SACD Round 2.

[jrhymeammo]

Who closed that thread? Dusty started picking on some contradictory statement Sir T made, but all in all I was learning alot. Alot of comments from both sides I knew, but havent thought of in a while. I really want that thread to continue. How many signatures do I need to collect? If anyone was learning something from those 2 then I strongly believe it should've continued.

I can see vinyl industry going down for me, since alot of music aren't being recorded on analogue tape. I dont want to buy any records that has been digitally recorded. I love vinyl/analogue for its' sound quality. If they have to convert back to analoge for LP then I'm not gonna get off as much. Maybe that's another reason why newer vinyl releases dont have huge differences in SQ compared to CDs.
I dont like paying $30+ each for audiophile repress. If that's what it takes to preserve SQ for "increasing" niche market then I am willing.
I read that they are working on "Fragile" by YES. That's a great news for me.
As long as they can keep'em going with cash-cows like DSOM.



Please dont close this thread. I'm seriosuly learning stuff here. I didnt revive this just to read them two get into a dog fight. I thought everything was reasonably civil.

Thank you.

-JRA

[noddin0ff]

I was enjoying the thread to, the part that wasn't playground cat (of dog) fight anyway.

[basite]

I can see vinyl industry going down for me,


-JRA

the vinyl industry is not going down, last week they said on the bbc news that the vinyl industry was booming because of more teenagers (!!!!!! i didn't see that coming) and young people are buying more vinyl records.
be sure ,the vinyl industry is not going down, and certainly not because of the sacd.

Greetz,
Basite

[shokhead]

Maybe in London the teenies are buying vinyl but i dont see it here but i can only go by:
1. My 21 year old daughter and her friends do not own any vinyl or recorder player and i've asked them and got the same answers,thats stupid.
2. See above for my 19 year old daughter.
3. I cant remember the last time i saw anyone under 40 looking in the vinyl section at the music stores.
I know this isnt an exit poll but take it for what its worth if anything.
BTW i might add i've listen to vinyl of jazz as hard as it was on a pretty nice setup and listened to the same recording on SACD. The SACD almost made me like jazz. I just liked it better then vinyl but it was abit refreshing hearing 2ch vinyl but not that much.

[Woochifer]

the vinyl industry is not going down, last week they said on the bbc news that the vinyl industry was booming because of more teenagers (!!!!!! i didn't see that coming) and young people are buying more vinyl records.
be sure ,the vinyl industry is not going down, and certainly not because of the sacd.

Greetz,
Basite

Uh, so that explains why iPod sales are more than double the combined total for all home audio component sales? And why the sales for one hit CD are more the entire combined sales for new LPs?

I don't know about you, but most of the teenagers I know aren't sitting at home listening to vinyl -- they're on the go with their MP3 players and downloading their music (legal or otherwise). Of course, this is no different than in the early-80s when prerecorded cassettes (remember those?) surpassed the LP as the dominant music format.

This whole notion of teenagers spurring a vinyl revival has been tossed around since the early-90s when alternative bands were insisting that the record labels issue their albums on vinyl. But, the sales figures did not support that contention, and I doubt that they ever will. Vinyl will slog along as a niche format, but to say that it's on the comeback trail because of teenaged listeners? It was wishful thinking in the early-90s, it was wishful thinking in the late-90s, and it's still wishful thinking today.

[jrhymeammo]

When I said "I can see vinyl industry going down for me" I meant that SQ is going to be different from my taste. I like LP pressed from analoge source. Some of my hiphop LP I've bought have been record digitally. I assume alot of stores you guys go to have different demographics. I see kids (15-30yr olds) holding stack and stack of LPs underneith their arm pit. As long as stores can stay in business, kids shouldn't buy records. More for me. But that is not the case where I live. University I go to, 50% of kids carry MP3 players. To most, it's just another fashion. When I see their playlist, they have maybe 30 songs.

Maybe I posted this while back. I was talking to my audio salesperson, and he said analoge sales have jumped up dramatically in last year or so. He said they can't keep Grado Red in stock, and they are strongly considering stocking TTs instead of contacting distributor everytime they sell a TT. Kids or not,m, sales are increasing in my region.

