|
|
|
Content removed by Frank Romeril.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the response.
Always appreciate your perspective. I apologize for letting my frustrations come through: it's very difficult, and although we disagree about process, and degree of quality, - I often totally agree with Teresa that someone should be out there just porting everything to DSD and releasing them. Even if it were small batches, while everyone is monkeying around with digital files, - people could be working deals that would be at least mildly beneficial, - to promote DSD hirez and get more hi-rez to people who are PSYCHED to pay for it.
What I'm saying about the Japanese market is not pricing that bothers me, - is that they have a market, - exploit it better by doing new stuff instead of re-doing stuff that already has been done. The Japanese market does have access to our DSD market, the discs are there, and they are cheaper. They don't need their own discs, at a higher cost. So why? The answer is, fetishness. They are selling better, not because they are better, but BECAUSE they are more expensive, and therefore more exclusive.
|
|
|
Post by DSD May 24, 2012 (23 of 25)
|
|
rammiepie said:
the SHM~SACDs are are priced much like our MoFi and Analogue Production SACD releases...
I just did some price comparisons at amazon.co.jp and Universal SHM-SACDs at ¥4,500 are 50% more than MoFi SACDs "direct from Amazon Japan" prices of ¥2,959-¥3,033. Even less from the Marketplace sellers at under ¥2,000.
MoFi SACDs in Japan are less than the standard Exton SACDs which are ¥3,000-¥3,500. I also checked European and USA labels such Channel Classics and they are less than ¥2,000 direct from Amazon Japan.
So ¥4,500 in Japan or $60+ in the USA, SHM-SACDs are expensive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
sordidman said:
What I'm saying about the Japanese market is not pricing that bothers me, - is that they have a market, - exploit it better by doing new stuff instead of re-doing stuff that already has been done. The Japanese market does have access to our DSD market, the discs are there, and they are cheaper. They don't need their own discs, at a higher cost. So why? The answer is, fetishness. They are selling better, not because they are better, but BECAUSE they are more expensive, and therefore more exclusive.
Hi Sordidman,
You are right about festishness. I guess there is a part of this in each one of us who buys SHM SA-CDs. But I cannot help thinking this is not the sole reason of owning some. I do like the sound of these discs. It really was a change for me to hear something else than over-remastered tiotles with crazy high frequency content just to overexpose the incredible sonic capacities of the SA-CD to the ears of the listeners.
What you call "confined", I call "neutral". In a sense, I'd even call this "closed" sound a refreshment to me.
However, I won't be naive enough to enjoy a "closed" sound as a revolution just because it is different. Some titles may be exceedingly confined on this SHM format, I don't think I own one of them. One should compare with the original tapes to really accurately assess such a statement.
Had I known the ABKCO editions first, perhaps I would have the same opinion than you. But I also think I would have ended up enjoying the SHM editions as well. Whatever their price, they have a charm. They do have a smooth, mellow and sweet quality.
I guess that debate "SHM flat vs. standard remastered" could be compared to the debate "whisky neat or on the rocks ?". Pure or processed, there is no right or wrong answer. It really is a matter of subjective taste.
|
|
|
|
|
|
""Had I known the ABKCO editions first, perhaps I would have the same opinion than you. But I also think I would have ended up enjoying the SHM editions as well. Whatever their price, they have a charm. They do have a smooth, mellow and sweet quality.
I guess that debate "SHM flat vs. standard remastered" could be compared to the debate "whisky neat or on the rocks ?". Pure or processed, there is no right or wrong answer. It really is a matter of subjective taste.""
Yes.. absolutely.... It is just a matter of both subjective taste and your equipment. I must say that I do sometimes have a tendency towards impatience regarding equipment. To a degree, more expensive playback gear, yields a higher resolution and "better" sound. Of course that is a moving target, because system synergy is absolutely vital. And although it is subjective, there is a big difference between playing these discs on Ed Meitner's player and a Sony 777 or Sony universal player. Both the redbook and SACD is outstanding on the former. It is a different experience.
I have the Steely Dan Aja SHM SACD and SHM redbook. The redbook is more open, has better separation of instruments, a wider soundstage, and "feels" more right. However, I am not saying that it's "better" because the SHM SACD obviously has higher resolution, and the instruments ring more true. I am happy to own both.. Aja was never released on Universal years ago like Gaucho.
Comparing the Meitner to the Sony? Well the Meitner sounds more real, more balanced, and more natural. (I am not nearly the only one who says this). The Sony is a more caustic, abrasive, and scratchy player, with less midrange bloom. On a Meitner, these SACDs sound "warmed up." ON a Sony, these SACDs sound just right....
Cheers,
|
|
