Thread: DSD remastering of PCM recordings: what is DGG doing?

Posts: 3

Post by nucaleena August 12, 2003 (1 of 3)
I recently left a review of DG's recording of Biber's Missa Salisbergensis which concluded with this request for feedback from users of this site:

"One final comment which I'd appreciate some feedback on, however, concerns DG's remastering policies. I appreciate that this recording was made using PCM, and the SACD layers are presented as 44.1 khz 24 bit recordings (compared to the redbook layer's 44.1 khz 16bit) but is this necessary?

The cover boasts the DSD logo/legend, so presumably the 44.1 was remastered as 2mhz and could have been presented at that sampling rate. I'm no technician but am I right in thinking that DG is opting out of the true potential of SACD in this way? If so, that could also explain the less than satisfactory transfer of the Beethoven 9th I've written about elsewhere. Could someone with more technical nous advise me on this please."

Post by Dinko August 12, 2003 (2 of 3)
I'm afraid DGG's SACDs are mostly horrible and quite useless so far. We'll see if the Lang Lang Tchaikovsky suffers from the same troubles. Though hopefully the Anna Netrebko and Bryn Terfel SACDs being newer recordings will not be as sucky as DGG's SACDs so far.

What's weird is that this doesn't apply accross the board to all Universal SACDs even though they're supposedly handled by Emil Berliner Studios.
I recently bought two Decca SACDs which are original 16bit/48kHz recordings, and even though they sound CD-like, at least the Decca teams used the full potential of the surrounds (if not necessarily the stereo program), such that the SACDs are more than worth having (unlike most DGG discs).

Post by nucaleena August 12, 2003 (3 of 3)
Dinko said:

I'm afraid DGG's SACDs are mostly horrible and quite useless so far. We'll see if the Lang Lang Tchaikovsky suffers from the same troubles. Though hopefully the Anna Netrebko and Bryn Terfel SACDs being newer recordings will not be as sucky as DGG's SACDs so far.

What's weird is that this doesn't apply accross the board to all Universal SACDs even though they're supposedly handled by Emil Berliner Studios.
I recently bought two Decca SACDs which are original 16bit/48kHz recordings, and even though they sound CD-like, at least the Decca teams used the full potential of the surrounds (if not necessarily the stereo program), such that the SACDs are more than worth having (unlike most DGG discs).

I'm afraid the evidence supports you fully, Dinko, at least from my limited sample, - 2 DGG SACD's, 2 big disappointments. I certainly wont be buying any more from DG until i start reading favourable reviews of the sound quality.
Re. Universal:- Philips have also taken a quite different tack to DG, so why is DG going it alone with such a poor marketing decision as 44.1 khz presentations of DSD remasters? Are they then going to re-release all their SACDs and try and get us to part with our money second time? 'Cos it wont work.

Closed