|
|
|
I just read George Flanagin's review. When George says:
"If you think there is loss in the transfer and format conversion of 44/16 LPCM data to DSD data you are mistaken"
... I think George is saying that this is actually a 44kHz/16 bit CD resolution recording? Is that right?
Since there is no sonic advantage or purpose in placing a CD on SACD, I think I am correct in understanding that George is saying that the raison d'être for this being on SACD is to ship / distribute more content on a single disc ... to take advantage of the DVD-size capacity of a SACD single-layer ...
... GeorgeFlanagin > "At $23 for 265 minutes of music"
That might be an interesting distribution idea ... but it seems outdated, for at least four reasons.
First, downloads have no physical constraint on the amount of music that can be sold for a given price.
Second, other physical formats (e.g. Bluray) can already hold vastly more.
Third, unless the item being distributed is a single entity, such as a grand requiem, I don't think it is desirable to have it all on one disc. When everything is on one disc, one item just flows directly into the next like porridge (just like it does in iTunes/iPods) ... almost like background music ... thus denying each of us from making our own purposeful existentialist musical selections :). Furthermore, it can become difficult to select tracks etc. And if you like having lots of content in minimal packaging, then you are better off with iTunes.
Fourth, if it is just CD quality material, I don't see any price advantage here over CD box sets. To make the point crystal clear, Archiv/DG have just released their entire set of John Eliot Gardiner Bach recordings ... some of the finest recordings ever made ... 22 CDs ... in a magnificent box set which you can buy for £30.
|
|
|
Post by stvnharr March 27, 2010 (2 of 21)
|
|
canonical said:
Since there is no sonic advantage or purpose in placing a CD on SACD, I think I am correct in understanding that George is saying that the raison d'être for this being on SACD is to ship / distribute more content on a single disc ... to take advantage of the DVD-size capacity of a SACD single-layer ...
Sorry, but you are a little old and out of date here.
The disc is known as an Extended Play Sacd where over 4 hours of music is all on the stereo sacd layer. It is a single layer sacd.
There were 2 Mendelssohn discs released just over 2 years ago. An initial 5 disc set of Bach organ music, a complete set I believe, was released a couple years earlier. And a final release of Lute Music came some time after the Mendelssohns.
For copyright reasons, only music in the public domain was used.
The recordings are all 80's and 90's recordings.
These didn't sell well, and there are no more.
You can confirm all of the above with Bissie, if you wish.
If you wish to compare these to other box set releases, well, go ahead, there are no shortage of them, but they will have 4X the number of discs. There may be other Bach sets, but not likely the Mendelssohns.
I don't know about your other comparisons to downloads and blu ray. Are there any 4 hour downloads? Are there any 20 hour downloads, as in the Bach organ set? Same for Blu Ray, are there any? I don't know and don't care really.
The advantage of the EPS releases was more of getting a lot of music on single discs at a very good price. There was no sound advantage as they were 16/44.1 original recordings.
The discs were obviously aimed for the sacd crowd. I liked them as I thought it was a great way to get a lot of music without too many discs, and for a great price. A few others did too. Obviously, many others did not feel that way, and so there are no more.
|
|
|
Post by DSD March 27, 2010 (3 of 21)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DSD said:
I wrote an article in the January/February 2009 Issue of PFO about BIS' Ultra Extended Playing Time SACDs. http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue41/sacd.htm
I read it.
> the more samples you have the smoother the sound is
Yes - except that there are zero more samples by this 'upsampling'. Zero. At best, all you get is some extra interpolation between the existing sample points. At worst, you get just more interference and digital messing with the source (at least DVD-A just gives you the source).
If you like your CDs converted to DSD, you could just buy a CD/SACD player that has an upsampling chippie in it (or take the digital out from any CD player and pass it through an external add-on upsampler to DSD), and then you could merrily enjoy the zillions of CDs on the market.
|
|
|
|
|
|
canonical said:
I read it.
> the more samples you have the smoother the sound is
Yes - except that there are zero more samples by this 'upsampling'. Zero. At best, all you get is some extra interpolation between the existing sample points. At worst, you get just more interference and digital messing with the source (at least DVD-A just gives you the source).
agreed, if the recordings were made at 44/16 the discs aren't Ultra Extended Playing Time SACDs but Ultra Extended Playing Time CDs (CD lovers' holy grail?)
|
|
|
Post by bissie March 27, 2010 (6 of 21)
|
|
canonical said:
... I think George is saying that this is actually a 44kHz/16 bit CD resolution recording? Is that right?
