Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › DSD or regular SACD or DVD-A or multiformat?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

DSD or regular SACD or DVD-A or multiformat? - Page 2  

post #16 of 155
9/12/03 at 12:49am
Quote:
Originally posted by Calanctus
On what are you basing this assertion? I assume it's not based on actually listening....
Though I haven't listened to very much on SACD what I have heard sounded really good, very warm... I own a DVD-A setup although it's not a very high grade one. Neither format is being used to their fullest potential so it's currently impossible to really judge. Even if you tried, you'd be comparing apples to oranges because to the best of my knowledge there isn't anything that's been released in both formats. In theory, however, SACD should not be able to surpass DVD-A in quality since all mixing is done in PCM anyway.

Head-Fi's Best Sellers

post #17 of 155
9/12/03 at 12:53am
Quote:
Originally posted by Orpheus
i think one reason why people like the SACD's and DVD-A's, is not cause either sounds all that different, but that these high resolution CDs have been remastered with better techniques and equipment... not necessarily because of the sampling technology itself.
I don't think this is true, but I do think you can make these formats sound much better cheaper than you can CD. I think CDs can sound amazingly good, but you have to spend a lot more for the players than you do with the high res stuff.
post #18 of 155
9/12/03 at 12:55am
Quote:
Originally posted by Jasper994
In theory, however, SACD should not be able to surpass DVD-A in quality since all mixing is done in PCM anyway.
Not quite true, SONY does have DSD boards they were selling to studios really cheap hoping they would take them. Not that the boards were bad, SONY was eating a lot of costs to push DSD.
post #19 of 155
9/12/03 at 12:58am
Quote:
Originally posted by Jasper994
to the best of my knowledge there isn't anything that's been released in both formats.
I think "Swing Live" from Chesky has been although i think it was mixed in PCM. And I believe that Telarc released the 1812 Oveture in both formats. The master was in DSD on this one and the DVD-Audio is a weird 88.2K instead of the more normal 48K or 96K sampling rates.
post #20 of 155
9/12/03 at 1:12am
Quote:
Originally posted by gpalmer
I think "Swing Live" from Chesky has been although i think it was mixed in PCM. And I believe that Telarc released the 1812 Oveture in both formats. The master was in DSD on this one and the DVD-Audio is a weird 88.2K instead of the more normal 48K or 96K sampling rates.
Alanis Morissette's "Under Rug Swept is" recorded at 88.2k as well... my player won't play it! That's what I get for getting a lower end DVD-A player... oh well... will get a better rig down the road when money isn't so tight.
post #21 of 155
9/12/03 at 1:42am
Thread Starter 
Whaaa!
I've heard of 96kHz, 44.1Khz, 2.8 Mhz, 192 kHz and a few other variations thereof, but I never heard of a 88.1Khz. It almost sounds like 2x oversampling of redbook.
post #22 of 155
9/12/03 at 1:44am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by Orpheus
( ...but i got another fancier 300b amp already. it's all good. but i'm glad you enjoy your amp.... by the looks of it, the parts alone must be pretty close to what you paid for it!)
off topic: but, yes the headamp was an incredible deal. So far it pairs up really well with my current system and I'm hoping to knock it up another notch with the new source.
post #23 of 155
9/12/03 at 1:48am
Quote:
Originally posted by Orpheus
nope, never hear either. i am just saying what an engineer said... you know, those folks that actually DESIGN the damn converters?
...you mean like the ones back in the 70s who desiged the solid state amps with lots and lots of global feedback to reduce distortion? Sure measured well...and sounded like crap.

Or maybe you mean the ones who assured all of us that CD was 'perfect sound forever' and that analog setups were completely outdated...

