(O/T) - Why do SACDs sound better? (Soft troll)
 

Jim Lesurf wrote:

In article , Chris Isbell
wrote:

BTW: I recently obtained a DVD-Audio player. My one DVD-Audio disc
sounds very nice, but no better than a good CD. (It's the Bach St.
Matthew Passion conducted by Harnoncourt and was recorded specifically
for DVD-Audio rather than being a remix of a 70s pop record.)

As an experiment I tried adding two rear speakers but found that this
made only a marginal difference for classical music.

I was very pleasantly suprised by just how good some DVD videos of
classical items are. I was tempted at one point to wonder if this is due to
the 48kHz sampling rate as opposed to 44kHz for CD. (I am only using the
stereo PCM sound for the DVDs.) However there are so many differences
between my CD and DVD systems [1] that it is essentially impossible for me
to form any conclusion about this at present.


It is possible to include a 96kHz 24 bit linear PCM track on a DVD video
- possibly that is what you are hearing (although cheaper DVD playerss
subsample this down to 48kHz).

Cheers.

James.

(O/T) - Why do SACDs sound better? (Soft troll)
 

"Keith G" wrote in message
.. .
"RobH"
wrote


OK, I'm declaring the whole morning a Coffee Break (but I'll have to
stop
for lunch soon........)

Let's have a clear up - shift yer legs, there's a bit under your
chair....


swoosssh....


Comparing recordings with live events is like comparing TV and
films
with
real life........
I agree with you that comparing TV/films with real live is generally
not
a good idea.
But if everybody had this attitude there would not have been any
improvments in any medium.


Yes and no - mostly no. I must admit, I don't think I could handle the
'baggage' you get with 78s. Fun and all that, but wouldn't do me - for
a
start, the material available on 78 don't exactly 'lift my skirt', to
be
honest. (A bit of tinny Caruso in some period Eytie flic is one thing,
but
settling down to an evening of it? - Nah, blx to that, it ain't me....
:-)



Imagine, for example, the first films were B&W. Somebody says "but
it's
not in colour".
Answer: don't be silly you shouldn't compare films with real life.


Very interesting point. Now, there may be an age thing here - I'm old
enough
to remember when TV was only black & white, OK?
Well, it's all I had when I was a kid.



So, at my age, I will say to you that, when a B&W film comes on the
telly it
takes me about 1 minute to forget it's B&W! My enjoyment of that
film - the
usual 'quality' of which more than compensates for any 'technical
shortfall,
I might add - I don't watch any movie unless it's a good 'un, is in no
way
lessened by it being a 'mono'(chrome) number. In fact, if there are
ads
(which are in colour, naturellement), it always comes as a bit of a
shock
for a few moments and when the film resumes there is almost a sense of
relief - takes only a few moments to get back 'with the programme'!

Not like that for you at all. I presume?

Au contraire, I enjoy B&W films and photography. Recently I've seen A
Canterbury Tale (1944), Great Expections (1958), Shichinin No Samurai
(1954) etc and loved every minute of them.
Obviously they also had mono soundtracks ;-)



Another example - mono sound recordings. Somebody says "it sounds
like
the orchestra are all sitting on top of each other". Answer: don't
be
silly you shouldn't compare films with real life.

Ok, now this is a very 'telling' remark.
That's why I included it in the post.


I guess you've never really heard
any 'mono' then? (Or, at least, not mono done well).
You guessed wrong - my favourite recording of all time is a mono
recording.


I suppose mono CDs
don't exist?
I've got a few. Mainly "historical re-issues" of 1950s recordings that
I've already got on LP or compact crapette.



I have dozens (possibly hundreds) of mono discs and I guarantee you
wouldn't
notice when I put one on. In fact I have one disc marked 'original
mono
recordings' which I have used to 'trick' a good number of people with.
The
soundstage is huge, the detail is excellent, the tone is superb and
the
whole experience (if you like Lionel Hampton) is extremely pleasant. A
pair
of speakers here is essential to create 'scale' - a single speaker
would
have to be a bit of a mutha to create the same effect!

