HDCD is it needed?

HDCD was only included on Naim CD players as a byproduct of the excellent sounding Pacific Microsonics PDM100 and PDM200 oversampling filters used.  These were chosen for their excellent performance with regular CDs rather than for their HDCD capability, which came as just a bonus (or not).

Richard as a side question, since Pacific Microsonics is no more and whose IPR was bought up by Microsoft, do you know who now manufacturers the PDM100/200 chips?

Simon

That's Richard, I had no idea. As I mentioned a week ago, my system settled in and fairdinkum I am thrilled with the sound! I was nervous for awhile as I fiddled with the arrangement, but now I can say with confidence that my Naim & JBL far outshineS my mates McIntosh & JBL (and a very very expensive setup). Even using the NAP200 for MF/HF has a smooth, silky character which is equal to that of tubes, which really surprised me. Any reservations I had at all are gone forever.

Simon, I don't know.  Best asked of Naim.

For some legacy material - Joni Mitchell, Neil Young & Grateful Dead + many others I'm sure, HDCD is good to have. 

HDCD encoded Discs sound good to these ears. Even after ripped using suitable software that can capture the HDCD, like dbPoweramp.

Just a note, the HDCD.exe programme that is used by many rippers to emulate the HDCD DSP  can handle the simple compression and companding  algorithms, but it will not decode the dynamic filtering as that requires more advanced DSP. The good news is I understand that not too many HDCD masters  used the dynamic filtering instructions... however it is possible your HDCD rip is not a true HDCD representation of the HDCD if such dynamic filtering has been used.

There is/was a utility somewhere that could decode a raw (IE 16 bit) HDCD rip and advise what operands were encoded into the audio... and this would tell you whether your HDCD rip is accurate or not. (IE if it excludes dynamic filtering you should be ok) But I can't find it now. You might have more luck on Google

Simin

edit.. Richard, ok thanks, I'll ask Steve H next time I am in touch...its just curiosity really.

Thanks Simon - very interesting.  Just had a quick Google and it does appear to be a bit of a minefield. One for a very rainy day.

According to one site Foobar has a plug in that can properly decode HDCD from a rip and  can show information about various flags used in the HDCD encoding. But another site claims Foobar only deals with the soft peak limiting and low level gain adjustments but not with the record/replay filters. Which I assume is what you allude to above. 

> Which I assume is what you allude to above. 

Correct 

SamS posted:

For some legacy material - Joni Mitchell, Neil Young & Grateful Dead + many others I'm sure, HDCD is good to have. 

HDCD encoded Discs sound good to these ears. Even after ripped using suitable software that can capture the HDCD, like dbPoweramp.

Don't forget - in case you like them - that all of the 30 Years remasters of King Crimson's albums are HDCD..

I have a few HDCD encoded discs in my collection and generally don't much like the sound of them. A bit 'pumped' and Hi-Fi sounding for me.

The basic 16/44 format was a brilliant conception, and implemented well, still takes some beating to these ears. It's generally my oldest (1980's) West German manufactured CD's which sound the best.

John.

John, of course HDCD is standard 16/44.1 at the CD level, all HDCD does is process the PCM audio in the master at encode and decode (if you have HDCD aware DSP). In a way to my mind there are conceptual similarities with MQA, 

HDCDs always a fun topic for me. As I've stated, I've got lots and they work great for me on a bare 5x, less so when I did the 5x/FCXS. On the other hand, traditional CDs probably work better with the PSU applied. One issue that's been forwarded with regard to HDCDs is "better" attention to mastering. Interesting because HDCDs often rate a lower DR than earlier, predecessor CDs yet present a more pleasing dynamic sound to me. Room/system/ear dependent for sure. As Richard suggested above my experience might be due to the filtering selection by Naim when HDCDs are played directly on their CDPs. All food for thought.

Massimo Bertola posted

Don't forget - in case you like them - that all of the 30 Years remasters of King Crimson's albums are HDCD..

Yes thanks Max - I have many of the KC and also Roxy Music HDCDs. Although some of the KC has been bettered by the Steven Wilson re-masters, and although I don't have it the Roxy box set from a few years ago is meant to be excellent, not sure if it is HDCD also.

I've got quite a few hdcds including the Linn sampler ones that came free stuck to magazines way back in the day. Gems.Sound fabulous on a cds3. Well worth having. There is definitely an enhanced sound quality to these ears. Only one sounded poor - Psychedelic Furs. I'll have to try it again. So awful it went straight  to the 'charity pile'.

Beefster, I've yet to find a decent sounding Psychedelic Furs album.  So I guess HDCD can't make a silk purse from the proverbial sow's ear.

I don't care for the sound of HDCDs.  I avoid them if possible.  They are also typically remasters, which are almost always a step backwards from the original issue.

Often times while listening to late night music, and an HDCD encoded disc presents itself, it's usually an "oh shit" moment. I think there's just much more coming out of the speakers with those discs....

Tom

Having a Naim HDCD player I'm also rather fond of the format. Some of the Warners best back catalogue (though be careful with the Jonis) and most recent Beach Boys reissues are HDCD. I suspect that those who don't like the sound of it aren't using an HDCD-capable player - it's quite possible the sound is worse if so. I also have some suspicion that Naim are playing down its value now that we're all supposed to be streaming hi-res....