Post by xmen269 March 2, 2010 (131 of 140)
|
|
Fitzcaraldo215 said:
Yes, I understand the theory, but I do not buy it. I do not believe in magic, nor do my ears.
Yes, u nailed it.Totally agree with u.
|
|
|
|
|
|
dcramer said:
.... the London LP version of the Sibelius 1st with Maazel gives me everything the Esoteric SACD does for a LOT less money.
Do you have the SACD of the Maazel Sibelius? If so, how does it compare to your LP? It would be very interesting to know ... and if you could reply in the Sibelius thread at:
/showthread/49047/
|
|
|
|
|
|
canonical said:
Do you have the SACD of the Maazel Sibelius?
I think I have a couple copies of the LP in one guise or another....
Which doesn't answer your question but I mention it because my earlier post on this thread might suggest I lack awareness of what repertoire is available on LP and probably that I am unaware of what they might be capable of delivering sound-wise. If one looks at the footnote placed at the bottom of my "particulars" one will gain a little more insight into my possibly contentious assertion concerning what best represents sound in the concert hall.
|
|
|
Post by dcramer March 3, 2010 (134 of 140)
|
|
Fitzcaraldo215 said:
I am in complete agreement with you. Sorry if I come across as a crazy anti-analog zealot. I am not. But, dealing with a polarizing pro-analog zealot like Fremer might make me appear so. I have not thrown 50 years worth of my vinyl collecting out the window, by any means. There are performances there that are irreplaceable, and many sound quite good. It's just that nothing duplicates the sound I get at live concerts like hi-rez multichannel. It's head and shoulders above anything else.
Carl, I understood your reaction in light of the over-the-top response by Michael Fremer to your post, and did not take it as anti-analog zealotry. As you already know, my frame of reference is two-channel. The few multichannel setups I HAVE heard were video-centric but I still heard enough potential to want to set up my own system; however, that's still several months away and in the meantime the diffferences between SACD and vinyl in two channel are not as clearcut. That being said, it was actually quite a revelation for an old vinyl die-hard when my two-channel SACD playback reached the level where it could sound as good as my vinyl front end and without any tics, pops, or surface noise!
Colin, I'm sorry if my post made it appear that I own a copy of the Esoteric Sibelius disc. I was ready to order it and decided to listen to my very clean LP copy one last time and it sounded so good that I couldn't justify the $60.00. Plus, it was cut directly from the master tape ;-)
Bruce, I already knew you had a vinyl setup in storage from an earlier conversation, which is why I didn't understand your blanket statement - unless, like Carl, you're referring to multichannel? It just doesn't match up with my own listening experiences - which is fine, of course. Maybe just for fun you could set up your Merrill one last time and do the Esoterc SACD/Decca LP comparison? I'd selfishly LOVE to see more SACD vs. LP comaparisons in reissue reviews. The point of my post is that declaring vinyl a "waste of time" IS a polarizing statement to vinyl veterans who may be contemplating adding SACD as a format and tends to tweak the basic human impulse to make self right and others wrong - not that I'M ever guilty of that ;-)
|
|
|
|
|
|
dcramer said:
Bruce, I already knew you had a vinyl setup in storage from an earlier conversation, which is why I didn't understand your blanket statement - unless, like Carl, you're referring to multichannel? It just doesn't match up with my own listening experiences - which is fine, of course.
Ah-Well!
I wasn't thinking of reissues vs reissues. And basically, or mostly, I was referring to multichannel.
What galls me, what I was probably unconsciously reacting to is the pages of print devoted to resuscitating vinyl and the devotional reverence given old 1960s recordings I have plenty of when, without even thinking of alternatives now available, but just referencing live sound, those old recordings do not remotely sound to me like live music. That is within a vinyl/vinyl context. Progress was actually made during the seventies.
Now 30 plus years later, digital recordings, particularly DSD or high bit/high sampling rate PCM with modern miking as practiced by Jared Sacks, SoundMirror, Polyhymnia et al, spending money to record in analog is ridiculous.
I think spending money on vinyl and its associated equipment instead of on SACDs and their associated equipment, unless one already HAS said equipment and recordings, is silly.
To me, hearing Julia Fischer or Hilary Hahn playing the Brahms concerto on a multi-channel SACD is far more rewarding than hearing Heifetz or Oistrach, or even (more recently) Itzhak Pearlman - any of the past violin masters being played back on vinyl. There are several things that are involved here. The limitations I already alluded to prevent the degree of realism now attainable, even when limiting oneself to consideration of recordings made only in stereo.
With well recorded multi-channel entering the picture, this situation (with the audiophile press) has become outrageous. The public is being lied to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Windsurfer said:
With well recorded multi-channel entering the picture, this situation (with the audiophile press) has become outrageous. The public is being lied to.
I totally agree with you, except for Kal Rubinson. Although, I did note that the almighty HP did some Mch SACD reviews in TAS a few months ago that praised what Mch was capable of.
There is nothing new here. You just need to follow the money. The high end mags would not now exist without high end ad revenue and largess in the form of review samples, some of which are very, very long term, and industry accomodation pricing to reviewers. The high end, which is largely analog/stereo-centric, has done essentially nothing in Mch, with few exceptions. They really do not have the money to do the engineering. So, what we get are writers like Michael Fremer making inflated claims for the sonic truthfulness of vinyl. Or, reviews of $20K CD-only players, $1,000 power cords, etc. Or, just generally, overstated claims for what stereo can do, with an implicit denial that Mch even exists.
We Mch guys are not a big enough group, but keep writing to TAS. I did a fair bit of that over the last few years. Stereophile is not likely to ramp up in Mch. I would think that Kal has his hands full trying to publish bi-monthly, even. Offhand, besides those 2, I do not know of any other worthwhile mags out there today.
P.S. - I have to tell the story of a good friend, audiophile and concert goer, whose tastes range from 78's, antique equipment and opera laserdisks to a huge vinyl and CD collection played through some excellent up-to-date gear, including a massive VPI TNT turntable. When I discovered Mch 2.5 years ago, I was so high, you could not get me down off the ceiling. I talked to him about Mch then, but he poo-pooed it, as opposed to stereo. He just got a Mch Anthem D2V processor with ARC Room EQ and an Oppo BDP-83 , and he is now as sky high as I was, and still am, by the way. He says Mch is far and away the greatest upgrade he ever made, and I fully agree.
|
|
|
|
|
|
As a veteran Hi-Fi enthusiast I totally agree with Fitzcaraldo 215 .The consumer is being totally ripped off by the so-called High Enders it amazes me that so many people are taken in by charlatan Hi-Fi journalists & magazines unable to think for themselves , have no commonsense totally ignore the laws of physics.you get what you deserve if you are stupid.With the High end you are paying for unnecesary exotic casework, not always for the sound.To pay the price of a car for a piece of High Fi equipment is your choice but in my book totally crazy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
zeus said:
The best sound on SA-CD comes from DSD recordings. What they captured in the studio can be exactly what you hear on the disc. Where you're dealing with older recordings, or recordings that require a large number of tracks, analogue or PCM sources can give good results ... sometimes approaching that of DSD.
As for vinyl, I have 400-500 classical LPs I'd love to find a buyer for. I have little time for the format now (and haven't for years).
Well, when otherwise, I'd gladly take extra steps to listen to PJ Harvey's work ; thus, in addition to the CDs, have bought also her LPs through amazon...
If ever, say at Qobuz, Qualité Studio Masters (24 bits)...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post by rammiepie September 3, 2014 (140 of 140)
|
|
Wilhelm—Xu Zhong-Rui said:
Astral projecti...
on
Right on, Wilhelm!
|
|
