[smerlas]

After reading the early posts regarding the reviews of the BCD1 it appears that disks in SACD format do not offer any sonic superiority over other CD formats when played in a redbook player.

At the risk of a asking a foolish question .......... what is the best format to purchase for playback in the BCD1?  Is there a preferred format which typically results in higher fidelity during recording, or does it just vary from CD to CD based typically on which label is issuing the CD.    Is it a waste of money to purchase a SACD?

Or is a case of the BCD1 plays them all well and it does not matter what I purchase?

To further qualify my guestion, by best, I mean which will offer the best qualities on playback.

[Mag]

After reading the early posts regarding the reviews of the BCD1 it appears that disks in SACD format do not offer any sonic superiority over other CD formats.

At the risk of a asking a foolish question .......... if the BCD1 is a "redbook" player which does not treat the SACD data any differently when read from the disk,  what is the best format to purchase for playback in the BCD1?  Is there a preferred format which typically results in higher fidelity during recording, or does it just vary from CD to CD based typically on which label is issuing the CD. 

Or is a case of the BCD1 plays them all well and it does not matter what I purchase?

IMO it depends on the cd.

With re-mastered they have very high resolution. Some audiophiles might find some a tad sterile or sharp. I can't think of any original re-masters I've played that I found irritating, but that's me.

Well recorded cds that are not re-mastered have high resolution and are good as is.

Then there are cds usually earlier releases but not always, where it should be obvious after playing a number of cds that the resolution isn't up to par with the above mentioned cds. These you can re-master (see re-mastering thread). After re-mastering they should exhibit high resolution.

 I have 2 cds I can think of that the recording is just awful. Re-mastering them I know I can improve them but I'm not sure if they can ever sound high resolution.

Some of my 320 mp3's transfered to cd-r have high resolution. If I played them for you you would not know they came from mp3.

In summary, try to avoid the early releases cds when cd's first came on the market. Pretty much everything released in the last 10 years is good to go.

[KeithA]

After reading the early posts regarding the reviews of the BCD1 it appears that disks in SACD format do not offer any sonic superiority over other CD formats when played in a redbook player.

At the risk of a asking a foolish question .......... what is the best format to purchase for playback in the BCD1?  Is there a preferred format which typically results in higher fidelity during recording, or does it just vary from CD to CD based typically on which label is issuing the CD.    Is it a waste of money to purchase a SACD?

Or is a case of the BCD1 plays them all well and it does not matter what I purchase?

To further qualify my guestion, by best, I mean which will offer the best qualities on playback.

Correct me if I am wrong, but being a 'Redbook' player, the BCD-1 wouldn't play a SACD unless it was a 'hybrid' SACD and in that case, it would only play the 'Redbook' level.

Keith

[rob80b]

After reading the early posts regarding the reviews of the BCD1 it appears that disks in SACD format do not offer any sonic superiority over other CD formats when played in a redbook player.

At the risk of a asking a foolish question .......... what is the best format to purchase for playback in the BCD1?  Is there a preferred format which typically results in higher fidelity during recording, or does it just vary from CD to CD based typically on which label is issuing the CD.    Is it a waste of money to purchase a SACD?

Or is a case of the BCD1 plays them all well and it does not matter what I purchase?

To further qualify my guestion, by best, I mean which will offer the best qualities on playback.

Correct me if I am wrong, but being a 'Redbook' player, the BCD-1 wouldn't play a SACD unless it was a 'hybrid' SACD and in that case, it would only play the 'Redbook' level.

Keith

That's the fact.


But in terms of overall sound quality it depends on how well the original recording was engineered, by the time it reaches your preferred format, CD, SACD, DVD and LP a lot has gone on to get there and depending on the audio engineer’s technical abilities and equipment the end result may be a far cry from what was heard on location or in the studio.
When CD’s first came out 25 years ago I gravitated to any thing that was AAD, till this day I’m unable to listen to those first DDD recordings without cringing.
Things have improved dramatically on the technical side in terms of recording digitally but now we seem to have lot of badly engineered recordings.
I believe there are just too many toys at the hands of the technicians these days and the art of audio recording has been lost. Mind you there are still some excellent recordings being made today and the better players will bring them to light

[Phil A]

I agree there is too much manipulation with many things.  There have been multiple articles quoting respected recording engineers about the loudness war and the compression in modern CDs.  Not that long ago, my friend played for me a few different masters of a Led Zepellin cut.  In the newest remaster, yes they did clean up some of the vocals but the whole timing and tempo to the music was gone.  He also brought over a copy of a Genesis disc I had recently bought on an imported hybrid SACD and there were definitely elements of the later remaster that were not an improvement.  There is much skill in the mixing and mastering of music and there is only so much you can do with something that was recorded in a different time using different techniques.