Then you are not really talking about mono. I take it you are using a
stereo cartridge?



(I have given Nick G a copy of the very same disc and I am sure it
will do
*exactly* the same stuff on his kit. I don't know if he's tried it on
anyone
yet - perhaps he'll comment.)

Rob, no less than 4 people from this group have had the chance to
compare CD
with vinyl on my kit (which always manages to sound a bit 'off the
fang'
when they're here, I might add!!!). Not one of them has preferred the
CDs.
As I have said oft times before - if you want to drag your CDP and a
few
disks here (Beds/Cambs border on the A1) you are perfectly welcome so
to do.
Unfortunately I don't think that will be practically possible 'cos my
CDP only has a Quadlink output or do you have a 99 Pre-amp?
Thanks for the kind offer though.

Mind you, I suppose I could bring me pre-amp, power amps and speakers.
Humm, no, on seconds thoughts that won't work - I can't fit me speakers
in the car.


If you thought the vinyl sounded ****e you would be equally welcome to
say
so!



Personally, I can't get enough of it - NP: Joan Baez 'Diamonds And
Rust'.
Actually it ain't - it's just ending, now I've got to go and change
it!
(Fakkin' LPs - they're a pain in the arse!). OK, NP: Joni Mtchell
'Mingus'........
Yeah, I've got Diamonds and Rust. Sheer genius.



My loudspeakers don't sound right. Don't be worry you shouldn't
compare
recordings with real life.


OK, OK I get your drift.....

I thought you might eventually.



There is something of a Paradox in my philosophy, I have to say - I
don't
need/seek '100% lifelike accuracy' but I do want the 'best possible
sound'......!

No paradox in mine. Sometimes I want "accurate reproduction", sometimes
I want that classic performance (but most of the time I want both!) and
with CD/vinyl there is no guarantee of either.


(What's the problem with that? - It's my life and I'm paying........!)
Absolutely. Live and let live I say.


Worse - they asked us to remain seated throughout the entire
performance and
I like to shuffle up and down the rows during the quiet bits......
And a bit of a bugger if you need to nip to the loo.


Do NOT mention that.....
Have to sit with crossed legs, did we?


SNIP

So if listening to the Mahler recording from the "digital" master is
"crap" how does transferring the recording to vinyl de-crap it?


F*ck Nose - ask Jim Lesurf, perhaps he's got an explanation?
Well, I'm asking you because you wrote "ALL digital
music is crap compared to vinyl" and the implication that the process of
transferring the digital recording to vinyl magically makes it better is
patently false. Does the expression "rubbish in, rubbish out" ring any
bells?


All I would say
is that 'sharpest and brightest' ain't always best.
I wouldn't disagree.



Ever seen 'soft focus'
used to good effect in the flics?
Course. Used in Photography as well. It's called "artistic effect" but
nobody would claim that it is anyway authentic but why should it be?


I love these slightly 'contentious threads - always bring up something
of
interest. (As opposed to Cable Jerking and people with strange
hardware prob
lems I can't solve...) Like my ''soft troll' in the Subject line'
ploy? -
Keeps the Wanky Yankee out of the equation! (Better'n garlic...!!)

Quite.


--
RobH
The future's dim, the future's mono.

(O/T) - Why do SACDs sound better? (Soft troll)
 

"MrBitsy" wrote in message
...

"RobH"
wrote in
message ...

snip


But then I wouldn't go to pop/rock events for quality sound.


And there you go, the most telling phrase of them all.
Yes, the sound quality at pop/rock concerts is always very poor and to
expect it to be "authentic" is daft.
However, I think I'm correct in thinking that the sound quality at, say,
an LSO concert it should be.


