Quote Originally Posted by mtrycraft
You need evidence to support the mixing contention as well. Given that I have no evidence supporting any one conclusion over another, I'm simply not ruling any of the known factors out, and the resolution would be one of them.


You need better evidence than the original post and follow up? A confession by recording eng or some recording companies?

How about Sony using mixing tricks to differentiate SACD from CD?
"Evolutionary or Revolutionary- Super Audio CD," Edward Foster, Audio, Nov 1999, page 40-47.
Very telling that the hi res couldn't differentiate it.
96/24- Point-Counter point, Bob Katz and Ken Kantor, Audio, Jul 1998, page 26-31

I am sure there are many others out there I am or you are aware of.

No, there is plenty of evidence for differences between CD and hi res, none of it is due to the hi res.

Maybe one day someone will make a deffinitive demonstration.
I hate to throw this newpaper on your front door step Mtry, but we are five years from 1999, and six from 1998. Alot has changed in this industry since then. Digging that far in the past for references means nothing today. Sony is not the only one turning out SACD releases, so pinning a problem on one Recording company amoung many in the industry does nothing to further your arguement. Most record companies are not marketing a format, and have no benefit form altering a CD layer to make is sound different than the SACD layer. Producers and artist approve all CD releases, if it sounds different, blame them. Have you any idea why sony supposidly alter the CD layer, and how was it done? If it is different eq, or compression levels, then possible the alter CD is being used as the primary format for many forms of broadcast. It is stupid to try and make a CD layer sound like the SACD layer if they are going to be used in different areas of audio.