[Hirsch]

Quote:

Originally posted by bkelly We are no longer a bunch of audiophiles standing in front of a copy of Mona Lisa and discussing the "copy" quality of the Mona Lisa. Now we are standing in front of the real Mona Lisa. Stand there long enough and you feel a breeze through your hair and the smell of farm animals. Hell, I think I just saw Mona Lisa winking at me or was I just delerious from the sound of an SACD.

I see. A digital copy of the Mona Lisa is the same thing? Wouldn't that depend on the pixel resolution of the display? Is there any way to digitize the three dimensional nature of the painting so that you can experience the texture of it, without actually seeing it in person?

The analogy holds true for sound as well. What you described in your post was a poorly mastered recording...and yes, your sound was lost. However, I suspect you got a bum explanation from the people who put it out. Take a look at what some of the people remastering old recordings are doing with them, and putting out on LP. It's not that the sound was lost in the translation to LP, as the LP's are more than capable of faithfully reproducing the remastered material. It makes a nice excuse from the engineer, though, as he doesn't have to admit to a poor mastering job.

What I will agree with is that neither a digital format or the LP can come as close to fidelity as an analog copy of the master tape. Both are approximations, with differing strengths and weaknesses.

 

[bkelly]

Hirsch,

After doing this for many years and with some of the most reverred people in the industry I stand firmly on my comments that an an LP is a long way off from the real thing. Even a Direct-To-Disc which is already loosing ground sonically is way ahead of a commercial LP release.

This is not an argument for or against analog versus digital becasue I tend to like analog better and try, wherever possible, to record only with tube amplifiers but in the case of digital there are many things to consider and the first is that when you buy a CD what you get is an exact copy of the final digital master. The copy you have is no better or worse than the copy the artist has and no different, either! There is not a better version somewhere in the record companies vaults. The CD you paid for which cost the artist hundreds of thousands to make is the same CD that the artist has. No different. When people complain of CD's costing $15.00 or more I've got to laugh because in truth what they have in their hand is not a copy but an exact duplication of the original. In fact, it could better be understood as one of the many originals rather than a copy. Once, again, it's the same thing the artist has but it cost him dearly.

There are some technical qualifiers I could include here, such as mixing at a higher bit rate, but, in the end, it is not worth going into for the purpose of this discussion.

On the other hand the inherent problem with analog and LP's is a huge hill to get over technically. If you want I can go over that in great detail.

Once again, this is not a digital versus analog argument since I have stuck up for analog as much or more than anybody I know of. I still have friends who will only record in analog (ADD) and judging from their work they are right in doing so.

The shocking thing to me in the breif audition of SACD is how much it didn't sound digital. At least one of the recordings we listened to may have originally been recorded in analog (Stevie Ray Vaughn) and you could tell it too. To me, someone who doesn't generally get all tht excited about the latest audio advances, SACD is a big leap forward.

Talk soon.





Best
Brian

 

[TimSchirmer]

Damn...they just released Beethoven's 9th on SACD...

I'm sooo tempted to get an NS-500V (i don't currently have a redbook player for my main system)


(I highly doubt it would compete with the vinyl version though)

 

[freeflight]

Even after I bought a SACD player, I will still buy more CDs than SACDs. It will be a while or forever to see enough SACDs to appear on the market.

 

[bkelly]

Freeflight,

What does that mean? We need more info. What do you have for a system?





Best
Brian

 

[Tuberoller]

Quote:

Originally posted by TimSchirmer Damn...they just released Beethoven's 9th on SACD... I'm sooo tempted to get an NS-500V (i don't currently have a redbook player for my main system) (I highly doubt it would compete with the vinyl version though)

Tim,
Good luck finding one.I haven't seen any for about a month.

 

[radrd]

Crutchfield seems to still have them at $180.

 

[DanG]

Quote:

Originally posted by TimSchirmer Damn...they just released Beethoven's 9th on SACD... I'm sooo tempted to get an NS-500V (i don't currently have a redbook player for my main system) (I highly doubt it would compete with the vinyl version though)

Tim, you have to realize that looking at classical music in terms of "versions" is really quite simplistic and close to irrelevant. Most important to a classical piece are how it is performed and that it is mastered competently. And how can you compare the scarletbook "version" to the "vinyl version?" Do you have an analogue and digital combination player?

Thinking of classical music as though it were the same as rock and pop is silly and overlooks some of the cheapest and best ways to improve the sound -- get different recordings with different conductors and different performers. Would you compare Miles Davis' "version" of "Round about Midnight" with Thelonious Monk's??? Is it an "upgrade" to go from the CD version of Miles' performance to the SACD version of Monk's?

Sorry to go off-topic, but it seems this thread has gone off far enough. I didn't read the middle pages, by the way...

 

[pikawel]

I don't think SACD is meant to be the next big thing. When DVD took over the video market, it came out with some UMPH. Everyone knew it was out. I think companies are releasing SACD support so they can juice some quick money out of the audiophiles knowing that the next big thing isn't due out for a few more years.

Super VHS!

 

[bkelly]

DanG,

Great point! Especially when it comes to Classical or Jazz since there are sometimes dozens of versions of the the same peice of music. In fact, interpretation is everything in these genres. It's hard to get people who are not used to lisening to Classical music or Jazz to realize that they need the better recordings.

Happy Holidays!






Best
Brian