Post by terence April 21, 2010 (41 of 64)
|
|
i wonder why nobody from Esoteric has ever attempted to answer all the queries regarding their methods on this forum directly? it would be easy for them to do so surely?
|
|
|
Post by LivyII April 21, 2010 (42 of 64)
|
|
Claude said:
Esoteric wrote in an email that they used 24/96 copies of the masters, and this is seems likely to me, as Universal archived their analogue tapes on 24/96 PCM, and they probably don't like to sent their original tapes to a small company in Japan.
Why would Esoteric copy the music from a CD? If they have a SACD licensing deal with Universal, they are entitled to a decent sounding source that is better than CD.
I am betting on 24/96 archived copies. You are correct - this is what Universal did for all their analog recordings, which is why the Universal SA_CD's are usually derived from this type of source.
|
|
|
Post by Chris April 21, 2010 (43 of 64)
|
|
flyingdutchman said:
Never claimed I was a recording engineer like your friend did. You make claims like that and quite naturally it raises flags. I am an end-user and have a nice enough set up to make my sound room quite enjoyable.
My friend?
Where did I say "LPG 1964" is my friend?
LPG 1964 stands for an LP released in the year 1964 by DGG.
I have to check which one.
Regarding the reviewer using that moniker for his "controversial" review,
I like you,haven´t got a clue who he really is.
But does it really matter who he is?
What could matter more is that he might just possibly be revealing a scam.
If he is an engineer he is probably more than superficially familiar with cheating the gullible public with fancy tricks.
Remember 4D and Original Image bit processing and other dirty tricks played by DGG to keep selling and reselling their all too often crappy sounding 16/44.1 RBCDs to unsuspecting customers?
Ramesh quoted WolfE as also saying this SACD sounds bad.
He also adds the fact that he has a very good system.
My opinion as owner of the original LP set is that whatever tricks you play there isn´t really that much you can do to "improve" something that isn´t that stellar from the start anyway.
One way of really trying to improve on many of the 1970s masters from DGG would IMHO be to go back to the analogue masters and silence basically all channels except the main stereo-pair.
That way we would probably hear how the Berlin Philharmonic actually sounded on many of the overmiked DG recordings of this orchestra.
I would much rather have someone go back and work on some of the already good masters from EMI in the same period.
Wolfgang Gulich used only half the number of mikes as Günther Herrmanns and the EMI LPs are apart from often very bad pressings mostly very good recordings that would make much more impressive SACD remasters than this set.
Even if I didn´t have the LPs,I wouldn´t buy it even at real bargain price, judging from the two negative posts reviews/comments and also because everything except the Webern? is already available in much better sound and comparable interpretations from other labels and orchestras and conductors.
And I am saying that as someone who actually thinks Karajan definitely was one of the truly great conductors of the 20 century.
ps I hope you didn´t "wet your pants" while reading the above line.
All the best Chris
|
|
|
|
|
|
More important to me is that he claims he is an recording engineer. We've got recording engineers and label owners that respond on these forums and I don't believe I've ever seen any of them rant as much as this guy has, whether they agree with another recording engineer or not. Robert and Jared have the utmost respect for each other. This guy makes his comments and runs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
terence said:
i wonder why nobody from Esoteric has ever attempted to answer all the queries regarding their methods on this forum directly? it would be easy for them to do so surely?
Many from Esoteric Japan wouldn't necessarily be able to respond in English well enough to be understood without being misinterpreted.
|
|
|
Post by Chris April 21, 2010 (46 of 64)
|
|
flyingdutchman said:
Many from Esoteric Japan wouldn't necessarily be able to respond in English well enough to be understood without being misinterpreted.
So that is the reason you step in so forcefully in their defence?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chris said:
So that is the reason you step in so forcefully in their defence?
No, that is my response to a question by another poster. It would be better for someone from Esoteric US to talk about it because there would be no misinterpretation.
|
|
|
Post by terence April 21, 2010 (48 of 64)
|
|
flyingdutchman said:
No, that is my response to a question by another poster. It would be better for someone from Esoteric US to talk about it because there would be no misinterpretation.
i wish SOMEONE from Esoteric would say SOMETHING!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
terence said:
i wish SOMEONE from Esoteric would say SOMETHING!!
If nothing else they live up to their name, which may in fact be a bit of an inside joke at Teac:
Main Entry: es·o·ter·ic
1 a : designed for or understood by the specially initiated alone
b : requiring or exhibiting knowledge that is restricted to a small group broadly : difficult to understand
2 a : limited to a small circle
b : private, confidential
|
|
|
|
|
|
Many readers in other forums have asked Esoteric these questions. They have stated that they use the highest quality available to them among all prior recordings, based on rights holder's information, at the time of their re-mastering. That source may be an analog master tape, a 24/96 master, a higher res. HDD file, a PCM master file, etc, etc. Esoteric claims the entire process is engineered to improve upon the “state of the art,” for the sole purpose of recreating the experience of enjoying the original master tapes and/or the live performance. Don’t take Esoteric’s “broken English” posted on line too literally. Japanese to English translation is often misconstrued. They use the finest studios, digital hardware, cable, power supplies and Rubidium master clock timing devices in the world, to re-master first to a DSD layer, then to a PCM/CD layer from the new DSD master (Using a Sony or JVC process). Hence these discs are termed “hybrids.” In another forum a member accused Esoteric of falsely stating the re-master was a DSD layer, (He was sure this was a lie because the disc was labeled 24/96 on its spine). The spine label was explaining the PCM layer as the second new layer on the disc. Because it was written in Japanese, the forum reader made the wrong assumption about the 24/96 recording mentioned, and labeled it a fraudulent claim of DSD re-mastering. Bottom line is that this user did not even understand that a hybrid has 2 playback layers (SACD/DSD + CD/PCM), selectable individually with high end SACD/CD players. I have learned that Esoteric has a 24 year history in ultra high end audio and to my ear, these recordings are magnificent. Esoteric’s heritage goes back to TEAC in 1953 (they developed magnetic tape recorders for NHK Japan in the 1950s), and their reputation for some of the best ultra high end audio hardware in the world is almost uncontested. I also learned that they have supplied disc transports to dCS, Wadia, Audioaero, Levinson, Playback Designs and EMM Labs. If the company was shady I doubt that any of these fine companies would have anything to do with them. I have also read that the Esoteric founder is a truly passionate audiophile and very well known worldwide for his accomplishments. Shame on those who don’t understand and appreciate what they have done. In my hours of listening, they have bettered any other recording I have of the same titles. If there is any real negative it is the high price for these new hybrids out of Japan. This argument of fraud, by others in this forum, reminds me of those in the audiophile review world who are spellbound by how a component “specs out.” My bottom line, as a true audiophile and lover of the DSD process, is how does it sound?
|
|
