Garyi’s recent post regarding the HDCD recording of Tubular Bells’ has prompted me to start this thread.
I, like I suspect many others on this forum, are interested to see which new format succeeds CD. (If indeed one ever does!)
Now let’s just suppose that SACD wins the war and becomes established as the new CD. Would it really be that much better?
Potentially the answer is yes, but wouldn’t SACD simply become the new ‘Buzz Word’ with record companies simply jumping on the bandwagon and producing poor to average quality recordings on the new format? The average buyer might be wooed by the fancy ‘SACD’ label on the box, but be unable to tell the difference between it and MP3 or whatever.
True, some companies, like Naim, Linn etc might produce stunning recordings on the new format but will the average company produce anything that would make it worthwhile investing in the latest equipment?
I recall the time, just before CD was released, that many classical recordings were labelled ‘Digital’.
God, what a load of bleedin’ crap that was – the worst of both worlds! Early digital sound along with the crackles and pops of vinyl. Yet people bought it. I think I bought about 3 and then gave up buying classical unless I could find a good analogue version.
I think if I the money I’d still be quite happy to invest in a CDS2. (And upgrade the LP12 of course).
Steve B
Posted on: 08 September 2001 by garyi
I think CD was a true revolution in music recordings in as much as it was portable and (arguably) survives as a format better than records (At least in my experience where I simply cannot look after software)
However I am reluctant to jump on the next bandwagon, all I would be interested in is a format which is smaller.
There seems to be an interest (such as HDCD) with higher bandwidth and getting that extra inch of musical enjoyment, but ultimately i think it falls down. After all if we wanted more then surely this would be available on the hugely larger DVD, but where are they?
Talk on the street is of a new cd sized format which can hold 100gigs of data, allowing for a lot more data per album, what we get out of that is to wait for.
One thing is for sure, in my lifetime there has been tape record and CD, (not alowing for mini disk, MP3 etc)
I am reluctant to start my personal favorites onto a new format, I find it hard to believe our ears will be sophisticated enough to enjoy any higher quality from a format. I find it distracting enough hearing hands scratching strings and people coughing in the background!
better recording techniques is where the future needs to be not better storage mediums.
Posted on: 08 September 2001 by Martin Payne
quote:
Originally posted by garyi:
After all if we wanted more then surely this would be available on the hugely larger DVD, but where are they?
SACD & DVD-A. Both are mutations of the DVD standard, holding audio instead of video.
After all, the "V" in "DVD" does stand for Versatile, rather than the "Video" that many assume.
cheers, Martin
Posted on: 08 September 2001 by Jez Quigley
SACD and DVD A have nothing to do with the record industry wanting to give us improved sound ( except as a marketing ploy). The real driver for them is as a potential way to prevent copying. When CD first came out it was inconceivable that anyone would have the means to make cd copies and no protection was therefore added.
Read the Barry Fox piece in this months Hi-Fi News about the record companies new attempts to protect audio CD by putting on data that is ignored on the original CD, but is intended to damage your audio system if the cd has been copied on a PC.
It may be that Naim/Linn etc will produce players that will get music out of the new formats(I hear that Meridian already has), but if I needed a new player and had the cash, I would have no hesitation in getting the CDSII.
pedantic note: The V in DVD did originally stand for Video, but when it began to be marketed as storage for any kind of data it was changed to 'Versatile'.
Posted on: 09 September 2001 by jpk73
Most CDs on the market sound terrible, espiacelly classic... I wonder how recently published recordintgs still sound that bad!
My experience: I heard several recordings (EMI, Teldec, DG etc) in the control-room as a multichannel/highresolution raw-mix and it sounded *never* any better than the final CD in my livingroom. Some recordings sound more/less better/worse, but the really bad ones from the beginning in the control-room sounded horrible!
For me that means that there is only a very marginal lose of sound-quality when converting highres/multichannel to CD-format!! Definately.
Greetings from Jun
Posted on: 09 September 2001 by Martin Payne
Whilst looking on Richers' website for an MD walkman I was surprised to find that they are selling an SACD player for £250.
Prices are dropping, but then what's the point of buying an expensive player when there's no software?
I'm sure stock is piling up somewhere if Richers are selling them off.
cheers, Martin
