Post by mdt August 17, 2005 (11 of 33)
|
|
zeus said:
I didn't say that I condoned the practice, merely that there are means to determine whether the disc contains a stereo mix or not beforehand. I've never seen a mandated requirement for a stereo high-resolution mix in any documentation from Sony or Philips. Given the few number of discs without one, I don't think this is cause for hysteria.
I remeber having read this at an early stage, unfortunately i can't remeber where, wether it was in an add or in the enclosed leaflet "the CD was a good idea...., this is much better". I am sure that i read it alltough, because i specifically remember that it was emphasized that the stereo mix was made specially in the studio, thereby claiming an advantage over DVD-A where, at times, the stereo is derived by the player via a downmix from the mch.
Also i did once buy a mch-only disc, that was not labeled as such. The sales people at the record store didn't know it either. Fortunately they kindly allowed me to return the disc, since they could understand that my buying an SA-CD made no sense, if if was aible to play the CD track only. The disc has since been re-issued with DSD stereo (because evryone wants only mch ?).
A few dics only ? Maybe, but this few discs were released as a series by a (or even the?) market leader. This means that this step could possibly be trend setting, so it's not that meaningless after all.
|
|
|
Post by azure August 17, 2005 (12 of 33)
|
|
mdt said:
During the entire (minimal) SA-CD promotion i've read everywhere, that SA-CD ALLWAYS contains a dedicated studio-made DSD stereo mix. "There will never be an automated down-mix on playback" (as with competing formats...).
I understood it as DSD stereo being standard for ALL(!) SA-CDs, with the possibel addition of DSD multichannel and/or CD stereo !
It's surprising to me that you, having followed SA-CD since the beginning, dont consider this recent development, which neglects the SA-CD standard, a problem. Instead you tell someone who rightly complains about this, not to throw the baby out with the bathwater ?!
I actually read the same thing, and at first was concerned, although as zeus points out, there are very few multichannel-only discs. If the practice continues, I strongly suggest, manufacturers/distributors clearly label MC-only
It boils down to the industry [like DGG] seeing SA-CD as a tool only for MC or a high resolution format regardless of channels
I'd prefer to see it as both
|
|
|
Post by akiralx August 18, 2005 (13 of 33)
|
|
Claude said:
On the other hand, many of those rare multichannel-only discs are not worth buying, and certainly not worth upgrading the system.
Especially the cheapo Universal Eloquence series, which consists in "rechanneled" stereo recordings.
/alltitles/366
I wouldn't agree with that, specifically in the case of the Guld/Prinz/Abbado Mozart SACD - as my, Daland's and Ramesh's reviews seem to confirm!
|
|
|
Post by akiralx August 18, 2005 (14 of 33)
|
|
nickc said:
Instead of not buying SACDs why not go MC?
Don't get me wrong - nothing at all wrong with listening in stereo - it would be a shame to miss out on SACDs for that reason.
Cheers
Nick
I agree 100%, unless cost is a real problem.
I can never understand the 'my listening room won't take any more speakers' excuse - my listening room (also the living room) is certainly not large (about 12 feet by 14 feet square) but accommodates 5 speakers no problem - nor does my fiancee object to the cables...
Whenever I compare the stereo mix to multi-channel so much is lost in most cases that, knowing what I know now, I would probably not bother with SACD if I only had stereo capability. A sad admission but true.
|
|
|
|
|
|
akiralx said:
I agree 100%, unless cost is a real problem.
I can never understand the 'my listening room won't take any more speakers' excuse - my listening room (also the living room) is certainly not large (about 12 feet by 14 feet square) but accommodates 5 speakers no problem - nor does my fiancee object to the cables...
Whenever I compare the stereo mix to multi-channel so much is lost in most cases that, knowing what I know now, I would probably not bother with SACD if I only had stereo capability. A sad admission but true.
Seconded!
