I have seen the spectrogram of the MFSL SACD layer as well as the Sony SACD later and the HD tracks 24/96 Hi-Res version. I’m perplexed. The MFSL SACD later shows hard frequency cutoffs below CD-frequency (approx. 20Khz). The Sony SACD later shows so for cutoff at around 20Khz, with some thinner visual representation of frequencies above that. The HDtracks version shows full frequency presence up to and through 50Khz, or thereabouts
Can you post a spectro of the HDTracks? Some mastering effects (like limiting or analog compression) can create upper harmonics like those you describe. Of course the MoFi has no limiting.
Certainly! And, apologies - after going back and reviewing, I should have said that HD tracks is 40Khz (not 50).
Thanks. This could look like the digital master was copied to analog tape then mastered. But people, please stop using Spek to analyse spectrograms, it is not sensitive enough. I know it is fast and easy to use but how many times have I read people saying "it's upsampled!!" when in fact Spek just couldn't resolve the frequency response correctly, or they couldn't analyse the spectro correctly... (see the latest Lennon Imagine remix, the Rickie Lee Jones Pirates SACD, etc...)
See, this new SACD is really interrsting to me, it's pretty much confirmed that it's one of those odball "ADD" Analog digital hybrid recordings from the 1980s and tbe final mixdown master is a digital file. Then why release this as an SACD? Wasn't the golden standard for digital audio strictly 44.1khz 16-bit? Why not mastet this for a gold CD instead? Wouldn't that make more sense? Or did the record labels record and mix music to a higher bitrate/sample rate than the redbook standard?
DSD transfers impart certain sonic characteristics even for PCM recordings that some greatly enjoy, particularly in the audible range.
It would be good if Steve Hoffman or another engineer would chime in, i find it hard to beleive that MOFI would upsample a 44.1khz 16 bit master to a hi-res format like DSD. What would be the point in that? Unless the original digital masters were.mixed down to a sample rate higher than redbook, or dubbed the digital master to analog tape for archival reasons i don't see the point in not releasing this as a gold disc.
The source may be 16/44.1 but the mastering moves are not. Vacuum tubes in the mastering can also add warmth & color. Have you heard The Nightfly One-Step? A good mastering is a good mastering. Don’t get hung up on bit rates, trust your ears instead.
Any type of signal processing whatsoever is distortion, technically. I'm just saying that it is possible for a 16/44.1 source to be improved upon with a modern audiophile mastering, even if your delivery device of choice happens to be analogue vinyl, DSD or PCM hi-res.
Let's say Mofi did release this as a Gold Disc only - it would still probably cost $29.99. So here you get an SACD layer, which may or may not sound better than if mastered for a Gold disc only, and a PCM layer that might be what it would sound like if mastered for Gold Disc only (yeah I know the PCM layer may be a downsample of the DSD layer on the SACD). Anyway, it is like getting 2 for the price of 1.
Has anyone A/B'd this new one to the old cd? Get a friend to change discs for you and see what the results are. I bought the new disc and I have the old one. Ill see if a friend can assist me in a listening test.
I guess it would only make sense if the master was only a 44.1khz 16-bit digital file. Then upsampling to DSD wouldn't add any musical information but I guess I could be wrong I'm not a sound engineer lol. I hope I don't sound like I'm doubting the quality of this release or the work ethic of mofi I'm just really curious as to the process of mastering one of those weird analog-digital hybrids for an audiophile release. Is this the first album with a digital mastering step in the chain mofi has done?