[Phil A]

Here's one of the articles I was talking about:

http://mixonline.com/mag/audio_big_squeeze/

[smerlas]

Phil,

Great link and very interesting article! 

Reminds me of when you made a cassette of an album.  During recording we always bumped the levels beyond 0.  Not so the VU meters were pegged, but to increase the levels.

[Toka]

I find that a lot of the older discs are actually better than the "new" remasters, which are typically dynamically compressed to the point of no return. It does depend, though, and you can't draw sweeping conclusions either way.

[James Tanner]

I find a lot of the 'Concord Jazz" CD's excellent.

james

[smerlas]

A quick review of their site reveals some interesting artists have CDs with them, Fogerty, Creedence, Paul McCartney, Miles Davis, Coletrane. 

Thanks James great resource ..................http://www.concordmusicgroup.com/

I will have to look further into what is on their label.

Interestingly Mindi Abair's latest CD is with them her "It just happens that way" CD was not and I was impressed with that one.

And in the world of strange but true .............. Herb Alperts "Second Wind" 1996 was not released on A&M records ............ odd since he is the A in A&M.  He appears to have assembled another group ALM Sounds in which he is still the "A".

[smerlas]

OK this could be trouble ................ Booker T, Ottis Redding, Ray Charles ..............

This in just a quick review of the artists listed A thru D on Concord Musics Label.  Cool.

I have bookmarked their site and I am sure they will appreciate the influx of cash they will be seeing from me.

 

[Mag]

A few cds that had poor resolution that now have high resolution played in the BCD-1:

ELP- Show that Never Ends
ELP- Pictures at an Exhibition
Rush- Exit Stage Left
Rush- Hemisphere's
Rainbow- On Stage
Pink Floyd- Pulse
Deep Purple- Made in Japan
Deep Purple- In Rock
Iron Butterfly- In-a-godda-da-vida

Terrible cds that I don't think are salvageable:(list may expand)

Led Zeppelin- Song Remains the Same disc I; terrible recording
Iron Maiden- Powerslave; terrible recording
Bare Naked Ladies- All their Greatest Hits disc I; music is too compressed.

[Phil A]

Joni Mitchell's last CD ("Shine") is also from the Concord Music Group and is a good sounding disc.

[bummrush]

Any halfway decent cd player will clearly show the sound between good and bad sounding discs,

[vegasdave]

A few cds that had poor resolution that now have high resolution played in the BCD-1:

ELP- Show that Never Ends
ELP- Pictures at an Exhibition
Rush- Exit Stage Left
Rush- Hemisphere's
Rainbow- On Stage
Pink Floyd- Pulse
Deep Purple- Made in Japan
Deep Purple- In Rock
Iron Butterfly- In-a-godda-da-vida

Terrible cds that I don't think are salvageable:(list may expand)

Led Zeppelin- Song Remains the Same disc I; terrible recording
Iron Maiden- Powerslave; terrible recording
Bare Naked Ladies- All their Greatest Hits disc I; music is too compressed.

Deep Purple-In Rock? I haven't heard that sound that great...even on the original LP!

Which Led Zeppelin? The original or the remaster?

[Mag]

Deep Purple-In Rock? I haven't heard that sound that great...even on the original LP!

Which Led Zeppelin? The original or the re-master?

I believe it was the original I borrowed from my brother as my copy was stolen from my taxi. I wasn't aware there was a re-master version. Disc II on the other hand sounds great as is played in the BCD-1.

With these re-mastered cds the smoothness is more apparent at high spl. With In-a-godda-da-vida for example I had my Yamaha RX-V1700 used as a pre-amp, volume maxed out without clipping. It still wasn't loud enough for me.

When I first did a comparison with Pink Floyd DSOTM in dts,sacd and cd. Using my spl meter 'C' weighted I would get readings of 110 db for sacd, 107 db for dts, and 100 db for cd before clipping. The cd at 100 db was harsh. With the BCD-1 I haven't done a reading but I know it is up there with sacd before clipping my amp and its still smooth.

The above re-masters are from the original. Made in Japan was from the 25 anniversary re-master. It's a tad shrill on the highs so I'm thinking of trying the original release and see how that works. Rush- Exit Stage Left, is a huge improvement over the original but still sounds  a bit muddy. I think I will try re-mastering it a second time and see if it  will clean it up.

