DCC Archive SACD

Discussion in 'Music Corner' started by Mal, Nov 24, 2001.

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

    Mal Phorum Physicist Thread Starter

    I've got two questions concerning SACD (let's leave DVD-A out of this for a minute):

    a) Is anyone willing to say that SACD is a potential improvement over Vinyl? I haven't heard SACD yet, but I know that Vinyl at it's best can be totally awesome.

    b) Is everyone as concerned as me about the record companies wasting any potential SACD might have by attempting to "improve" the sound of original analogue recordings in the mastering process?

    If re-mastering engineers (with very few exceptions) feel the need to suffocate great recordings from the 50's 60's and 70's by using Sonic Solutions, Cedar etc. in order to get the most out of CD aren't they going to be even more zealous in their efforts to remove hiss and other noise inherent in the master tapes in order to get the most out of SACD?!
    Of course, some stock CD releases have been treated with dignity - but not many.

    Incidentally, is there any way we can convince EMI/Apple to let Steve oversee the transfer of the Beatles catalogue onto SACD (assuming he's willing :p)?
    Seriously, we could try......

    (As the Rutles put it: "I'm living in hope")

    [ November 24, 2001: Message edited by: Malc S ]
     
  2. Metralla

    Metralla Joined Jan 13, 2002

    Location:
    San Jose, CA
    Malc S,

    Surprisingly, we have seen many jazz releases on SACD from 50's tapes where no attempt has been made to doctor the tape hiss, and the ones like this that I have heard sound stupendous. Take "Kind Of Blue" as an example.

    Newer SACDs made with DSD througout have zero noise, and truly amazing sonics - for example, on the FIM label, "River of Sorrow".

    Late '70s stuff? Blood, Sweat and Tears has no discernible tape noise and has a freshness, energy and musicality that I believe is superior to vinyl.

    So far, I am very impressed by SACD. I had been contemplating buying a new high-end vinyl rig but I'm going to stick with the Linn and the records I have, and surf the SACD wave. It's going to be a sweet ride. Sure, there have been fewer releases than is desirable but I think it's rolling now.

    Regards,
    Metralla
     
  3. No less an LP/analog maven than Michael Fremer of Stereophile magazine says that SACD offers all the advantages of analog master tapes{!} with none of the format's weaknesses, especially in full Direct Stream Digital mode. Having heard both, I tend to agree with him. I think we should consider ourselves fortunate that Sony is now pushing this format by delivering reasonably-priced SACD players to store shelves for audiophiles with real-world budgets. Hopefully, we'll see some titles from Universal & EMI in the coming months now that they've officially announced their commitment. :D
     
  4. GregM

    GregM The expanding man

    Location:
    Bay Area, CA
    >> a) Is anyone willing to say that SACD is a potential improvement over Vinyl? I haven't heard SACD yet, but I know that Vinyl at it's best can be totally awesome. <<

    As stated above, the general consensus is that SACD is as good as virgin vinyl, though some still prefer their 45's. No one is necessarily choosing SACD over vinyl, but the advantages of digital are nice, and SACD seems to have none of the disadvantages.

    >> b) Is everyone as concerned as me about the record companies wasting any potential SACD might have by attempting to "improve" the sound of original analogue recordings in the mastering process? <<

    If anything, the improvements afforded by SACD will show remaster engineers the error of their ways in producing CDs. It certainly can't get any worse. DSD can potentially make it much better. If you are losing sleep over this-- stop.

    >> If re-mastering engineers (with very few exceptions) feel the need to suffocate great recordings from the 50's 60's and 70's by using Sonic Solutions, Cedar etc. in order to get the most out of CD aren't they going to be even more zealous in their efforts to remove hiss and other noise inherent in the master tapes in order to get the most out of SACD?! <<

    Why do you think so? Have you heard any of the available SACDs?

    >> Incidentally, is there any way we can convince EMI/Apple to let Steve oversee the transfer of the Beatles catalogue onto SACD (assuming he's willing )?
    Seriously, we could try...... (As the Rutles put it: "I'm living in hope") <<

    Hope or denial? :D
     
  5. Uncle Al

    Uncle Al Senior Member

    Location:
    Long Island, NY
    With the initial marketing strategy aimed at "high end" audiophiles, and the curent strategy aimed at "audiophiles with a real world budget" (wonderful phrase there - thank you luke j), I wouldn't be too concerned with excessive compression, noise reduction, etc.

    However - should SACD ever become the dominant format, I imagine that there will be no avoiding a repeat of the current evils. After all - early CD's suffered more from the use of poor analog masters and misused A/D converters than excessive noise reduction and compression. Those evils came about after the format gained market dominance.

    [ November 25, 2001: Message edited by: Uncle Al ]
     
  6. Mal

    Mal Phorum Physicist Thread Starter

    Greg,

    Call me a cynic, but looking at the mess the majors made of transferring their priceless back catalogue to CD (Badfinger, Beatles, Bowie, etc, etc....), I wouldn't be suprised if they don't make the most of the potential that SACD has to offer.

    As I said before, I haven't yet heard SACD - but just looking at the available releases raises questions about the future. Looking at the Byrds release makes me wonder if we are in for a move towards re-mixed releases generally. I know some people love the new Byrds and Simon & Garfunkel CDs, but they are not the REAL thing! (OK, Bookends and BOTW excepted)

    This, to me, would be just as bad as them NoNoising the original tapes (if not worse)!


    It's not really fair to suggest that just because the Jazz SACDs sound fantastic the rock/pop (for want of a better name) releases will too. Jazz releases have always been treated with more dignity, whatever the format.

    I'm serious about trying to get Apple/EMI to let Steve master the Beatles tapes to DSD - how about a petition? :eek:

    [ November 25, 2001: Message edited by: Malc S ]
     
  7. GregM

    GregM The expanding man

    Location:
    Bay Area, CA
    Malc, I'd sign your petition! Pardon *my* cynicism but even if you got 200 million signatures it wouldn't make any difference to EMI. I think CD is a fundamentally flawed medium in a way SACD and LP are not. This makes engineers approach CD in all kinds of different ways attempting to adjust for that brick wall. Steve of course has the right approach, but just because others have the wrong approach, don't let that dull your enthusiasm for SACD. No matter who DSD remasters those Beatles titles, I'll be first in line for the SACDs and I'll bet they sound a lot better than the CD versions.
     
  8. christopher

    christopher Forum Neurotic

    complete and total ********.

    later, chris
     
  9. Jim Ricketts

    Jim Ricketts Active Member

    Location:
    Freedom, USA
    I agree 110%. No question that SACD is far superior to redbook CD and much closer to pure analog. Ultimately, it is more musical and satisfying than CD, too and appears to be the future standardized format considering the major labels jumping on board the SACD bandwagon. The superior copy protection of SACD vs. the audible DVD-A watermarking (and lack of copy protection) no doubt played a role in the labels decision.
     
  10. Gary

    Gary Nauga Gort! Staff

    Location:
    Toronto
    I agree with GregM on this except I'd put it in a different way: CD is limited in what it can reproduce. It's like when you copied an LP to tape for the car deck. The tape sounded duller, less highs, etc. Then you'd tweak it, buy better tapes, EQ it to make it sound better.... but still the LP was better!

    HDCD raised the bar (16 to 20 bits) noticibaly. SACD raises the bar significantly. But I'll bet there will be better technology in the future that will improve on SACD! Hard to imagine - but remember way back in '85 we all thought taking away the tape hiss would make CDs sound better.... :(
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine