|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
24.4.156.89
The day before yesterday, I received my latest shipment from HMV Japan containing three new Exton DVD-A’s released over the last couple of months:Mahler Third Symphony (Macal and the Czech Phil)
Strauss Also sprach, Don Juan, Rosenkavalier Suite (DeWaart and the Netherlands Radio Philharmonic)
Schubert Unfinished and Great C maj. Symphonies (labeled as nos. 7 and 8 – do we really need to slog through this type of musicological correctitude again? – oops, getting off the subject – sorry!) (Sieghart and the Arnheim Philharmonic)My friends, aside from the Schubert disc, which is a “24-bit Remastering” (of what – I don’t know!), the labeling leaves no doubt that the masters for the other two discs (the Mahler and the Strauss) are DSD!!!
In the past, I used to snicker to myself when I would read the outraged comments on the HiRez (SACD) Highway about SACD’s derived from PCM masters (via conversion to DSD), as if the purity of the SACD format had been tainted by any contact with PCM. (I think the most recent discussion of this had to do with the Mercury Living Presence 35mm SACD’s being converted to 24/192 before conversion back to DSD for SACD production – there was much weeping and gnashing of the teeth about this, if I remember correctly.)
At the same time, I just don’t understand the logic of taking a PCM master and going through another conversion step to produce the DSD master necessary for SACD. I mean, if your master recording is 24/192 or 24/96, why muck things up with another conversion step just so you can release it as a SACD? Why not just release it as a DVD-A?
Well, now the shoe is on the other foot – the masters of these new Exton DVD-A’s are DSD. I have to ask, why bother to release them as DVD-A’s? Why not just stick to SACD’s in this case and save the extra conversion step?
My initial listening of the Schubert and Strauss discs did not produce favorable impressions. (I’ve lent the Strauss disk to another listener just to check my reaction against his.) I will need to spend more time with the Mahler. Interestingly, Macal’s performance comes as a 3-disc set, with the same performance contained onto 1 DVD-A and split over 2 hybrid SACD’s. I suppose the idea is to compare DVD-A vs. SACD, but given the DSD origins of the recording, I can’t imagine that the DVD-A will sound as good.
Follow Ups:
> > I have to ask, why bother to release them as DVD-A’s? Why not just stick to SACD’s in this case and save the extra conversion step? < <These were released on SACD and DVD-Audio. Like other companies, they are apparently trying to capture revenue from both sub-markets.
All of them have been released as SACDs already and some time ago.
"All of them have been released as SACDs already and some time ago."While that may be true of the Schubert, the recording date of the Mahler is shown as May 5-6, 2005, and that set (which, as I mentioned, contains both the DVA-A and SACD versions of this same performance) was released only last month. (As I also mentioned, I've temporarily lent out the Strauss disc, so I can't confirm the dates on that recording.)
*** At the same time, I just don’t understand the logic of taking a PCM master and going through another conversion step to produce the DSD master necessary for SACD ***The "logic" as such has nothing to do with audio quality or purity - the decision to release on CD vs SA-CD vs DVD-Audio is a commercial decision, and you've made that decision you have to convert to the delivery format mandated by the media (regardless of how you recorded it in the first place - since that is a separate decision made by the engineer).
For example, all the recent Eno remasters were done on DSD, but EMI for various reasons decide to release them only on CD.
some of us would prefer that these conversions are avoided whenever possible, but at least for classical music you would hope that the material will not undergo multiple analog to digital to analog conversions which is typical for pop music (due to the use of outboard effects units).
*** I suppose the idea is to compare DVD-A vs. SACD, but given the DSD origins of the recording, I can’t imagine that the DVD-A will sound as good. ***
I wouldn't necessarily assume that. There are too many variables at play. For example, I've discovered some amplifiers can't handle the ultrasonic noise generated by DSD, and if the DVD-A filters out the ultrasonics it may sound better. Similarly, if the player has a clock optimised for 48 vs 44.1 it may sound better at 96/24 vs DSD. Lastly, some DACs may have better sounding digital filters for PCM over DSD.
One thing I've learnt over the years is that too often we blame the format or the recording when what we are hearing is the aggregation of various factors across the whole playback chain. For example (and you can do a search if you want to) I used to hypothesise that I can hear a PCM "sonic signature" vs DSD. But as I've upgraded my system over the years, I'm finding less and less differences between PCM and DSD and now I can't reliably distinguish the same recording across both formats.
But anyway, enough pontificating. Let us know how the discs sound!
I bought the Schubert disc some time ago as an SACD, and the performances are quite weak. I'd like to get other reviews of the Strauss, as I'm tempted by that one...
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: