Post by emaidel May 24, 2009 (551 of 4131)
|
|
You two certainly have a point, and I agree with your perspectives. Still, many of the posts here have been bitterly critical of the fact that PCM was used at all by BIS, and that "how dare" he not record exclusively via the DSD medium. While 96KHZ, both theoretically and in practice, should outperform 44.1KHZ, all one need do is listen to a BIS SACD to see that 44.1KHZ can, and does, sound pretty good. Would 96KHZ have sounded better? It should have, but it's awfully hard to top the glorious sound of so many of those BIS discs. And, since several "pure" DSD recordings sound so much worse, I think Bissie has a point.
|
|
|
|
|
|
emaidel said:
You two certainly have a point, and I agree with your perspectives. Still, many of the posts here have been bitterly critical of the fact that PCM was used at all by BIS, and that "how dare" he not record exclusively via the DSD medium. While 96KHZ, both theoretically and in practice, should outperform 44.1KHZ, all one need do is listen to a BIS SACD to see that 44.1KHZ can, and does, sound pretty good. Would 96KHZ have sounded better? It should have, but it's awfully hard to top the glorious sound of so many of those BIS discs. And, since several "pure" DSD recordings sound so much worse, I think Bissie has a point.
and You and Robert have a point too, as 24bit masters BIS is using are obviously better sounding than 16bit masters, but still moving to 96kHz seems wise decision (for the reasons previously stated).
|
|
|
Post by mahlerei May 24, 2009 (553 of 4131)
|
|
emaidel said:
You two certainly have a point, and I agree with your perspectives. Still, many of the posts here have been bitterly critical of the fact that PCM was used at all by BIS, and that "how dare" he not record exclusively via the DSD medium. While 96KHZ, both theoretically and in practice, should outperform 44.1KHZ, all one need do is listen to a BIS SACD to see that 44.1KHZ can, and does, sound pretty good. Would 96KHZ have sounded better? It should have, but it's awfully hard to top the glorious sound of so many of those BIS discs. And, since several "pure" DSD recordings sound so much worse, I think Bissie has a point.
Agreed. There are just so many variables in a recording - number and type of microphones, the placement thereof, the hall acoustics - that just having the 'right' recording equipment can never guarantee a perfect result (whatever that might be). And that's not even taking into account the musicians who, for one reason or another, may not be at their best. A stunning recording doesn't amount to a hill of beans if the performance is lacking.
Within the constraints of BIS's recording philosophy I genuinely believe they get remarkable results (or so my ears tell me). And as if to reinforce the point that the bells and whistles approach doesn't guarantee anything I have some SACDs that sound truly dire (from PentaTone and Exton, for example).
As an example of what's possible I always go back to the 1958 Horenstein Mahler 8. By all accounts the BBC engineers planned and executed this recording with the utmost care and the results speak for themselves,half a century later.
As I suggested earlier it's too easy to be hypnotised by the numbers; in the end your ears must be the final judge.
|
|
|
Post by stvnharr May 24, 2009 (554 of 4131)
|
|
Hm, it used to be that folks on the forum offered opinions on WHAT to record. Now it seems that there are a few internet experts offering advise on HOW to record.
Good Grief Charlie Brown, what's going on???!!!
The only thing listeners have any control over is WHAT they buy, discs and equipment.
BIS discs have been praised for years. And now 2 or 3 folks here, who don't seem to have very many BIS discs, have suddenly found previously great sounding discs suddenly went bad.
It makes one laugh!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Robert,
BIS records are top class the way they are. I treasure the Brautigam/Beethoven Pianoforte Sonatas as some of the best albums in my collection; Freddy Kempf's works (Chopin Op 10, 25) are all time showcases; Grieg's or Faure's vocals are out of this world, and I could go on and on and on. Would have they benefited of having been DSD mastered? ... probably yes, but someone like myself (a non-pro in the audio business) surely won't pretend to lecture you on how to do your job. I sincerely hope BIS expands on SACD, so I will just carry on adding BIS records to my collection, and vividly recommend them to friends both because the repertoire and artists selected at BIS, and because the records have outstanding sound. And for what I can read, I think the vast majority out there think very much like me. Thank you !!!
|
|
|
Post by fafnir May 24, 2009 (556 of 4131)
|
|
BIS discs have been praised for years. And now 2 or 3 folks here, who don't seem to have very many BIS discs, have suddenly found previously great sounding discs suddenly went bad.
It makes one laugh!!!!
Actually, I doesn't make me want the laugh; it makes me want to cry out in frustration. When I purchase a BIS SACD, I do so with the confidence that the disc will have splendid sonics - well balanced without spotlighting, uncompressed, and recorded in a good venue in which the ambiance has been properly preserved by the mch technique. Of the dozens of BIS SACDs that I own, I think there is perhaps one (and I have mentioned it on this forum) in which the balance at a critical point was miscalculated. IMO no other manufacturer, and there are several fine ones, has this high a success rate. Can anyone claim that Telarc or LSO Live has the same consistent quality?
Robert has offered a beautifully reasoned explanation for his use of PCM. As far as I am concerned, the so-called advantages of pure DSD, if in fact they exist all, are quite insignificant to the real factors that affect recording quality: microphones, venue, and the skill of the recording team in capturing the music.
What a pity it would be if the comments of the fanatics result in BIS abandoning the SACD format. Their loss in deciding not to purchase BIS, based on specious reasoning, should not be our loss.
Lastly, and somewhat off topic, those who claim 20 kHz as the upper frequency cut off for adult hearing are living in a dream world. You're very fortunate if you are over 40 and your hearing at 15 kHz isn't in the mud.
|
|
|
|
|
|
fafnir said:
When I purchase a BIS SACD, I do so with the confidence that the disc will have splendid sonics - well balanced without spotlighting, uncompressed, and recorded in a good venue in which the ambiance has been properly preserved by the mch technique. Of the dozens of BIS SACDs that I own, I think there is perhaps one (and I have mentioned it on this forum) in which the balance at a critical point was miscalculated. IMO no other manufacturer, and there are several fine ones, has this high a success rate. Can anyone claim that Telarc or LSO Live has the same consistent quality?
That's most admirable and I don't think anyone disputes same - but it really has nothing to do with the issue here which is the suitability of placing these recordings on SACD vs redbook CD. One would get all of the benefits you refer to above equally on a CD version of the recording. There is definite value for MC fans, but only some 'extra bits' for the stereo SACD crowd.
> Lastly, and somewhat off topic, those who claim 20 kHz as the upper frequency cut off for adult
> hearing are living in a dream world. You're very fortunate if you are over 40 and your hearing
> at 15 kHz isn't in the mud.
This assertion has been raised several times ... I think it deserves it's own thread ... so:
New thread: the hypersonic effect ...
|
|
|
|
|
|
audioholik said:
(The) 24bit masters BIS is using are obviously better sounding than 16bit masters...
That really is the crux of it yes? In addition, one might question the different post production processing that goes into mastering an SACD (or rbcd for that matter). Different labels will sound better or worse, IMHO depending on how much messing around they do to make a recording (in their opinion) "commercially acceptable". I suspect, but do not really know, that DG is one of the worst offenders and that BIS is one of the least. I am talking about such little tricks as adding bass and artificial reverberation. The less of that going on, the better the recording.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I hope Robert to take these complains as a good sign that people here don't mind paying extra dollars to get better sounding recordings. They care more about music and sound than the price they pay.
how about raising retail price and then investing extra profit on recording gears?
In the long run, it's good for you and for us.
Don't talk like a politician who lives for today and not for tomorrow.
|
|
|
Post by tailspn May 29, 2009 (560 of 4131)
|
|
skogskatt said:
That really is the crux of it yes? In addition, one might question the different post production processing that goes into mastering an SACD (or rbcd for that matter). Different labels will sound better or worse, IMHO depending on how much messing around they do to make a recording (in their opinion) "commercially acceptable". I suspect, but do not really know, that DG is one of the worst offenders and that BIS is one of the least. I am talking about such little tricks as adding bass and artificial reverberation. The less of that going on, the better the recording.
Wow! Where did you come from? You just exposed the dirty little secret that IS the primary contributer, beyond microphone selection and placement, as to how any recording sounds. The amount of post production, and it's effect can be, and usually is significant. Much more than one would expect, unless you have the opportunity to hear the before and after. And as you said, it's all done to make a recording "commercially acceptable" (in their opinion)!
Sampling rates, formats, hardware and cabling are all important, to a degree. But they all pale to insignificance compared to the impact post production makes on the average recording, IMHO. I hear unedited, unprocessed 2 channel 44.1/24 bit recordings all the time that have an inner detailing and spaciousness, a you-are there quality, that is missing on the majority of SACD's that I purchase, regardless of their origin format. You can get a sense of that from most of the Bis Minnesota Beethoven series.
I think if we want to talk about sound quality with record company owners and producers, we should be asking about their post production philosophy long before we talk about formats.
Great post skogskatt!
Tom
|
|
