[JaZZ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bifcake Are we just going to sit here and spank our collective monkeys or are we going to do something about it?

Any ideas? I'm in.

 

[bifcake]

Let's compile a list of companies that produce substandard "high res" material and start inundating them with mail until we figure out a better way of proceeding.

 

[HiWire]

I really hope that Redbook recordings are NOT being deliberately "doped" in the studio. But since I am also forward-looking, I would join in the petition against falsely advertised high-res recordings.

 

[bifcake]

Let's do it then. How do we begin? Anyone have any ideas on how to compile a list of companies that do this?

 

[JaZZ]

I have 2 titles to offer:

Shostakovich / Shchedrin: Piano Concertos; Hyperion SACDA67425;
no recording-format data available, but obviously the SACD layer doesn't sound like hi-rez, just edgier and more artificial.
(I've e-mailed my complaints to the record company, without response.)

Stravinsky: The Rite of Spring / Tchaikovsky: Symphony No.4; Telarc SACD-60563;
«50 Hz Master Transfer To DSD» (no data about bit depth).
The SACD layer sounds marginally better than the CD layer, but not like real hi-rez.

 

[bifcake]

I'd like to see hard data. It's one thing to have a poorly recorded/mastered CD/DVD etc. It's another to have a PCM master transferred to an SACD and call it high res. I would like to get real facts, something to beat the record companies over the head with rather than subjective impressions.

 

[JaZZ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bifcake I'd like to see hard data. It's one thing to have a poorly recorded/mastered CD/DVD etc. It's another to have a PCM master transferred to an SACD and call it high res. I would like to get real facts, something to beat the record companies over the head with rather than subjective impressions.

While I'm convinced that the Hyperion recording is based on low-rez PCM, it's hard to prove it, of course -- you would need dedicated measuring equipment. But I think a record company can be confronted with the corresponding recording anyway. In the case of the Telarc SACD the low-rez master is clearly indicated on the cover. If you need more than that, your idea will fail.

 

[bifcake]

What's to stop the record company from simply denying that it's a pcm conversion? Then they'll take the wind out of our sails and that'll be that.

 

[JaZZ]

There can be found lots of relatively hard facts on HighFidelityReview. Some extracts:

J.S. Bach - The Complete Brandenburg Concertos
DVD-A: 48 kHz/24 bit
Tacet DVD 101

Donald Fagen - «Kamakiriad»
Master: 48 kHz/24 bit (!). DVD-A: 96 kHz/24 bit
Rhino 73782-9DVA

Porcupine Tree - «In Absentia».
Master: 48 kHz/24 bit. DVD-A: stereo: 48 kHz/16 bit / multichannel: 48 kHz/24 bit
DTS Entertainment 692860111196

Sergej Rachaninov - Piano Concertos Nos. 2+3
DVD-A: 48 kHz (apparently valid for almost all Naxos DVD-As!)
Naxos CNAX 5.110013

Roxy Music - «Avalon».
Master: analog tape. SACD: stereo: (pure) DSD / multichannel: 53.76 kHz/16 bit
Virgin CVIR 83871 SA

 

[soundboy]

Using just specs in judging software or hardware is very dangerous.

Roxy Music's Avalon SACD has nothing but good reviews on sa-cd.net after 11 reviews are written. As for "pure" DSD, unless it's a recording is directly recorded in DSD, it's not "pure" DSD.

 

[Ferbose]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaZZ There can be found lots of relatively hard facts on HighFidelityReview. Some extracts: J.S. Bach - The Complete Brandenburg Concertos DVD-A: 48 kHz/24 bit Tacet DVD 101

I have heard comments that higher wordlength (24 over 16) brings more sonic benetfits over higher dampling frequency (96k over 44k). I think I read it on Bob Katz's website. I cannot really testify on this point though, since it is hard for me to make a direct comparison.

 

[rsaavedra]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bifcake Are we just going to sit here and spank our collective monkeys or are we going to do something about it?

I think there should be a letter sent directly to Norah Jones complaning about (and maybe letting her know) what her record company is doing. I'm guessing probably she doesn't even know about that.

 

[JaZZ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by soundboy Using just specs in judging software or hardware is very dangerous.

Maybe, but after all we have to begin somewhere... And after having detected a bunch of suspicious disks, we can begin to judge their sound quality.

Quote:

Roxy Music's Avalon SACD has nothing but good reviews on sa-cd.net after 11 reviews are written.

I have this SACD myself and like the two-channel playback ([«pure»] DSD), but can't tell anything about the multichannel track. However, 53.76 kHz/16 bit is not what I would call hi-rez, although it's better than redbook CD -- and then there's the surround effect.

Quote:

As for "pure" DSD, unless it's a recording is directly recorded in DSD, it's not "pure" DSD.

That's why I've set it in brackets -- I didn't know how else to point out that there was (reportedly) no PCM processing in play after DSD encoding of the analog recording.

 

[markl]

On the Roxy SACD, the original multi-tracks had been lost or had deteriorated (I don't remember), so for the multi-channel, they had to use an older digital transfer, and create the mix from those, hence the 16-bit rating. The 2-channel is mastered from the original analog stereo mix-down tapes, though.