Why do you go to the concert if it isn't for the sound quality?
I go for different reasons for different music.
Do you expect to have the same experience if you go to the cinema to see
"Howard the Duck" or "Citizen Kane" ?


There must
be something else there that grabs you by the short and curlies. The
sound
may not be up to a sound system at home but the atmosphere, colours,
ambience overcome any sound issues.
Well, in the case of U2 at Wembley Stadium, it didn't.


Keith also made a telling remark - why are black and white movies so
good?
Just because I like watching B&W films and there are good & bad B&W
films is absolutely no reason to say the colour films are a better or
worse experience. I like to watch both.

Sctratches, bad contrast and no colour yet the movie can still pull
you in.
Within a few seconds of the movie starting you don't care about the
colour.
Watched any Laural and Hardy recently - was the humour spoilt because
of a
lack of colour and some scratchy sound?

For me, vinyl has a certain ambience about it that pulls me in to the
performance in a different way to cd. Yes, there are some scratches
and
colour but a certain 'feeling' is there that I find cd can't
reproduce.
If you want to listen to the "ambience" of vinyl you won't hear me
complaining.

I like to listen to music performed by "acoustic" instruments and they
don't particularly sound like LPs to my ear. Equally I've got 1950s
recordings which I don't expect to sound "authentic" either.




--
RobH
The future's dim, the future's mono.

(O/T) - Why do SACDs sound better? (Soft troll)
 

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"MrBitsy" wrote in message

"RobH"
wrote in message ...

snip


But then I wouldn't go to pop/rock events for quality sound.


And there you go, the most telling phrase of them all.

Why do you go to the concert if it isn't for the sound quality?

The music.

The ambiance.

The tour T-shirt.


--
RobH
The future's dim, the future's mono.

(O/T) - Why do SACDs sound better? (Soft troll)
 

On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 15:44:34 +0000 (UTC), "RobH"
wrote:


"MrBitsy" wrote in message
...

"RobH"
wrote in
message ...

snip


But then I wouldn't go to pop/rock events for quality sound.


And there you go, the most telling phrase of them all.

Yes, the sound quality at pop/rock concerts is always very poor and to
expect it to be "authentic" is daft.

Why? *Some* live sound is poor -- although these days even the worst
seem to be considerably better than the hideous excesses of distortion
and feedback we used to be subjected to in the 70s ;-( However, the
sound in some locations can be *very* good - the best I know of is the
Warfield Theater in San Francisco, whose in-house PA system sounds
like a good hi-fi (albeit w/ about 6000W of amplification!).

Having said that, it is perfectly possible for a recording to be a
good - even excellent - representation of the 'live' sound at a
concert. Right now, I'm listening to a recording of a band called the
String Cheese Incident, from a show at the Union Chapel in Islington
on June 30 this year. Now, sensitivity for the ears of my family and
neighbours means that I'm playing it at something less than the volume
of the actual show (which, BTW, I was at). However, what I'm
listening to sounds very 'lifelike' (remember that word?), i.e., the
combination of the music the band played, the acoustics of the venue,
the interaction with the crowd, all seem to be much as they were a
couple of weeks ago.

The key to this is that the CDs I'm listening to came from a DAT
recording, made in the audience, using good (Sonic Studios DS6)
microphones. It is very rare that such recordings are available
commercially - typical 'live' albums take multi-channel feeds from the
live mixing desk, sometimes supplemented by additional mic feeds
specific to the recording process, onto multi-track tape, which is
then mixed (and, all too often, overdubbed) for consumption. No
surprise, them, that your typical 'live album' doesn't sound like the
actual performance its drawn from!

However, I think I'm correct in thinking that the sound quality at, say,
an LSO concert it should be.

