITH ME. Although I sense a lot of high end smear on the Norah Jones disc, it is not un-pleasent to listen to, and in fact I enjoy it quite abit. But please check out the production credits on the Yo-Yo Ma SACD, OBRIGADO BRAZIL, and listen to this disc carefully, it is so beautiful and melodic that it sounds natural and not in the least bit bright or smeary.
     
  10. Holy Zoo

    Holy Zoo Gort (Retired) :-)

    Location:
    Santa Cruz
    Just as clarification, I was referring to the sax on the multi.
     
  11. Dave

    Dave Esoteric Audio Research Specialist™

    Location:
    B.C.
    Oh, ok. I have to get my butt down to a retailers and listen to MC one day.
     
  12. Dob

    Dob New Member

    Location:
    Detroit
    Well, if you're ever in the Detroit area, you can come over and hear my set-up(s).

    Not only am I not afraid of criticism, I already know that my systems are kinda sucky. Which defeats the whole purpose of your coming over, I guess...
     
  13. Gary

    Gary Nauga Gort! Staff

    Location:
    Toronto
    Careful there, Dave. Last time I went into Future Shop to listen to multi channel I just 'bout went deaf! :sigh:
     
  14. LeeS

    LeeS Music Fan

    Location:
    Atlanta
    ThomH,

    Thank you very much for the comments from BP. I was pleased to see mostly agreement from him on the subject.

    "On the larger matter, I don't think we've really begun to experience the problems that Mr. Putzeys (or for that matter Lipshitz, Vanderkooy, and others) is warning us about yet. Much of the SACD material out there qualifies as an application of the technology which he endorses; DSD as delivery medium only- reissues produced in other formats and converted at a late stage for sale and the like."

    Gerry, you make it seem like there are serious enemies for DSD in Lipshitz and Vanderkooy but the last AES I attended seemed that agreement was reached that their issues were eliminated by the Reefman paper that showed how proper dithering is the solution. Also, I think that fact that recorded titles out on SACD sound so great is proof that any issues are minor.

    In a weird kind of way, I think the initial difficulty in editing has led to cleaner, less processed albums that are truer than the source. I also think that the utter transparency of high resolution forces the recording engineer to be at the top of his/her game. That's a good thing!
     
  15. LeeS

    LeeS Music Fan

    Location:
    Atlanta
    "I'm sorry but SACD has not impressed me other than Steve's own work."

    Steves work is simply superb but there are a lot of great SACD recordings out there done by other people.

    "Are the "in your face mastered SACD's" you mention the same as the ones that smear the highs? I don't hear the latter, but I do have several SACDs that are mastered hotter than I like, and with EQ choices I don't like much. DSOTM stereo is one. "

    Hmm...I'm a bit of a DSOTM fan and expert on some of the recordings. I think the new SACD is by far the most open, transparent album of this classic title. It is not bright on my system at all. It beats my MoFi album and my Harvest pressing hands down. Mastering plays a huge role in almost every case has been my experience, second only to the original recording/mic placement...then again sometimes not second at all.

    I think we have to be careful that some SACD players will produce upper frequency output that can be handled differently by different systems.
     
  16. Claude

    Claude Senior Member

    Location:
    Luxembourg
    News on Philips, SACD and DVD-A:

    Philips to Produce DVD-Audio Capable ‘Universal’ Disc Module (highfidelityreview.com)

     
  17. LeeS

    LeeS Music Fan

    Location:
    Atlanta
    Yeah, interesting story but I thought the last sentence by Stuart really indicated some bias to DVDA. Seems like he is just trying to fan the flames of the format war.

    The increased interest in universal players may indicate that the SACD camp is starting to think about adopting some sort of dual standard approacj to hirez like DTS/DD.

    That may be a good thing if it means more titles and easier/required inclusion of hirez audio on future DVD players...
     
  18. GabeG

    GabeG New Member

    Location:
    NYC

    Well, the interesting (and good) thing about highfidelitynew.com is that they don't hide their bias. Better still they have contributors who are biased to both sides (such as Brian Moura for SACD).
     
  19. Gardo

    Gardo Audio Epistemologist

    Location:
    Virginia
    Very interesting story, though all this talk about a "universal transport" is very confusing since the transport obviously isn't the issue. The issue is the all-in-one decoder chip. The reporter was a little too wired and breathless to get the distinction right.

    In fact, the tone of the piece in general isn't very helpful. DVD-A "hardware domination"? (huh?) Daggers? I understand he's on fire because Philips is being evasive and hypocritical, but that's no reason to add to the confusion and hype. Pieces like this are a big part of the reason I have to hold my nose when journalists crow about the necessity of their work, especially when it comes to being adversarial. In the end I just want to say "a pox on both your houses.":mad:

    What a mess!
     
  20. GabeG

    GabeG New Member

    Location:
    NYC

    True, but I find this much preferable to stories written that sound like their balanced, but in essence are full of %#$. At least you can read this and make judgements without reading between the lines.
     
  21. LeeS

    LeeS Music Fan

    Location:
    Atlanta
    "Better still they have contributors who are biased to both sides (such as Brian Moura for SACD)."

    Well I find Brian's reporting to be enthusiastic but generally fair and as accurate as possible. Statements like the above by Stuart do raise my eyebrows a bit.

    I agree with Gardo...we need more objective reporting.
     
  22. GregM

    GregM The expanding man

    Location:
    Bay Area, CA
    The thing is, from the very early days, anyone looking objectively at both formats had to admit that SACD catered more to the music consumer. It was more straightforward, better planned and executed from a technology and market perspective, and the titles came out faster. The hardware for SACD was also superior from the outset. Several examples of the audio press tried to hide these facts from consumers in the name of pseudo objectivity. Sound and Vision is a good example.

    I believe to this day that hi rez has been done a severe disservice by people who refused to face the "music" and wanted a so-called "balanced" view at the expense of the truth, i.e., we all are supposed to pretend that both formats are equal in meeting our needs and wants. That's not balanced.
     
  23. GabeG

    GabeG New Member

    Location:
    NYC

    With all due respect to Brian, much of what he reports is based on press releases and information from Sony.
     
  24. LeeS

    LeeS Music Fan

    Location:
    Atlanta
    "much of what he reports is based on press releases and information from Sony"

    Fair enough, but he has broken some fairly big stories as well.
     
  25. GregM

    GregM The expanding man

    Location:
    Bay Area, CA
    >> "much of what he reports is based on press releases and information from Sony" <<

    What should it be based on? Second-hand accounts? Large companies usually don't grant information beyond what is issued in press releases.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine