Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
CD vs. SACD
What's the story here?
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
In article , post news
wrote: What's the story here? SACD has a longer word length, higher sampling rate, higher cost than CD and in some cases.. surround as opposed to CD's stereo only. Many will argue about what's better, but thats the jist of it. hth, -- Cyrus *coughcasaucedoprodigynetcough* |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"post news" wrote in message ... What's the story here? Dunno it anybody has produced a CD and SACD from the exact same master yet. That owuld be necessary to tell if the CD version is seriously (or at all) compromised wrt the SACD version. geoff |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Geoff Wood wrote:
"post news" wrote in message ... What's the story here? Dunno it anybody has produced a CD and SACD from the exact same master yet. That owuld be necessary to tell if the CD version is seriously (or at all) compromised wrt the SACD version. geoff Such a disc would hardly help sell SACD, now would it? Mark Z. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Mark D. Zacharias wrote:
Geoff Wood wrote: "post news" wrote in message ... What's the story here? Dunno it anybody has produced a CD and SACD from the exact same master yet. That owuld be necessary to tell if the CD version is seriously (or at all) compromised wrt the SACD version. Such a disc would hardly help sell SACD, now would it? LOL! |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Mark D. Zacharias wrote:
Geoff Wood wrote: "post news" wrote in message ... What's the story here? Dunno it anybody has produced a CD and SACD from the exact same master yet. That owuld be necessary to tell if the CD version is seriously (or at all) compromised wrt the SACD version. geoff Such a disc would hardly help sell SACD, now would it? Mark Z. Would Sony/Philips sue the creator of such a disc? after all, it only proves their first invention sounds as good as their second. Talk about a catch-22. CD |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
On Thu, 14 Apr 2005 22:59:00 +1200, "Geoff Wood"
wrote: "post news" wrote in message ... What's the story here? Dunno it anybody has produced a CD and SACD from the exact same master yet. Problematic. Would that master be in 44.1/16 PCM or DSD format? Either way, the other would require recoding. Except for that caveat, there are several that come close to matching your standard. Kal |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
On Thu, 14 Apr 2005 10:23:47 -0400, Codifus
wrote: Mark D. Zacharias wrote: Geoff Wood wrote: "post news" wrote in message ... What's the story here? Dunno it anybody has produced a CD and SACD from the exact same master yet. That owuld be necessary to tell if the CD version is seriously (or at all) compromised wrt the SACD version. geoff Such a disc would hardly help sell SACD, now would it? Mark Z. Would Sony/Philips sue the creator of such a disc? after all, it only proves their first invention sounds as good as their second. Talk about a catch-22. Well, since some lame-brained marketing wag advertised the first one as 'perfect sound forever', that would kind of preclude *any* improvement, wouldn't it? :-) -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
post news wrote:
What's the story here? I guess I'm not buying that SACD player then, thanks, more money for CD's now. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
On 4/14/2005 11:26 AM, post news wrote:
post news wrote: What's the story here? I guess I'm not buying that SACD player then, thanks, more money for CD's now. Isn't SACD obsolete as the new cd players are going to be DVD audio? |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
On Thu, 14 Apr 2005 13:40:11 -0500, Dan wrote:
Isn't SACD obsolete as the new cd players are going to be DVD audio? Or was it the other way around? ;-) Kal |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
"Kalman Rubinson" wrote in message ... On Thu, 14 Apr 2005 22:59:00 +1200, "Geoff Wood" wrote: "post news" wrote in message ... What's the story here? Dunno it anybody has produced a CD and SACD from the exact same master yet. Problematic. Would that master be in 44.1/16 PCM or DSD format? Either way, the other would require recoding. Except for that caveat, there are several that come close to matching your standard. Doubtlessly the master would be at a higher bit-depth or even sample rate, but if the only difference was what was incurred in teh transcoding, that would say something about the extent of the differences, no ? Or how about a 'direct to disc' analogue source ? geoff |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 08:19:59 +1200, "Geoff Wood"
wrote: Doubtlessly the master would be at a higher bit-depth or even sample rate, but if the only difference was what was incurred in teh transcoding, that would say something about the extent of the differences, no ? Sure. There are a few. WaterLily did one with the Philadelphia Orch in CD, SACD and DVD-A. There's also a neat disc from Musical Fidelity with the DSD on the SACD layer and downsampled on the CD layer. It also has an analog source converted to DSD on the SACD layer and converted to PCM on the CD layer. Kal |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 10:21:02 +0930, Kalman Rubinson wrote:
On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 08:19:59 +1200, "Geoff Wood" wrote: Doubtlessly the master would be at a higher bit-depth or even sample rate, but if the only difference was what was incurred in teh transcoding, that would say something about the extent of the differences, no ? Sure. There are a few. WaterLily did one with the Philadelphia Orch in CD, SACD and DVD-A. There's also a neat disc from Musical Fidelity with the DSD on the SACD layer and downsampled on the CD layer. It also has an analog source converted to DSD on the SACD layer and converted to PCM on the CD layer. Kal New release from Naxos -CANTELOUBE: Chants d'Auvergne (Selection) 6.1100 SACD CANTELOUBE: Chants d'Auvergne (Selection) 5.1100 Audio CD The CD is an excelent recording in my opinion -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Kalman Rubinson wrote:
On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 08:19:59 +1200, "Geoff Wood" wrote: Doubtlessly the master would be at a higher bit-depth or even sample rate, but if the only difference was what was incurred in teh transcoding, that would say something about the extent of the differences, no ? Sure. There are a few. WaterLily did one with the Philadelphia Orch in CD, SACD and DVD-A. There's also a neat disc from Musical Fidelity with the DSD on the SACD layer and downsampled on the CD layer. It also has an analog source converted to DSD on the SACD layer and converted to PCM on the CD layer. Do these recordings have related names? |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 03:01:33 GMT, "Kerry Gascoigne"
wrote: New release from Naxos -CANTELOUBE: Chants d'Auvergne (Selection) 6.1100 SACD CANTELOUBE: Chants d'Auvergne (Selection) 5.1100 Audio CD The CD is an excelent recording in my opinion It's an OK recording of an OK performance. I've not heard the CD but I am judging from the DVD-A and the SACD. Typical of Naxos, it is recorded PCM and the SACD is made from a transfer. Kal |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 07:52:32 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote: Do these recordings have related names? Sure but I am not at home so I cannot just pick them up and look. The WaterLily is the only one they made with the Philadelphia Orchestra and the Musical Fidelity is Mozart Clarinet Concerto. Kal |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
It would be better to have the same performance, same mics, but
recorded by two machines (or three), analog, PCM and DSD. Super Audio Center established to meet growing demand for SA-CD production October 26, 2004 San Francisco, October 28, 2004 -On the eve of the 117th Audio Engineering Society (AES) Convention, a new company has been formed to meet the growing demand for SA-CD music production. The Super Audio Center, LLC (SAC) will be directed by Gus Skinas, formerly head of Field Operations for the Super Audio Project at Sony Corporation of America. During his tenure at Sony, Mr. Skinas launched the first production center in the U.S. dedicated to providing a comprehensive array of support services for SA-CD clientele, including recording and tape transfer, mixing, editing, mastering and authoring for SA-CD projects. The new Super Audio Center will be based in Boulder, Colorado and will work closely with field engineers in both Los Angeles and New York to support remote recording and mix sessions wherever they may occur. SA-CD Momentum "As the Super Audio CD format continues to gather momentum, a number of new businesses have been spawned," said David Kawakami, Director of the Super Audio CD Project for Sony Corporation of America. "Under Gus's guidance, this new SA-CD facility will enable us to better address the needs of those artists, producers and music labels who want to issue their music on this exciting, high resolution multi-channel format." SA-CD compatible products are currently being offered by more than 26 manufacturers, with nearly 120 different models available. According to the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), more than 1.3 million SA-CD albums were shipped in the U.S. in 2003 alone, bringing the total installed base of SA-CD software to over 12 million discs life-to-date. There are now more than 2,500 SA-CD titles in release worldwide, with almost half of them available in multi-channel surround. Sonoma Workstation Support The new Super Audio Center will also assume the responsibility for the management and support of the Sonoma Workstation-a standard tool used for recording and editing SA-CD projects in their native Direct Stream Digital (DSD) domain. Utilizing converters designed by Ed Meitner of EMM Labs, the Sonoma is widely regarded as one of the most transparent recording systems marketed today. The new SAC organization will be chartered to not only lease Sonoma products, but distribute them as well, making it a critical factor to ensure SA-CD's continued growth. According to Tom Jung, president and chief engineer of DMP Records, "The Sonoma System, when optically interfaced with Ed Meitner's DSD converters, is the most musically accurate recording and editing system available today at any price, period." New Sonoma Model During the 117th AES Convention, SAC will be demonstrating a Sonoma Workstation capable of recording and editing 24 tracks of DSD audio. "Many of our clients have expressed a need to record and edit more DSD channels in order to handle more complex pop music projects," said SAC director Gus Skinas. "The new Sonoma's added capacity makes it possible for us to offer up to 24 channels of high quality DSD audio in a package that behaves much like a standard multi-track recorder but delivers powerful editing as well." "With DSD, we are much closer to achieving the true capability of digital recording," said producer Michael Beinhorn. "The Sonoma machines are, in my opinion, sonically unsurpassed and have become a staple for my mixdowns. I can only imagine how remarkable the new 24-track Sonoma is." The new Sonoma Workstation will be shown in the Philips-sponsored Super Audio CD Booth #536 and in demonstrations sponsored by ATC Loudspeaker Technology in room 224. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
The Krouchebagg's logical flaw on this one is so obvious that a turnip
like me will let everyone else figure it out for themselves. That said, it's just obvious that highbit digital will more closely approximate an analog signal asymptotically as its bitrate increases. SACD and DVD-A have never impressed me as much as a few occasions of listening to either first rate vinyl or 1/2" 30 ips tape on a well set up Ampex. However the variety of source material on highbit hasn't been as great yet, and naysayers aren't helping the situation. |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
|
#22
|
|||
|
|||
"post news" wrote in message ... What's the story here? One of the big differences is that the CD was based on sound mathematical and engineering principles for sampled data systems, and SACD is based on a rather bizarre internal data format and "marketecture". But marketing will probably win out over good engineering, which is sad. If you're interested in a highly technical discussion, try this: http://sjeng.org/ftp/SACD.pdf |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Karl Uppiano wrote:
"post news" wrote in message ... What's the story here? One of the big differences is that the CD was based on sound mathematical and engineering principles for sampled data systems, and SACD is based on a rather bizarre internal data format and "marketecture". But marketing will probably win out over good engineering, which is sad. If you're interested in a highly technical discussion, try this: http://sjeng.org/ftp/SACD.pdf Which is a posting of Audio Engineering Society Convention Paper 5395: Why 1-Bit Sigma-Delta Conversion is Unsuitable for High-Quality Applications by Stanley P. Lip****z and John Vanderkooy Audio Research Group, University of Waterloo Waterloo, Ontario N2L 3G1, Canada. As I recall, AES discussions of this topic caused Sony to eventually admit that their professional SACD encoders don't actually use DSD to directly digitize analog signals for recording purposes. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... Karl Uppiano wrote: "post news" wrote in message ... What's the story here? One of the big differences is that the CD was based on sound mathematical and engineering principles for sampled data systems, and SACD is based on a rather bizarre internal data format and "marketecture". But marketing will probably win out over good engineering, which is sad. If you're interested in a highly technical discussion, try this: http://sjeng.org/ftp/SACD.pdf Which is a posting of Audio Engineering Society Convention Paper 5395: Why 1-Bit Sigma-Delta Conversion is Unsuitable for High-Quality Applications by Stanley P. Lip****z and John Vanderkooy Audio Research Group, University of Waterloo Waterloo, Ontario N2L 3G1, Canada. As I recall, AES discussions of this topic caused Sony to eventually admit that their professional SACD encoders don't actually use DSD to directly digitize analog signals for recording purposes. Well, I can see why Sony would prefer a consumer format to be "in principle imperfectible". It would make it impossible for consumers to make studio quality duplicates of SACD recordings. Still, I see it as a big step in the wrong direction. If I could see an elegant engineering design, I'd probably be an early adopter. As it is, I'll be a grudging, reluctant adopter if and when I can't find what I want to hear in any other format. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Why just highbit digital signals, Cal? Isn't it true that increasing the bitrate doesn't necessarily increase precision, particularly if the increased bitrate comes from increased sample rate and the signal being digitized is band-limted? If the data were synchronous that would be so, but by definition analog is async. Bicycle spokes and popsicle sticks and all that. || SACD and DVD-A have never impressed me as much as a few occasions of listening to either first rate vinyl or 1/2" 30 ips tape on a well set up Ampex. So Cal, how old are you anyway? Offhand I would say that only an octogenarian would fail to hear the way that vinyl trashes the audio off a good high speed analog tape. Younger than you, Arny. Good analog tape is the gold standard, is it, Arny? Well, yes. But really good vinyl comes moderately close. Maybe we should be arguing for analog optical-sprocketless film on Ampex transports with photocells instead of mag heads. But like turbine cars and Marilyn singing anything Lennon-McCartney wrote, it wasn't to be and can't now. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
|
#27
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 17 Apr 2005 00:59:32 +0200, François Yves Le Gal
wrote: On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 17:32:42 -0400, "Arny Krueger" wrote: Which is a posting of Audio Engineering Society Convention Paper 5395: It's a preprint, not a paper. BTW, it's a deeply revised version, correcting the numerous errors of preprint 5188 presented at AES 109 (August 2000), which should never have been accepted IMO. As I recall, AES discussions of this topic caused Sony to eventually admit that their professional SACD encoders don't actually use DSD to directly digitize analog signals for recording purposes. You don't recall correctly: DSD Wide was already widely deployed and well known in pro circles since 1999 or so. DSD Wide *is* DSD. Please stop this continued *lying* about DSD Wide. DSD Wide is a 64x oversampled 8-bit system, functionally identical to PCM as implemented by dCS and others. The *whole* of DSD's claimed technical advantage was rooted in it being *single bit*. Since DSD Wide is *not* single-bit, then it shows *no* technical advantage over conventional PCM. Indeed, it's