Of course, the technique I described above is exactly that used for
many classical music recordings: one pair of microphones. ISTR that
there were (sometime in the 70s, at a guess) classical recordings made
with multiple (often close-mic'd) feeds onto multi-track tape that was
subsequently mixed by the conductor. From my recollection of these,
the sound was diabolical (not surprisingly, a Beethoven symphony
recorded this way starts to sound more like the ELO than the LSO!)

snip

may not be up to a sound system at home but the atmosphere, colours,
ambience overcome any sound issues.
Well, in the case of U2 at Wembley Stadium, it didn't.

*Anything* at Wembley Stadium will probably sound seriously BAD. I
don't know whether the 'new' Wembley will take into account some of
the developments in stadium design in the US, where major concerts can
account for a major slice of the stadium's income and a great deal is
invested to ensure that the locations of stage, speaker towers
(increasingly flown over the audience rather than blasting into the
faces of the front rows), etc. are optimised to make the sound as good
as it can be.

Julian


--
Julian Fowler
julian (at) bellevue-barn (dot) org (dot) uk

(O/T) - Why do SACDs sound better? (Soft troll)
 

"Julian Fowler" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 15:44:34 +0000 (UTC), "RobH"
wrote:


"MrBitsy" wrote in message
...

"RobH"
wrote in
message ...

snip


But then I wouldn't go to pop/rock events for quality sound.


And there you go, the most telling phrase of them all.

Yes, the sound quality at pop/rock concerts is always very poor and
to
expect it to be "authentic" is daft.


"authentic" == comparision with studio album.
Any one who expects the studio album at a pop/rock concert is daft IMHO.



--
RobH
The future's dim, the future's mono.

(O/T) - Why do SACDs sound better? (Soft troll)
 

"RobH" wrote


Another example - mono sound recordings. Somebody says "it sounds
like
the orchestra are all sitting on top of each other". Answer: don't
be
silly you shouldn't compare films with real life.

Ok, now this is a very 'telling' remark.
That's why I included it in the post.


I guess you've never really heard
any 'mono' then? (Or, at least, not mono done well).
You guessed wrong - my favourite recording of all time is a mono
recording.


What is it?


have to be a bit of a mutha to create the same effect!

Then you are not really talking about mono.


'Phantom mono', if you prefer then.......


I take it you are using a
stereo cartridge?


Yes and still wired for stereo.



(I have given Nick G a copy of the very same disc and I am sure it
will do
*exactly* the same stuff on his kit. I don't know if he's tried it on
anyone
yet - perhaps he'll comment.)


Or perhaps he won't.....




Mind you, I suppose I could bring me pre-amp, power amps and speakers.
Humm, no, on seconds thoughts that won't work - I can't fit me speakers
in the car.


Maybe you need a biger car then!


Yeah, I've got Diamonds and Rust. Sheer genius.


I like her very first 2 albums best.





My loudspeakers don't sound right. Don't be worry you shouldn't
compare
recordings with real life.


OK, OK I get your drift.....

I thought you might eventually.


No, I don't necessarily agree with you, but I understand the point you were
making......


Rest snipped - run out of time!

(O/T) - Why do SACDs sound better? (Soft troll)
 

"Keith G" wrote in message
...
"RobH"
wrote


Another example - mono sound recordings. Somebody says "it
sounds
like
the orchestra are all sitting on top of each other". Answer:
don't
be
silly you shouldn't compare films with real life.

Ok, now this is a very 'telling' remark.
That's why I included it in the post.


I guess you've never really heard
any 'mono' then? (Or, at least, not mono done well).
You guessed wrong - my favourite recording of all time is a mono
recording.


What is it?
It is a recording of some Bach played by a Spanish guitarist by the name
of Narciso Yepes.


have to be a bit of a mutha to create the same effect!

Then you are not really talking about mono.


'Phantom mono', if you prefer then.......


I take it you are using a
stereo cartridge?


Yes and still wired for stereo.



(I have given Nick G a copy of the very same disc and I am sure it
will do
*exactly* the same stuff on his kit. I don't know if he's tried it
on
anyone
yet - perhaps he'll comment.)