[Woochifer]

Who closed that thread? Dusty started picking on some contradictory statement Sir T made, but all in all I was learning alot. Alot of comments from both sides I knew, but havent thought of in a while. I really want that thread to continue. How many signatures do I need to collect? If anyone was learning something from those 2 then I strongly believe it should've continued.

I can see vinyl industry going down for me, since alot of music aren't being recorded on analogue tape. I dont want to buy any records that has been digitally recorded. I love vinyl/analogue for its' sound quality. If they have to convert back to analoge for LP then I'm not gonna get off as much. Maybe that's another reason why newer vinyl releases dont have huge differences in SQ compared to CDs.
I dont like paying $30+ each for audiophile repress. If that's what it takes to preserve SQ for "increasing" niche market then I am willing.
I read that they are working on "Fragile" by YES. That's a great news for me.
As long as they can keep'em going with cash-cows like DSOM.



Please dont close this thread. I'm seriosuly learning stuff here. I didnt revive this just to read them two get into a dog fight. I thought everything was reasonably civil.

Thank you.

-JRA

A lot of good info that was starting to get a bit overly heated.

For me, the biggest benefit of SACD is with the multichannel remixing, and the BIG cleanup in the audio quality that often results from that remixing process. The reason is that the remixing has to go all the way back to the original multitrack master tapes -- can't just pick up a two-channel analog master and tweak with the EQing, have to go all the way back to the beginning. The affords the opportunity to remix the tracks without all the processing and signal loss that might have accompanied the original mixdown.

And in the comparison with vinyl, I think the point that Terrence was trying to make was you have to look at it case by case. For one thing, vinyl is hardly a model for consistency in terms of sound quality and pressing quality from album to album. Even different LP copies of the SAME album can sound dramatically different. This was very common back in the vinyl heyday when record companies had to press millions of copies of a hit album, often from worn stampers or stampers made from second or third generation master disks; and would constantly reissue albums that sounded different from before.

All too often, I hear vinyl proponents rant on about how vinyl is ALWAYS superior to a CD. With the number of LPs I've bought and listened to over the years, I know that's certainly not the case. Even the most ardent digital proponents will at least acknowledge that a lot of the early CDs were improperly transferred and had audibly inferior audio quality to the original vinyl releases.

Otherwise, if the contention is which format is the most accurate representation of the original source material, then you absolutely cannot make the case for vinyl. I recently read an interview with well-regarded mastering engineer Bob Ludwig (who remains one of the best vinyl cutters around) where he indicated that it's impossible to get vinyl to sound transparent to the original master, while it is possible with high res digital.

[jrhymeammo]

My opinion.

Vinyl is music. If anyone talked when I'm listening to LP, I will stab them.
HT is just an entertainment. Who cares? Alot of you apparently.
LPs are just pops and hisses. Who cares? Alot of us obviosuly.

[jrhymeammo]

A lot of good info that was starting to get a bit overly heated.
For one thing, vinyl is hardly a model for consistency in terms of sound quality and pressing quality from album to album. Even different LP copies of the SAME album can sound dramatically different. This was very common back in the vinyl heyday when record companies had to press millions of copies of a hit album, often from worn stampers or stampers made from second or third generation master disks; and would constantly reissue albums that sounded different from before.

All too often, I hear vinyl proponents rant on about how vinyl is ALWAYS superior to a CD. With the number of LPs I've bought and listened to over the years, I know that's certainly not the case. Even the most ardent digital proponents will at least acknowledge that a lot of the early CDs were improperly transferred and had audibly inferior audio quality to the original vinyl releases.

Otherwise, if the contention is which format is the most accurate representation of the original source material, then you absolutely cannot make the case for vinyl. .

I agree with you on that Woocher.

Also, here is the thing I'm wondering. Digital lovers with $300 CD player will not be convinced with $300 TT setup. Buy a good cartridge, that already half of the budget. $150 on a TT and phono-pre? Yeah, digital will always sound better. I agree. Cost of equipements doesn't always justify performance. I understand that, but I believe it helps me lay out my point.

What do you guys think?

