Jump to content
LogicprObe

For those who think MP3 is great.

Recommended Posts

How about BR audio? I've got a couple of SACD's and they are head and shoulders above their CD counterparts and though I haven't heard one myself I've been told that BD audio discs are way above SACD's again. OK, it's very early stages atm but with the uptake if BD players gaining momentum surely to goodness they'll start marketing BD audio discs as well? Or am I living in fantasy land again?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never looked a Blu-Ray Audio myself but we do pay more for them, and they need to set themselves apart for that reason too, so I at least would expect quality out of them.

 

I guess the real test would be to see them when they are main stream like CD is now, possibly?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've got a BR drive in my PC but I've got nothing to play on it!

 

edit - a SACD drive in a PC would be terrific!

Edited by LogicprObe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about BR audio? I've got a couple of SACD's and they are head and shoulders above their CD counterparts and though I haven't heard one myself I've been told that BD audio discs are way above SACD's again. OK, it's very early stages atm but with the uptake if BD players gaining momentum surely to goodness they'll start marketing BD audio discs as well? Or am I living in fantasy land again?

Looking back through this thread and at the suggested problems with music, I would say Blu-Ray audio would not offer any real improvement, at least not at the moment.

 

The thread started with the idea the compressed digital audio robbed music of its quality, this then moved briefly to the idea that any digital audio hurt music. That idea was then countered with some technical info about the dynamic range of CDs and on paper they have heaps of dynamic range.

The thread then moves on to the idea that recent recordings are heavily compressed to make them sound louder, all the sound is pushed to the loud edge of the medias dynamic range thus a modern recording released on CD is not making use of its greatest ability, its huge dynamic range.

 

It seems lots of people, including myself think dynamic range is a huge part of the music experience.

I can't see that more dynamic range and greater resolution of a media like blu-ray or even super audio CD can make music better if these features are not utilised at the mixing and mastering level.

 

In the past I would have told you that vinyl was the best media to listen to music on, now my view is shifting a little.

I think I love vinyl (my vinyl) because of its age, most of the albums are from the 60's 70's and 80's, and only a handful that are more recent.

These old recordings are just done better in my mind, making them a pleasure to sit and listen to.

Many of the records I like to listen to are not of bands or singers that I would call myself a fan of, but the music is just so good that I sit and listen, never getting up to change the volume or skip a track.

 

For higher resolution digital media to offer something useful the recording industry would first need to pick up its game and I guess it will not change until the consumers demand better.

 

And now we complete the vicious circle.

 

With so many people using portable music players and listening in loud environments (on the train, bus in the car etc) loud, compressed audio with little to no change in amplitude will continue to be popular.

 

My advice, buy up as many old recordings as you can, the age the music is less important then the experience you can get from it.

 

Luck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good advise, Yogs' :)

 

Yeah, I have to agree with the older LP's I have a few and they just sound superior to others in every way.

Edited by datafast69

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good advise, Yogs' :)

 

Yeah, I have to agree with the older LP's I have a few and they just sound superior to others in every way.

Thanks,

 

just to be clear on my previous post;

 

I am starting to lean to the conclusion that I like my vinyl over other media I have, NOT because the media itself is better but because of the way recordings were made in the past.

 

I am not fully willing to accept that other media is better but can see its potential.

 

I think old recording, mixing and mastering methods are just more accessible in an older format like vinyl.

At least that is how I am thinking atm, who knows how my ideas will devlope in the future.

 

Luck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hay Les

If you want an example of a good vinyl transfer, I have a CD of Hounds Of Love that a mate transferred from a rare fully anolog release I had.

 

He spun it on that table I showed you and recorded straight to the DA Converter chip on his pro card :)

 

It blows the CD release out of the water :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah studio limitations aside the BD audio discs are supposed to be lossless. There's a few about so I might get one or two to sample.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All the stuff I'm reading relates to audio with video, not just plain audio.