Or perhaps he won't.....
You just can't get the staff.



Mind you, I suppose I could bring me pre-amp, power amps and
speakers.
Humm, no, on seconds thoughts that won't work - I can't fit me
speakers
in the car.


Maybe you need a biger car then!
Unfortunately I couldn't afford a Mercedes Estate.



Yeah, I've got Diamonds and Rust. Sheer genius.

I like her very first 2 albums best.





My loudspeakers don't sound right. Don't be worry you shouldn't
compare
recordings with real life.


OK, OK I get your drift.....

I thought you might eventually.


No, I don't necessarily agree with you, but I understand the point you
were
making......
Did I say you agreed with me?


--
RobH
The future's dim, the future's mono.

(O/T) - Why do SACDs sound better? (Soft troll)
 

"RobH" wrote in
message ...

"Keith G" wrote in message
...
"RobH"
wrote


Another example - mono sound recordings. Somebody says "it
sounds
like
the orchestra are all sitting on top of each other". Answer:
don't
be
silly you shouldn't compare films with real life.

Ok, now this is a very 'telling' remark.
That's why I included it in the post.


I guess you've never really heard
any 'mono' then? (Or, at least, not mono done well).
You guessed wrong - my favourite recording of all time is a mono
recording.


What is it?
It is a recording of some Bach played by a Spanish guitarist by the name
of Narciso Yepes.


Right, I'm not here! (Should have been out of here an hour ago!)

Yepes (LPs of course - WTF else?):

Plays Bach - DG Stereo 2535 248
Spanish Guitar Music (the usual - Albéniz, Granados, Tárrega, Llobet,
Ruiz-Pipó, Villa-Lobos, de Falla) - DG Stereo 2535 182
Guitar Music Of Spain (Catalonian obscure stuff mostly) - Contour CC7584
Guitar Music Of The 20th Century (Wild modern stuff - brilliant - Poulenc,
Brouwer, Ruiz-Pipó, Maderna, Balada, Kuera) - DG Stereo 2530 802

A very 'pleasant plucker' indeed..... :-)

(Say the word and I'll, er, tape you summat, if you are quite partial and
don't have all the above.......!)

(O/T) - Why do SACDs sound better? (Soft troll)
 

"Keith G" wrote in message
...
"RobH"
wrote in
message ...

"Keith G" wrote in message
...
"RobH"
wrote


Another example - mono sound recordings. Somebody says "it
sounds
like
the orchestra are all sitting on top of each other".
Answer:
don't
be
silly you shouldn't compare films with real life.

Ok, now this is a very 'telling' remark.
That's why I included it in the post.


I guess you've never really heard
any 'mono' then? (Or, at least, not mono done well).
You guessed wrong - my favourite recording of all time is a mono
recording.


What is it?
It is a recording of some Bach played by a Spanish guitarist by the
name
of Narciso Yepes.


Right, I'm not here! (Should have been out of here an hour ago!)

Yepes (LPs of course - WTF else?):
I wish.
Unfortunately it's on a cruddy old compact cassette.



Plays Bach - DG Stereo 2535 248
Spanish Guitar Music (the usual - Albéniz, Granados, Tárrega, Llobet,
Ruiz-Pipó, Villa-Lobos, de Falla) - DG Stereo 2535 182
Guitar Music Of Spain (Catalonian obscure stuff mostly) - Contour
CC7584
Guitar Music Of The 20th Century (Wild modern stuff - brilliant -
Poulenc,
Brouwer, Ruiz-Pipó, Maderna, Balada, Kuera) - DG Stereo 2530 802

A very 'pleasant plucker' indeed..... :-)
Yepp.


(Say the word and I'll, er, tape you summat, if you are quite partial
and
don't have all the above.......!)
Got most of it but thanks for the offer.

cheers

--
RobH
The future's dim, the future's mono.