Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › From CD to SACD how much of difference
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

From CD to SACD how much of difference - Page 6

post #76 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by ADD View Post
Hi,

I used two commercial HDAD releases made by Classic Records as well as the Mendelssohn Scottish Symphony on Linn records. The HDAD releases are the Stravinsky Rite of Spring (Everest) and Pictures at an Exhibition (also on Everest).
A couple of weeks ago I purchased a high-res Vivaldi track from Linn's site. I converted it to cd resolution and then - quite unsuccessfully - tried to hear the difference between the original and the converted version

Is there a particular track on the Mendelssohn album worth trying?


Regards,

L.
post #77 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leporello View Post
A couple of weeks ago I purchased a high-res Vivaldi track from Linn's site.
What options are there for downloading high-res music? Any artists/bands out there who record in 24 bit and offer it online?
post #78 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by ADD View Post
Hi,

I used two commercial HDAD releases made by Classic Records as well as the Mendelssohn Scottish Symphony on Linn records. The HDAD releases are the Stravinsky Rite of Spring (Everest) and Pictures at an Exhibition (also on Everest).

The HDAD releases were 35mm recordings made in the early 1960s. The Linn recording is a modern fully digital recording. In each HDAD release are two discs, each with identical program content. The difference between the discs is that the HDAD version contains both a 24-192 and 24-96 track, whilst the CD is just the redbook version. Both versions were converted to digital simultaneously during commercial mastering at Grundman studios using two seperate analogue to digital converters concurrently - one for the 24-192 version and another for the 16-44 version. That way, neither the final 24-96 version nor the 16-44 version suffered the ill-effects of non-integer downsampling. I then downsampled the 24-96 tracks on the HDAD disks using r8Brain Pro and created a DVD audio disk at 24 bit 48 Khz that was playable on an ordinary DVD player. This facilitated a direct comparison between the redbook disk and my 24-48 track of the same using the exact same equipment the whole time.

As for the Linn records release, it is available in both resolutions (24-96 and 16-44) from Linn's website, so I actually purchased both versions. Again, I created a redbook CD and DVD audio disk that could be played in the exact same player.

I then had an accomplice switch disks behind my back so to speak, and deliberately asked them to cheat at will so to speak by not necessarily alternating at all (i.e opening the disk tray and "swapping" disk but actually putting the same one back in again).
Thanks for describing your test, I appreciate the time you took to explain it. I have no issue with the test or the kit or how you did it. It looks like you did a serious test and had an accomplice who was not helping you. I only have one question, can you be sure that the volume levels were the same on the original HD and CD recordings ?. I only ask as I can tell the difference between my external DAC and my built-in DAC, there is a small but significant increase in the output voltage on the external, once you adjust the volume the difference (for me) is gone. Other than that the experiment looks sound.

Thanks.
post #79 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by ADD View Post
Incidentally, I found a very good high resolution recording of the violin on the net. That company High Definition Tape Transfers has Edith Peinemann playing the Dvorak - it's an open reel tape transcribed to 24-96. I'm not convinced about the equalisation curve, but the sound on that comes much closer to the real thing than CD.
I downloaded the 1st movt of the Dvorak concerto. Then:

1. converted the flac to a high-resolution (96 kHz, 24 bit) wav-file with Foobar

2. converted the high-resolution wav file to a low-resolution wav-file (i.e. 44, 1 kHz, 16 bit) with Audacity

3. converted the low-resolution wav-file back to 96 kHz 24 bit resolution with Audacity

4. tried to hear the difference between the original flac and the new 96/24 file without any success.

In my opinion the original high-res download and the downgraded version of it sound identical.

OTOH, I do not like the recording particularly much. Almost any modern run-of-the-mill violin recording sounds better to my ears.


Regards,

L.
post #80 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by sacd lover View Post
Maybe your sacd player doesnt have the resolution to reveal the difference.
1) Blame the quality of the equipment
2) Blame the hearing of the listener

If a top of the line, well reviewed SACD player can't reveal the difference in the format, the difference isn't big enough to worry about.

I've compared the output of a 24 bit ProTools rig to redbook. No difference for normal music playback. I guarantee you that if there was a difference, the ProTools rig would have been good enough to reveal it.

See ya
Steve
post #81 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by hciman77 View Post
I only have one question, can you be sure that the volume levels were the same on the original HD and CD recordings.
Yes there was, which was another reason I wanted to do the conversion. The RMS level of the 24-96 version was about 0.6 dB higher than the redbook version, so I needed to adjust the volumes on the disc to make them the same. However there is nothing you can do about the significant difference in the sound of cymbals for example, which sound fine on the redbook version until you listen to them on the higher resolution version. In other words, I would have needed to actually compress the 24-96 original at extremely high frequencies to match the perceived volume of the redbook. I obviously wasn't going to do that. Then you can hear how redbook has compressed all the overtones. The Mussorgsky is particularly graphic in this particular case.

