One would imagine that it's because it costs $ to license and create a surround mix, and that something that sells in such miniscule numbers doesn't warrant the expenditure.
I'm thankful for the good stuff, yes. But much of the rest of it is of questional pedagree. I mean, the all-important analogue to digital or DSD transfer, who is making it? How is it being made? From what source tape? To what machine via what playback deck? Anything in the middle of the transfer loop like mastering gear or noise reduction or needless stuff? What happens next, etc., etc., etc.? I love the original SONY DSD single layer SACDs. Most of those were direct transfers by people I know and trust and I'm glad I have them. If someone tells me here that something sounds good on SACD (someone that I trust, that is) I'll grab it. But we gotta be careful with our money on some of this crapola.
By and large most of my SACDs sound very good but I've tried to buy those from the original tape (or at least claiming to be). I'm pleasantly surprised at all the new titles. I did figure SACD would be around for a while (and said so here and was often criticized). The number of people interested in this niche format is great enough to sustain it for a while I believe and we seem to have hardware and software support. My only wish is that the SHM-SACDs were more affordable because the dozen or so titles I have sound great!
I'd be very surprised if the SACDs happens to be new DSD transfers...very surprised. And I agree with Pana Plasma, it's dissapointing the that 24/96 and 24/192 PCM masters are compressed. This shows that Warner did not aimed the DVD-A releases for the audiophiles, but more for Joe six-pack.
I agree Steve but there are a number of labels doing work in pure DSD like Channel Classics, 2L, Stockfisch, etc. or from tape like APO, MFSL, and Chesky (on older titles where a tape exists) that there is plenty to say grace over. I love the early Sony titles also. Great stuff. I have most of them and all the classical ones.
Unless it is a title that I really want, I am not going to buy any more of the SHM-SACD titles using prior DSD masters or mastered from Japan tapes. Universal Music seems to be getting the message - Black Sabbath and Thin Lizzy titles scheduled for August will now use UK tapes. Sadly, Steely Dan's The Royal Scam is still listed as being from the Japan tapes. All of the new Stones titles are going to be "flat transfers" using original UK tapes, which make them essential to me for historical purposes. Looking forward to hearing Tattoo You tonight.
But why did the engineers for some (most?) of the DVD-A transfers choose a DR of 7-9, when they could choose DR 9-16? Why?
Good question and sadly I can't answer that. All I know is that the vast majority of the non-audiophiles I know don't care about 24/96, dynamic range, etc. They would rather focus on the music itself rather then to nitpick about the mastering like we do around here. So that's why Death Magnetic happens.
Most of the players these days support native DSD output over HDMI to any number of receivers that support DSD>analog conversion using "pure" modes that avoid PCM conversion. For example the Oppo 980H > 95BD Receivers from Marantz, Denon, Onkyo, etc:
I find some of the posts in this thread very sad. If anything, it's been some of the recent gold CD releases and not SACD's that I've been most disappointed in. This forum contains a wealth of valuable information. If do find it discouraging when hearsay and misinformation become intertwined with the largely objective and very helpful discourse. Mike
Good point...some are quick to jump on a (supposedly) poor SHM-SACD but not on a poor 'audiophile' Gold disc.
I agree. But most of us have not your knowledge. We don't hear what you hear. We don't have your classy hi-fi setup Everything that sounds better than modern loudness wars cd's is better. I'm afraid of buying new cd's. I'm a rock fan, but I can't listen to new rock-albums without getting headache. The only "good sounding" album I've heard so far this year was Intergalactic Lovers "Greetings and Salutations" (Steve Rooke, Abbey Road, Beatles Remasters). It's still not perfect ... But I would be glad if every new album would sound like this. I don't want to spend money on vinyl ... But I want good sounding music in high resolution. So what's left: a handful Mofi titles a year, the shm-sacd's and rarely an apo pop/rock title. I really miss AF here: they've got the mastering engineers, the best gear,... For the Warner Japan sacd's: I'm not 100%, but I'm afraid it will be the same mastering as the dvd-a's. If they used the Kevin Grey & SH remaster, everyone would buy a copy. I would even pay 100$ or more. A missed opportunity.
I don't have a classy setup by any standards, but I can still tell the difference between a CD and SACD. I can also the difference between a DVD-A and SACD on my system because on most DVD-As, my system doesn't play the centre vocal channel. Another reason why I prefer SACDs
I'm not surprised at the recent resurgence, I'm delighted! When Sony released their budget stereo SACD player a few months ago, Richer Sounds dropped their price for the Onkyo C-S5VL (two-channel) player to match it. I snapped one up for £150 (Stg) and I've offset the price saving by splashing out on Analogue Productions Hybrid SACDs. I had built up a collection of Hybrid discs over the past few years (Animals, CCR, Clapton, Sam Cooke, Dylan, the Stones, Mingus, etc.) but until recently I could only play the redbook layers. I've not yet pulled the trigger on any SHM-SACDs, though I do have a couple in my CDJapan shopping basket.
But they forgot that Joe six-pack is no longer interested in buying physical carriers. He is downloading everything from the net for free, or in best case from iTunes (in 256 kbps cd quality) He never heard of high resolution, sacd, blu-ray audio or dvd-a. And the audiophile is not interested in "DR7" high resolution discs. Warner Japan just jumped on the sacd-train to fool some "unknowing", "unaware" or "newbie" audiophiles, after the success of the shm-sacd's in Asia. I think (and I hope I'm wrong). (was talking about Fleetwood Mac "Rumours" sacd that should get the SH & KG remastering in the previous topic)
I have the Oppo 83SE and I assumed that it output DSD without PCM conversion when the DSD setting was selected. When I listen to 2CH SACDs I set the 83SE to DSD then pass the signal to my Parasound 2100 preamp. I hope I'm getting native DSD and not DSD converted to PCM. Bill
NAD told me their universal player, the T585 did NOT convert SACD to PCM. And that the analog outputs were "true" DSD->ANALOG. Now did they tell me wrong?
The newer Oppo's [BDP-83se, BDP-95 and I think BDP-93] via HDMI and most of the higher end Denon's via Denon Link do pure DSD playback. When I playback those ways the DSD light on my receiver illuminates. When I play back through other methods the light does not and sound is noticeably different. I know a lot of other gear, like NAD mentioned in above post, does the same - still the majority probably does not.
Yes if you go analog on the Oppo the result is different than via HDMI. Receiver of course must support DVD playback. BTW I'm not saying which sounds better or worse SACD through HDMI or Analog from my 95, only that the results are different - same with my reference Denon which is my preferred SACD transport for sound, although it's real close and that is a credit the much lower priced Oppo. Oppo makes some great stuff for little money in comparision. Hopefully they don't get bought out