[Feanor]

...
I can see vinyl industry going down for me, since alot of music aren't being recorded on analogue tape. I dont want to buy any records that has been digitally recorded. I love vinyl/analogue for its' sound quality. If they have to convert back to analoge for LP then I'm not gonna get off as much. Maybe that's another reason why newer vinyl releases dont have huge differences in SQ compared to CDs.
...
-JRA

Want realism? What an experience that is as close as possible to a real performance in a real musical venue? The state of that art is multichannel SACD.

I'm not talking just any old SACD reissue; I'm talking about mostly recent recordings made with with multichannel in mind. The best of such recording advance the SOTA beyond anything possible heretofore. Of course, the proportion of even modern recordings that really to justice to the medium is small. So what's new about most recordings be mediocre?? Damned few, whether vinyl, CD, whatever, are really good.

I'll admit I listen mostly to CDs ripped to Apple Lossless via an M-Audo Audiophile USB, not SACD multichannel. Nevertheless if you want a really advance in sound, the latter is it. The whole debate of vinyl versus CD -- or either vs. stereo SACD for that matter -- is completely fatuous IMO.

[bobsticks]

Want realism? What an experience that is as close as possible to a real performance in a real musical venue? The state of that art is multichannel SACD.

I'm not talking just any old SACD reissue; I'm talking about mostly recent recordings made with with multichannel in mind. The best of such recording advance the SOTA beyond anything possible heretofore..

I think that this is an important point. Newer SACD releases positively dwarf offerings from even a few years ago. Labels like B.I.S., Naxos, Chesky, and Telarc are doing some really amazing things with hi-rez--to the point where the old Sony label discs are the last thing one would want to arm himself with in a sound-off...

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

A lot of good info that was starting to get a bit overly heated.

I think it got overheated because some of the things written were so far from the truth, so absolute, and so just plain wrong!

And in the comparison with vinyl, I think the point that Terrence was trying to make was you have to look at it case by case. For one thing, vinyl is hardly a model for consistency in terms of sound quality and pressing quality from album to album. Even different LP copies of the SAME album can sound dramatically different. This was very common back in the vinyl heyday when record companies had to press millions of copies of a hit album, often from worn stampers or stampers made from second or third generation master disks; and would constantly reissue albums that sounded different from before.

Bingo!!!. It is definately a case by case situation. Also remember they were using recycled vinyl, and alot of folks that didn't know their craft that well into the mix.

All too often, I hear vinyl proponents rant on about how vinyl is ALWAYS superior to a CD. With the number of LPs I've bought and listened to over the years, I know that's certainly not the case. Even the most ardent digital proponents will at least acknowledge that a lot of the early CDs were improperly transferred and had audibly inferior audio quality to the original vinyl releases.

I believe I mentioned this is my posts. When I first got into digital audio back in the middle to late 80's, the converters in the digital recorders of the time basically sucked. There were brickwall filters, clocking and phase issues, and they just sounded hard in the midrange. Also, there were alot of engineers with their analog hats on, EQ'ing as if the product was being released to LP only. This combination was deadly to the sound of CD in the 80's

Otherwise, if the contention is which format is the most accurate representation of the original source material, then you absolutely cannot make the case for vinyl. I recently read an interview with well-regarded mastering engineer Bob Ludwig (who remains one of the best vinyl cutters around) where he indicated that it's impossible to get vinyl to sound transparent to the original master, while it is possible with high res digital.

I believe I also mentioned this. Even if the master was analog tape you couldn't really make them close. IMO the only format audio wise that could come close to its master would be DSD to SACD. If I was still stuck on analog, it certainly wouldn't be LP. Analog 1/2" or 1" is much more pleasing to these ears with two channel analog than LP

[Dusty Chalk]

I think it got overheated because some of the things written were so far from the truth, so absolute, and so just plain wrong!

You got that right!

[ericl]

Who closed that thread?

I closed it. It looked like a decent thread until it turned into a little shouting match.

[jrhymeammo]

I closed it. It looked like a decent thread until it turned into a little shouting match.

Thanks for your reply.

BTW, any idea when I can start seeing E.A.R. 843P phono-pre in our review section?