.. the raison d'être for this being on SACD is to ship / distribute more content on a single disc ... to take advantage of the DVD-size capacity of a SACD single-layer ...
First, downloads have no physical constraint on the amount of music that can be sold for a given price.
Second, other physical formats (e.g. Bluray) can already hold vastly more.
Third, Furthermore, it can become difficult to select tracks etc. And if you like having lots of content in minimal packaging, then you are better off with iTunes.
Fourth, some of the finest recordings ever made ... 22 CDs ... in a magnificent box set which you can buy for £30.
Dear canonical,
they are indeed 16/44,1 Stereo recordings.
The reason for having them on a single single-layer SACD is precisely that - quantity at a very reasonable price. A bonus for SACD player owners, an attempt to make the format more popular.
First: Correct, but this is better than mp3, which was the format when the discs were released.
Second: Correct, but, when these were released, there was no blue-ray. We still don't have any practical blue-ray audio-only discs.
Third: yes, on blue-ray it would be difficult. On SACD there are no problems whatsoever.
Fourth: Space. Since we pay our artists, we cannot make offers like the DG offer you talk about.
The idea didn't hit off. We sold rather fewer than we thought (although we didn't lose much, either) and aren't currently planning on continuing.
OK?
Robert
|
|
|
Post by Chris March 27, 2010 (7 of 21)
|
|
No wonder they didn´t sell well.
Very few music lovers buy SACDs for any such reasons as extended playing time.
A much more interesting question although a bit "hot" here perhaps,would be to ask;
Robert, when are you going to sell hi res downloads,ie your 24 bit PCM masterfiles before conversion to DSD,directly from your own BIS site?
I do appreciate your generous MP3 "previews" as a way to sample new works but I want hi res.
I would really like to be able to download many of your recordings at better than CD quality.
I mean all those recordings that will never make it to SACD.
2L,Linn,Channel Classics and Chandos to name just some other providers of quality music ,are already doing it and the list just keeps growing.
When will we in Europe be able to buy hi rez downloads from BIS too?
The long-term future for well recorded classical music will definitely be,
hi rez downloads.
Classical CD sales are dropping dramatically worldwide.
Even in major cities like London shops are closing or downsizing.
And in Stockholm the only big specialist ,Classical music shop Megastore, moved to much smaller premises several years ago.
But hi rez download sales have increased by some 50 % just recently.
I do think SACDs will survive much longer than CDs, just as LPs have, because most music lovers who buy SACDs care about sound quality.
But what is already a small minority will become an even smaller minority when both those who have never even heard an SACD,and never will, and those like me who have heard both,get to hear how good hi res music can actually sound from a computer.
We have arrived at a real game-changing point now.
The case for SACD will diminish and the obvious advantages of of hi res downloads will become obvious to more and more once they get to hear the new player on the scene.
I myself have, in just the past couple of weeks, downloaded music from all of the above high quality providers for more than 150€.
I am already more than one step into the future as a music-buyer.
Where are You Robert as a seller?
Ett anspråkslöst Konsultråd utan dyrt arvode!
ps Did you record any of the Mahler symphonies at the Festival?
All the best Chris
|
|
|
Post by bissie March 27, 2010 (8 of 21)
|
|
Chris said:
Robert, when are you going to sell hi res downloads,ie your 24 bit PCM masterfiles before conversion to DSD,directly from your own BIS site?
I do appreciate your generous MP3 "previews" as a way to sample new works but I want hi res.
I would really like to be able to download many of your recordings at better than CD quality.
I mean all those recordings that will never make it to SACD.
They'll be available sooner than you think.
Robert
|
|
|
Post by wehecht March 27, 2010 (9 of 21)
|
|
bissie said:
They'll be available sooner than you think.
Robert
Hopefully not at the expense of continued sacd production.
Bill
|
|
|
Post by bissie March 27, 2010 (10 of 21)
|
|
wehecht said:
Hopefully not at the expense of continued sacd production.
Bill
At this time, no, but, in effect, you're the one deciding this.
Anyway, April will see 5 new SACD:s from us, May another 3-4, like June.
R
|
|