 

Although the lossless PCM would be good for live concert videos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yEAH, i GUESS IT'S STILL EARLY DAYS BUT IF THE STUDIOS HAD ANY BRAINS (ok, i KNOW...) (stupid capslock) they'd be porting everything to bd audio. For a couple of reasons 1) unlike SACD you don't need special equipment to play it on, just a BD player and 2) I suspect it would eliminate a lot of piracy due to the size of the download.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i am still unconvinced the stark improvements people claim are attributable to the SACD format are not predominantly the result of other factors, like greater attention paid to preserving high fidelity details during remixing/remastering when releasing to an audiophile market. they are free to eschew the stupid loudness war.

 

@DIRECTOR. THE IRONY IN YOUR COMMENTS (oops, excuse me..) is that SACD has always been about content protection. one can always rip the ordinary CD layer though. i doubt the size of blu-ray would have much effect on piracy either. if someone makes high res rips available, there will always be a certain percentage of people queuing up to download them — especially as the price of bandwidth and storage continues to fall. and nothing to stop the rest of them downloading the inevitable low-res mp3 version...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re:vinyl.

 

One would imagine that in the 70s and 80s, compression may have been a more costly activity.

 

Maybe the reason it wasn't done, was not because they didn't want to, but because it was a pain in the ass?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe the reason it wasn't done, was not because they didn't want to, but because it was a pain in the ass?

its a mixture of many things. practicality, expense, technology, and changing aesthetics.

 

back in the day, it would have been prohibitively expensive to have a compressor on each console input during recording, but not expensive at all to compress everything like crazy during mixdown and mastering — if they had wanted. but like a lot of production techniques back then, compression was used more judiciously during recording than it sometimes is today. when the SSL consoles came along, with a whole lot of processing options on each channel, the sound of studio recordings began to change at the recording end.

 

but not that much. everything was still being recorded onto tape, with its natural and gentle compression characteristics. and mixed down onto tape, with its gentle compression characteristics.

 

and they still werent tempted to compress drastically, partly because the destination listening environment was usually a quiet-ish space where people gathered around for dedicated listening — as opposed to walking around loud city streets wearing earbuds and doing other stuff, for example.

 

sure, quite early on Phil Spectors 'wall of sound' had spearheaded some change, partly because this louder production style could cut through and sound kick arse blaring out of a little transistor radio at the beach. but things werent yet out of control.

 

now, we have all sorts of fancy digital algorithms to slam the shit out of sound in ways that simply werent possible before. sometimes its beneficial and particularly befitting of newer genres, but often its just loudness war bullshit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re:vinyl.

 

One would imagine that in the 70s and 80s, compression may have been a more costly activity.

 

Maybe the reason it wasn't done, was not because they didn't want to, but because it was a pain in the ass?

Compressors aren't new and the old ones fetch big bucks.

I'm guessing the first one was designed in the 20's or 30's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting, thanks for the responses. I know compressing isn't new, but I guess I imagined it to be a time-consuming, fiddly process with minimal gain, before it could be done in a few seconds with free software.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Software or hardware, you still have to get the settings for the sound you want right.

That said, some of the mastering compressors have some great presets these days.

(software, I mean here)

 

edit - Here's a pretty good quick rundown on dynamic compression.

 

http://www.harmony-central.com/Effects/Articles/Compression/

Edited by LogicprObe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice find Cyb3r, really shows what George was talking about, hay. Again...great find, mate :)

 

Maybe his detractors will admit they may be wrong about him now...

 

If not, well :P

Edited by datafast69

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*Grabs Icepick & packed lunch*

 

"surely technology has improved since vinyl?"

 

Yes, but the sound hasn't :P

 

I'm just poking you a bit, nice write up Cyb3r ;)

Edited by datafast69

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would I be too much of a nitpicker if I responded to....

 

"It begs the question; surely technology has improved since vinyl?"

 

Noting that technology has definitely improved... it's the use of it which has gone backwards.

 

Just read the next line :P

 

Rob.

Edited by robzy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×