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are good reasons why a few people, including myself, only listen in stereo. One of them being that I actually PREFER it. MC just doesn't do it for me. Sorry but it seems some people actually do still like listening to purity of sound without it bouncing all over the place. It's a shame that people are missing the point of SACD in that it isn't purely a medium for MC but also a high resolution format for music lovers who demand a more natural sound than CD can offer.
There is, also, the cost. For me to upgrade my system to full multichannel, keeping the same quality of components, would just be too expensive and i'm not prepared to compromise on terms of sound quality.
I do gain an enormous amount of listening pleasure from stereo SACD across a wide spectrum of music and am especially enjoying the Mercury Living Presence discs.
If you enjoy MC, great! But this perception that MC is the saviour of SACD and stereo is the ugly sister is rubbish.
Until the human body grows 3.1 more ears, i'll stick with the two i've got thanks very much.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Couleddie said:
Until the human body grows 3.1 more ears, i'll stick with the two i've got thanks very much.
Are you saying that you can't identify when sounds come from the side or behind you with only two ears? This is why MCH beats Stereo for accoustic music hands down IMHO (pop mixes where sounds *do* bounce around are another matter though).
Agree though that the expense required can be staggering - but I suspect that people said/felt the same moving from mono to stereo and eventually this became the norm without the breakdown of civilisation (well, generally)...
|
|
|
|
|
|
The 3.1 ears comment was tongue in cheek :-)
I did have a MC set up when I first got SACD a few years ago but it was entirely seperate from my stereo set up and significantly inferior quality. However, it still gave me the ability to experience surround but I just found I was trying too hard to hear everything at the detriment of the music. I can't quite put my finger on exactly why but I just don't like the feeling of having the sound coming from around me. The definition is totally lacking and I don't think it sounds natural.
I guess I just like stereo as a personal preference but i'm pleased I at least tried 5.1 from an interest point of view.
|
|
|
Post by nickc August 18, 2005 (19 of 33)
|
|
Couleddie said:
The 3.1 ears comment was tongue in cheek :-)
I did have a MC set up when I first got SACD a few years ago but it was entirely seperate from my stereo set up and significantly inferior quality. However, it still gave me the ability to experience surround but I just found I was trying too hard to hear everything at the detriment of the music. I can't quite put my finger on exactly why but I just don't like the feeling of having the sound coming from around me. The definition is totally lacking and I don't think it sounds natural.
I guess I just like stereo as a personal preference but i'm pleased I at least tried 5.1 from an interest point of view.
Don't laugh - I get funny looks when i walk down the street with my 5 ears - I'm worried that when Blu-Ray arrives in a Kafkaesque metamorphosis I might sprout another two!
Best wishes
Nick
|
|
|
Post by akiralx August 18, 2005 (20 of 33)
|
|
Couleddie said:
There are good reasons why a few people, including myself, only listen in stereo. One of them being that I actually PREFER it. MC just doesn't do it for me. Sorry but it seems some people actually do still like listening to purity of sound without it bouncing all over the place.
Er, that is a truly horrendous misunderstanding (or misrepresentation) of what MC reproduction is. MC when done properly simply increases the soundstage and sonic depth of the music and places it more securely in front of the listener.
I'm sure those who have heard say, the Budapest/Fischer Dvorak 8 or Wispelwey/Lazic Beethoven Cello Sonatas SACDs will agree that the MC mix gives a sense of reality and fidelity that stereo simply cannot match. When listening to these recordings one wouldn't hear sound coming from anywhere other than the soundstage in front of the listener, beacuse the ambient rear channels have been correctly transferred.
Even more remarkable in some ways is the Pollini Chopin Polonaises disc which sadly sounds mediocre in every medium other than MC SACD.
Like you I find surround-sound gimmicky effects simply unacceptable - I wouldn't countenance those chamber SACDs (several Praga Digitals I think) which place the listener in the middle of a string quartet by having one instrument per channel. That is just absurd.
|
|
