Thread: IS SHM~SACD The Closest We've Come To The Master Tapes?

Posts: 424
Page: prev 1 ... 24 25 26 27 28 ... 43 next

Post by Polarius T December 1, 2011 (251 of 424)
DSD said:

My Mac Mini is for music not available on SACD or DVD-Audio. I don't like the sound quality of any 16/44.1k music files including MP3. The Mac Mini doesn't start to sound good until one plays 24 bit lossless music files and the best sounding are at 24/88.2k or higher.

This, too, has been pointed out to you before, but here once more:

What you have in your Mac Mini is a SigmaTel chip with a 19,2 kHz passband and, says Michi who checked the specs, maybe 14 or 15 bits of resolving power... Not even close to 44.1 kHz PCM.

(See /showthread.php?page=10, post 91 onward.)

You can't even hear standard PCM resolution on it, to say nothing about 24/88.2 or higher. But, as you say, you "believe" all these facts are and must be "wrong." End of discussion.

Post by DSD December 1, 2011 (252 of 424)
Polarius that information is WRONG, the REAL specs are 20Hz-20kHz+0.5/-3dB at "44.1kHz" which is Mac Mini's default setting. If Michi didn't change core audio to 24/96 she was ONLY measuring 44.1k.

In addition it is very easy to hear the difference between 16Bit and 24Bit 44.1k music files.

Using XLD I recently converted some 24/96 music files to 24/48 to play on my iPod and compared them. The 24/96 had airier highs with more ambiance and intricate detail.

However I prefer DSD recorded SACDs.

Post by rammiepie December 1, 2011 (253 of 424)
Polarius T said:

What babble, nonsense? I've seen none thus far, only terse and clear statements of fact that anybody can check if they want (they usually don't).

I wasn't talking about AmonRa but about those posts addressed to him.

And, apropos babbling on an SACD forum, look at the posts you make. How many are there without that ad byline about your DVD player and its DVD performance? That's a competing format (where's Arnaldo the Watchdog when you need him!). And apropos nonsense, shall we go into those lubes, tints, radiation catchers, and other magical substances you favor for your audio cult...

Polarius, it may be a competing format but if you heard it with my recommended tweaks, your jaw would drop wide open. It's that good!

And I'm a lot more interesting that you could ever imagine being..........At least I try things out instead of intellectualizing, ad nauseam, why they don't or cannot work (tweaks, that is).

What would this world be like if imagination and the need to expand one's horizons were placed in YOUR hands.......

Dull, dull, DULL....or what I call the tragic bore syndrome!

As if your topics are always on target??????????????????

Post by Dave54321 May 22, 2012 (254 of 424)
"IS SHM~SACD The Closest We've Come To The Master Tapes?"

The simple answer is: No, not even close. SHMs are not even derived from "master" tapes.

To be fair, many SHM-SACDs are really excellent sounding, no doubt. They tend to avoid excessive EQ'ing and compression, and that's a really good thing.

But SHM also use very misleading statements in their marketing - and "marketing" is all it is - to mislead listeners into lumping SHM together with the likes of MFSL and Analogue Productions.

Firstly, the term "original analog tapes" means nothing. There's a very good reason they never - but NEVER - use the word "master." These are NOT master tapes, but second (or later) generation copies, albeit usually very good ones. But a degree of resolution is lost between the master and the 2nd-gen copy. Just compare, for example, the SHM of 10CC's "Original Soundtrack" with the DCC CD version of the same album. The DCC is only a humble 16-bit redbook CD, but it blows away the SHM because it uses the original master and so achieves greater clarity and dynamics.

Secondly, the weasel words "SHM-SACD (Super High Material SACD) is the ultimate Super Audio CD that utilizes the materials and technologies that were developed for the SHM-CD to further enhance the audio-resolution" have been chosen with lawyerly care.
Nowhere do they state that this material enhances resolution. If you read carefully, it merely states that the material was *developed* to further enhance blah blah blah.

If you want something truly close to the master tapes, you need to get MFSL or Analogue Productions SACDs or check out the very few original-master remasters on HDTracks (e.g. Stevie Wonder's Innervisions*). There are other examples too - but certainly not SHM (as good as they are).

*Compare Innervisions HDTracks with SHM, and again, hear the difference in resolution between the original master and the copy. It's like comparing day and night.

Post by rammiepie May 22, 2012 (255 of 424)
Dave 54321......when I posted my original query about the SHM~SACDs back in October of 2011, I was under the impression that they were in some way special but then even I realized that most of the American releases were NOT from the original masters since the country of origin (USA) is where most of the original master tapes are stored........even the Stones and Who reissues are not from the original masters as they reside in the UK.