Quote:
...yeah, they probably don't know what they're talking about.... just pulling out stuff from their ass, and leave it up to audiophiles to "listen."
I agree.
post #24 of 155
9/12/03 at 1:57am
Thread Starter 
Calanctus, it's interesting you should say that. In fact the tests performed on the sharp setup were not as impressive as expected although it obviously had killer sound. In fact the same stereophile review I had excerpted before highlighted this, then again vinyl may pale in tests of accuracy yet sound far better on a more subjective plane. Test are one-dimensional tools. They are excellent at measuring one given parameter, and thus fail to deliver the true complete picture. Nonetheless, Orpheus makes a valid point. How good something sounds really depends on whether you are listening to the sound or the music. It is analogous to comparing a painters brushstroke to a computerized plotters precision. It is the brains behind either that determine their artistic value.
post #25 of 155
9/12/03 at 3:41am
Quote:
Originally posted by gpalmer
Not quite true, SONY does have DSD boards they were selling to studios really cheap hoping they would take them. Not that the boards were bad, SONY was eating a lot of costs to push DSD.
Really? from what I read they were recommending converting to PCM for mixing...
post #26 of 155
9/12/03 at 3:59am
Quote:
Not quite true, SONY does have DSD boards they were selling to studios really cheap hoping they would take them. Not that the boards were bad, SONY was eating a lot of costs to push DSD.
yeah right....... my ass "cheap." you know, there's samplitude software for dsd... wanna know how much? get this........ $30,000!!! for frickin' software!

nope.... DSD equipment is WAAAAAYYYYY out of league for small studios. and for performance less than PCM. forget it!
Quote:
Or maybe you mean the ones who assured all of us that CD was 'perfect sound forever' and that analog setups were completely outdated...
no, i mean the ones that make the very SACD player you are using today.

anyway.... how many people here actually have had the chance to compare a SACD and DVD-A of the EXACT!!! SAME mastered recording head to head? thought so......

it's pretty clear SACD is ahead mostly because of marketing. can't even find frickin' DVD-A's in a normal music store, despite the fact that almost every studio has most of the equipment to make DVD-A's. isn't that weird?--it's the easiest to make, yet you can't buy it.... doesn't that sound fishy? ...doesn't that make you question the real reason why SACD is more popular?
post #27 of 155
9/12/03 at 4:03am
Quote:
Originally posted by Jasper994
Really? from what I read they were recommending converting to PCM for mixing...
I was reading an article about a year ago and SONY was actually picking up about half the tab for a studio to convert one of their recording studios over to DSD and suggested that a number of other studios had gotten the same deal. IIRC, the number was in the dozens, but they weren't redoing all their studios, they were usually doing one to try it out. I would agree that the number of recording studios setup for DSD is a tiny minority. I've never heard a percentage, but it's gotta be tiny. Not many studios were willing to toss out their old PCM gear and install new gear for a format that really wasn't established.
post #28 of 155
9/12/03 at 6:14am
What I really don't get is why all new releases aren't being released in one of the formats... Especially DVD-A since most recordings are probably being done in 24bit/96khz anyway... and how hard is it to run it through an MLP encoder and throw on a few pics and lyrics?
post #29 of 155
9/12/03 at 7:22am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by Orpheus
it's pretty clear SACD is ahead mostly because of marketing. can't even find frickin' DVD-A's in a normal music store, despite the fact that almost every studio has most of the equipment to make DVD-A's. isn't that weird?--it's the easiest to make, yet you can't buy it.... doesn't that sound fishy? ...doesn't that make you question the real reason why SACD is more popular?
Sounds a lot like HDCD. In the early days, I went and bought an HDCD capable DVD player (Like 2 years ago! )and I've only bought my first HDCD last week. And that was by accident! Despite whatever advantage (perceived or real) DVD-A has, there is hardly any media that is easily available. My brother who happens to be an electrical & electronics major reccomended buying DVD-A, because, like Orpheus, felt it was technologically superior. Even he was hard-pressed to find media so much so that he eventually sold his DVD-A player.
post #30 of 155
9/12/03 at 2:06pm
I mean, really... every person who buys into DVD-A or SACD isn't buying into MP3 and is very unlikely to be distributing the music on a large scale. Even if they break the encryption and copy it, file sizes are rather large for major distribution.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Dedicated Source Components
This thread is locked  

Head-Fi's Best Sellers

Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › DSD or regular SACD or DVD-A or multiformat?