more accurately described as PCM Narrow, not DSD Wide. That's one of the reasons why Lip****z and Vanderkooy rewrote their presentation. They had stated in 5188 that: "In contrast [to DSD] multibit sigma-delta converters, which output linear PCM code (here, multibit refers to five or so bits in the converter), are in principle infinitely perfectible". DSD Wide is an 8-bit form of sigma-delta. Exactly - and therefore *nothing* to do with DSD proper, whatever the marketing jerks decided to call it. The adoption of DSD Wide in the recording chain completely destroys Sony's claims for SACD. BTW, Thorpe, Bental et al. presented "DSD-Wide. A Practical Implementation for Professional Audio" at the same AES 110, preprint 5377. While Nuijten and Reefman refuted most of Lip****z and Vanderkooy's remaining arguments in "Why Direct Stream Digital (DSD) is the best choice as a digital audio format", 5396, where they showed that "1-bit DSD signals can be dithered properly, so the resulting dithered DSD stream does not contain audible artifacts in a band from 0-100~kHz". OK, proper dither isn't perfect dither, but DSD works. Which is why Sony stopped using it? BWAHAHAHAHA! -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
|
#29
|
|||
|
|||
PMFJI but the elephant in the middle of the room that everyone seems to be
dancing around is this: (1) There is the way you do analog-to-digital conversion, and (2) there is the way you STORE what you converted. Now, there are lots of 1-bit converters out there. The idea is that doing a huge number of 1-bit conversions at some huge multiple of the sampling frequency avoids certain electronic problems. I have no opinions on that, and if I did, it wouldn't matter as I'm sure this has been discussing more times than global warming and 9/11 put together. But it's all irrelevant to (2). Your storage method need not be bound by how you did the conversion. Once you've got a certain digital stream, then your problem is how to preserve its information completely, in the most efficient possible format. And what I don't understand is how any delta-modulation scheme, which is basically what SACD is, wherever it came from, could store information more efficiently than a PCM scheme having the same bit rate. We covered delta modulation, and ADPCM, and all that in engineering school. They have some uses, mainly I think as a quick-and-dirty scheme for certain telephony-related, lo-fi purposes. In about 20 years of watching the digital audio scene, I never heard anyone propose such a thing to replace PCM, until now, when the CD is a mature technology and somebody desperately needed an "improvement" to milk more money from consumers. That said, no doubt I'll eventually own some SACD discs, and a player that can handle them. That's just because there'll be remastered versions of some favorite artists, and I'll want the new version just because, I will hope, the mastering will have been done better. This kind of dilemma occurs now and then, and certainly not just in audio. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
RWG wrote:
And what I don't understand is how any delta-modulation scheme, which is basically what SACD is, wherever it came from, could store information more efficiently than a PCM scheme having the same bit rate. Agreed, there is this slight matter of information theory. SACD decreases the information content of the data it transfers by means of frequency-dependent dynamic range. The dynamic range drops precipitously above 20 KHz, which dramatically decreases the information content. In about 20 years of watching the digital audio scene, I never heard anyone propose such a thing to replace PCM, until now, when the CD is a mature technology and somebody desperately needed an "improvement" to milk more money from consumers. The same kind of frequency-dependent dynamic range management works with PCM, with similar effects on required bitrates. That said, no doubt I'll eventually own some SACD discs, and a player that can handle them. That's just because there'll be remastered versions of some favorite artists, and I'll want the new version just because, I will hope, the mastering will have been done better. This kind of dilemma occurs now and then, and certainly not just in audio. I was looking for a better-than-average optical player earleir this year, and ended up with a universal model that handles both SACD and DVD-A discs. I think it cost me about $30 more than the cheapest players from the same manufacturer. |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
"Karl Uppiano" wrote in message news:yRe8e.13896$Zn3.4537@trnddc02... and SACD is based on a rather bizarre internal data format and "marketecture". Nice terminology :-) But marketing will probably win out over good engineering, which is sad. It often does, but fortunately in this case I doubt it. MrT. |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... I was looking for a better-than-average optical player earleir this year, and ended up with a universal model that handles both SACD and DVD-A discs. I think it cost me about $30 more than the cheapest players from the same manufacturer. Which is as it should be. MrT. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
But marketing will
probably win out over good engineering, which is sad. It often does, but fortunately in this case I doubt it. I certainly hope you're right. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Great *sounding* CD recommendation? | Audio Opinions | |||
Any SACD Experience to Report? | High End Audio | |||
Sony Digital Amps (and SACD) vs. Sony Analog Amps | High End Audio | |||
Is the war over yet? DVD-audio vs SACD | High End Audio | |||
No surround channels playing Dark Side of Moon SACD | High End Audio |