I think I mentioned in another thread that on the LP versions of these Classic Records recordings, there is energy in the cymbals at 35 Khz - barely registerable of course, but they are still going pretty strong beyong the redbook limit and at the limit of DAT territory too. I'm not saying I can hear anywhere near that high (I am sure I can't hear anywhere near that high!), but perhaps I am perceiving the difference in a cymbal crash where the highs are brickwalled while they are still going strong versus a smoother roll-of (of everything) with the higher resolution and sample rate. I think in the case both the 24 bits and sample rate are helping, especially since that delicate high frequency information is at such very low levels.
post #82 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leporello View Post
A couple of weeks ago I purchased a high-res Vivaldi track from Linn's site. I converted it to cd resolution and then - quite unsuccessfully - tried to hear the difference between the original and the converted version

Is there a particular track on the Mendelssohn album worth trying?


Regards,

L.
I think the Linn examples aren't really the best to test out on reflection. I say this because the recording sessions took place at 24-96 and that 24-96 was downsampled to 16-44 for the redbook. Just by doing that you are going to change the sound. That's why I tested out the Classic Records HDADs as well, because I thought it was the fairest test possible, there being no non-integer downsampling involved at any step of the process.

You could perhaps give Linn's Brahms Violin Concerto a go. They also have that at 24-96 and 16-44. If you listen to both side by side, the 24-96 has very slightly more very extreme high frequency definition and clarity. It's very subtle, but's it's there.
post #83 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by ADD View Post
I say this because the recording sessions took place at 24-96 and that 24-96 was downsampled to 16-44 for the redbook.
The Vivaldi track was recorded with 24-88.2. I downloaded it like that and then downsampled it to 16-44 myself - but could hear no difference.


Regards,

L.
post #84 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by ADD View Post
I think I mentioned in another thread that on the LP versions of these Classic Records recordings, there is energy in the cymbals at 35 Khz - barely registerable of course, but they are still going pretty strong beyong the redbook limit and at the limit of DAT territory too. I'm not saying I can hear anywhere near that high (I am sure I can't hear anywhere near that high!), but perhaps I am perceiving the difference in a cymbal crash where the highs are brickwalled while they are still going strong versus a smoother roll-of (of everything) with the higher resolution and sample rate. I think in the case both the 24 bits and sample rate are helping, especially since that delicate high frequency information is at such very low levels.
In that light, have you heard any of the upsampling dacs? They don't have a brickwall filter.
post #85 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by ADD View Post
I think I mentioned in another thread that on the LP versions of these Classic Records recordings, there is energy in the cymbals at 35 Khz - barely registerable of course
35kHz wouldn't make a bit of difference to the music when it's almost a full octave above the range of human hearing. Bats and dogs might like the sound though.

See ya
Steve
post #86 of 161
If you're gonna quote someone to make a contradicting point, please don't snip out the second part that qualifies the first part of his statement.
post #87 of 161
Sorry, when I read something that just plain doesn't matter, I stop reading. There is nothing at all to hear at low levels at that frequency. None. Zip. Nada. Crank the volume up on that frequency and it may make the jelly around your brain vibrate, but it won't make a lick of difference to how cymbals in the 1812 Overture sound.

See ya
Steve
post #88 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpelg View Post
First of all, I hear a difference. And to me that difference is significant enough to want an SACD player (actually a universal player) for my home headphone setup, and purchase SACD's (and DVD-A's) whenever possible. Call me crazy. Obviously, there are variables potentially in play that can affect the sound positively or negatively that have nothing to do with the format. But all else being equal, hi-rez wins, ime.

Secondly, I know that on my Denon 3910, the factory default setting for "Source Direct" is set to "OFF". This converts DSD (SACD) signals to PCM (Redbook), which results in inferior sound quality output.

"Source Direct" should be set to "ON" for the best hi-rez sound quality. It's a tricky setting to find, and requires a monitor to view the on-screen menus. There is a substantial difference in the the sound, again imo.

I only mention this because you have a Denon also, and it might be the same for yours as well.

For you Yamaha universal player owners, they've been known to have inferior SACD playback for some reason. Their DVD-Audio is better.
I have a Yamaha dvd-s2700 universal player feeding a Musical Fidelity X-CAN v2 and a pair or Grado GS-1000 and i can assure you that my Yamaha doesn't have inferior SACD playback,in fact the SQ i get from this system is nothing short of amazing
post #89 of 161
i was talking to my manager at my work and we got into the discussion of audio which lead the topic of SACD's. He told me he could hear a difference which at first was kind of interesting (and discouraging considering i have a lot of cds). when i asked him what he was listening from he pointed at his little portable ipod dock.... needless to say, the conversation went a little cold.
post #90 of 161
two comments about why some people may not hear any benefits from SACDs.

1. if the SACD disc is not derived from a DSD source but instead PCM, there will be no SACD benefit, other than remastering.

2. most SACD players (not universals) only play stereo or 2-channel SACD, so if the SACD disc is only multi channel (and i know some are, although probably the minority), the player will default to PCM playback, so again there is no SACD benefit.

i'm still not sure where i stand on SACDs, but am considering getting a SACD player to further explore the format. from what i can tell, based on observational listening, there is a benefit to super audio.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Dedicated Source Components
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › From CD to SACD how much of difference