[niels]

This is a very difficult subject as every single album (almost) is manufactured to different standards, with different equipment in different studios or live arenas and mastered with different ears and speakers. Besides, you can have a cd and a vinyl record of the same album and they sound very different, and yes, maybe they both are available on 3 different labels!
I am curious, how exactly do you "re-master" your own cd´s? If you do it on the computer, like re-arranging a 16 bit 44.1 cd to 24 bit 88.2 via dbpoweramp or something you will hear no difference whatsoever.
Some cd´s mastered with in-the-ear microphones sounds terrific on headphones, some very prominent labels are overrated and sound worse than an average 1970´recording from Supertramp, and its just about impossible to recommend something that surely will sound good on everybodys stereo, and if it does, do we like the music?
I have several very high profile "audiophile" recordings, and guess what, I never play them, the music is too weird.
I buy what I like and take good sound as an extra un-expected bonus.
In this house we love revival music, old stuff, and you can hardly go wrong with Beatles for example.
I hardly buy any more music, I play a lot of radio, and if I do buy an album its via download, from Linn for example.
If I was to recommend a couple of albums for music lovers it would be Dire Straits On Every Street and Eva Cassidy Live At Blues Alley.

[vegasdave]

Deep Purple-In Rock? I haven't heard that sound that great...even on the original LP!

Which Led Zeppelin? The original or the re-master?

I believe it was the original I borrowed from my brother as my copy was stolen from my taxi. I wasn't aware there was a re-master version. Disc II on the other hand sounds great as is played in the BCD-1.

With these re-mastered cds the smoothness is more apparent at high spl. With In-a-godda-da-vida for example I had my Yamaha RX-V1700 used as a pre-amp, volume maxed out without clipping. It still wasn't loud enough for me.

When I first did a comparison with Pink Floyd DSOTM in dts,sacd and cd. Using my spl meter 'C' weighted I would get readings of 110 db for sacd, 107 db for dts, and 100 db for cd before clipping. The cd at 100 db was harsh. With the BCD-1 I haven't done a reading but I know it is up there with sacd before clipping my amp and its still smooth.

The above re-masters are from the original. Made in Japan was from the 25 anniversary re-master. It's a tad shrill on the highs so I'm thinking of trying the original release and see how that works. Rush- Exit Stage Left, is a huge improvement over the original but still sounds  a bit muddy. I think I will try re-mastering it a second time and see if it  will clean it up.

Cool. So, the BCD-1 makes that much of a difference...my Onkyo player distorts at real high volumes. It just can't handle it. Yes, the Led Zeppelin has been remastered....

http://www.amazon.com/Song-Remains-Same-Led-Zeppelin/dp/B000VWYNNW/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/104-0879951-3419967?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1190911142&sr=1-1

As far as Made In Japan goes, try the 3cd set.

[Mag]

This is a very difficult subject as every single album (almost) is manufactured to different standards, with different equipment in different studios or live arenas and mastered with different ears and speakers. Besides, you can have a cd and a vinyl record of the same album and they sound very different, and yes, maybe they both are available on 3 different labels!
I am curious, how exactly do you "re-master" your own cd´s? If you do it on the computer, like re-arranging a 16 bit 44.1 cd to 24 bit 88.2 via dbpoweramp or something you will hear no difference whatsoever.
Some cd´s mastered with in-the-ear microphones sounds terrific on headphones, some very prominent labels are overrated and sound worse than an average 1970´recording from Supertramp, and its just about impossible to recommend something that surely will sound good on everybodys stereo, and if it does, do we like the music?
I have several very high profile "audiophile" recordings, and guess what, I never play them, the music is too weird.
I buy what I like and take good sound as an extra un-expected bonus.
In this house we love revival music, old stuff, and you can hardly go wrong with Beatles for example.
I hardly buy any more music, I play a lot of radio, and if I do buy an album its via download, from Linn for example.
If I was to recommend a couple of albums for music lovers it would be Dire Straits On Every Street and Eva Cassidy Live At Blues Alley.

I don't have the technical answer but it works something like this:

Your typical cd played through your typical cd player outputs a partially distorted wave, meaning its not square. This was the touted advantage of sacd with DSD outputting a square wave with virtually no distortion.

The BCD-1 with its low jitter and clocking takes the cd and outputs a square wave. You record this undistorted wave and transfer it to cd-r. You then play this same album now on cd-r with the corrected undistorted wave and the oversampling brings out the details even more. Oversampling works like a cleaner, if you clean too much however you risk stripping the music of its characteristics (sort of like taking the paint off a wall if you use too strong a cleaner).

That's it in a nutshell, simple with outstanding results.

[smerlas]

Well we got a little off subject but that is OK.

The original intent was to verify the there is no reason to purchase SACDs or any other format touted as being "better", that in fact SACDs may not play in the BCD1.  Nor does there appear to be a reason to seek out CDs that have HDCD labeling.  Stick with CDs on reputable labels and you are OK.  Certain labels are in general better fidelity which has always been the case.

Added bonus was discussing certain labels which I had not paid attention to, in particular Concord Music.  As well as the current pratices of mastering a disk at higher volume and the reduction of dynamics that result from recording at loader levels.  Which likely accounts for the listing of "bad" disks and remasters.