They do, however, sound wonderful and except for MoFi and AP (who do, in fact, use the original masters), I doubt whether these USA~based masters will ever leave the country to be stored in Japan.

And, hopefully, down the road, Universal/Japan may see fit to drop their high prices as they do with their SHM~CDs.............but the "limited" status may, in fact, preclude this price drop.

The buyer always has to be aware in this economy and as the recent Esoteric releases have taught us.....no amount of hoopla and fancy packaging can disguise the simple fact that oneday these precious and aging masters may NEVER leave their storage facility and we will be forced to purchase 'dupes' made from sub~masters.

Unfortunately, analogue tape is NOT archival!

Post by Kveld-Úlfr May 23, 2012 (256 of 424)
canonical said:

I'd take a Sony/Columbia or Pentatone or Mercury Living Presence etc:

--------- direct analog master tape ---> DSD conversion anytime

... in preference to the typical Universal SHM-SACD release which is:

--------- analog master tape ---> 96 kHz/24bit PCM ---> DSD


[ Actually, many of those early Sony/Columbia releases are single-layer, so they are basically SHM-SACDs anyway, plus or minus some greeny goop. ]

Hi Canonical,

Please indicate your sources regarding that information. I am curious. Until now, I believed only the Queen SHM SA-CDs were taken from Bob Ludwig's 2011 96/24 PCM remasters ?

Post by Kveld-Úlfr May 23, 2012 (257 of 424)
Dave54321 said:

"IS SHM~SACD The Closest We've Come To The Master Tapes?"

The simple answer is: No, not even close. SHMs are not even derived from "master" tapes.

Hi Dave54321,

You are accusing Universal Japan of lying. Well, it would not be the first time a huge company lies to the world. Still, just as transfers from the original master tapes are mentioned by U.J., transfers from second gen tapes are mentioned as well.

So, given the fact they freely admit using second gen tapes sometimes, why would they lie for all the rest of them ?

Post by Kveld-Úlfr May 23, 2012 (258 of 424)
rammiepie said:

Dave 54321......when I posted my original query about the SHM~SACDs back in October of 2011, I was under the impression that they were in some way special but then even I realized that most of the American releases were NOT from the original masters since the country of origin (USA) is where most of the original master tapes are stored........even the Stones and Who reissues are not from the original masters as they reside in the UK.

They do, however, sound wonderful and except for MoFi and AP (who do, in fact, use the original masters), I doubt whether these USA~based masters will ever leave the country to be stored in Japan.

Hi Rammipie,

I am not sure being correct here, but if tapes cannot leave their country of storage, why not do the opposite ? I think tapes being in a foreign country won't prevent a producer from taking a flight to do the transfer job where the original tapes are. The tricky part would be, in my opinion, on whether or not the local studio can ensure DSD transfers. If I am not wrong, only a few studios are equiped for that kind of operation.

Post by Espen R May 23, 2012 (259 of 424)
Dave54321 said:

If you want something truly close to the master tapes, you need to get MFSL or Analogue Productions SACDs or check out the very few original-master remasters on HDTracks (e.g. Stevie Wonder's Innervisions*). There are other examples too - but certainly not SHM (as good as they are).

*Compare Innervisions HDTracks with SHM, and again, hear the difference in resolution between the original master and the copy. It's like comparing day and night.

??

Stevie Wonder SHM-SACDs: These are transfered from analogue to DSD by Ellen Fitton in US (Universal mastering studio) And Ellen Fitton has confirmed that the Master tapes has been used.
I have two of them, and the transparency in sound is incredible.

Analogue Productions always use 1. generation tapes? Really?? I have several jazz SACDs from AP, and the first generation tapes are not used. The SHM-SACDs from japan sounds clearly better (even copy tapes has been used)

Post by Espen R May 23, 2012 (260 of 424)
rammiepie said:

Dave 54321......when I posted my original query about the SHM~SACDs back in October of 2011, I was under the impression that they were in some way special but then even I realized that most of the American releases were NOT from the original masters since the country of origin (USA) is where most of the original master tapes are stored........even the Stones and Who reissues are not from the original masters as they reside in the UK.

The Stones (70's catalog) and Who tapes are located in the UK. And the SHM-SACDs are transfered from analogue-to-DSD in the UK from the original master tapes by FX Mastering studio and Close to the Edge Mastering studio, both located in the UK.

Page: prev 1 ... 24 25 26 27 28 ... 43 next

Closed