HDCD VS SACD

Kijanki

To paraphrase:

Why do SACDs sell for $30 and royalties are $1?

If that's true or even slanted towards truth more than less, it's a simple answer... Avarice. Plain and simple greed.

The only format I've not actually heard played back on a decent outfit is DVDA. As with any other silver disc, in which ever format, some are great and some are not. Those which are in fact, become as apparent as day or night.... those which aren't, well, won’t.

.....and why I said just that in my previous comments. Formats with far greater numbers alone in their composition of bits, lands and grooves, are not the lock on great listening. It simply has the potential to be great.

Remember the initial slew of CDs? Here you go folks, the best thing since the automobile is now available! It's all digital! No errors! Compact! And soon hereafter, the prices will go sharply down by way of affordability! So simply re-buy all your favs in this new near indistructable format and reap the benefits of the new digital age of audio at its best!.

right-y-o!

Little there was or is the truth and simple CDs were double the cost of LPs at the onset. The cost only went down by proxy via a class action suit and those results too were not well published... but I did get a check for $20! spread that over a thousand CDs and prices did go down! Now new releases are going back up again.

Chalk it up to “Bomonomics”!

Who pays $30 for SACDs?

Anyone who buys them online from Mobile Fidelity, Telarc,etc. Even some std CD in better (?) recording processes like Gold, or XR CD run close to that amount... again, online, at many outlets.

I'll journey into high res world on the heels of my personal confuser, and rip them initially at loftier rates or just buy downloads already done for me at those rates or greater... if they are what I want to begin with.... individually or as the complete work.

This attitude in and of itself may account some for the upwardly spiraling prices for ready rolled CDs these days, beats me. But today’s no different than any other. It’s faster now and the worlds smaller, but the same devices which drove the recording market and industry years ago still have their hands on the wheels. Only the cosmetics have changed.

Done well, the 24/96 (DVD) or 32/105 (SACD) do sound way good though.. but largely depends on the source and disc itself.... as with any other playback system, analog or digital. Listening side by side, RB to SACD, with both disc and source up to par, the choice will be obvious for the SACD version.

Now there's BR. The potetial for better is improved upon yet again... BUT what about SS discs? things the size of a dime could be coming along pretty soon.

I'm hoping for Marbles instead but solid state sticks of chewing gum might soon litter containers in the book shelf area where CD cases and albums once stood. No motors, and no lasers, with bit perfect playback! at that point ONLY the playback system will bare the burden of how great the fidelity actually will be.... just don't count on lower prices for it though. That just isn't in the cards I've been reading.

Adding to the posts above I read a while back the HD CD format was encoded at 20 bit word lengths rather than the norm red Book CD words of 16. The sampling rates were identical. 44,100 Hz.

I have a few and when ripping to my hard drive so far the HD CD have a wee bit of fuzz to their playback thereafter.

Normal playback using whatever CDP doesn’t seem to produce that ‘fuzzyness’. It’s slight but noticeable. I suspect the differences in word lengths of the recorded vs encoded files speaks to those errors.

On a previous HD CD capable CDP/DVD player, the audio from the HD CD is quite analog like. Remarkably smooth and full sounding. Almost velvety. The disc I play and recall most often is the Ride with Bob HD CD by Asleep At the Wheel… the other’s escape me now.

Microsoft as I understand it bought the codec outright and now own it’s rights completely.

With increased word lengths and sampling rates, eg., SACd 32 & 105 in the Direct stream Digital domain, a substantial element of resolution has to be gained. Hyping either the word lengths or sampling rates usually account for steps up in overall resolution of the orig recording.

Fidelity on the other hand seems to be more a result of recording practices, production techniques, processing etc. one can have very resolute and not terribly high fidelity products in the final analysis. One can’t always count on high res recordings’ to have great fidelity.

Consequently, with higher rate and word lengths, one SHOULD have the potential to produce very good to excellent recordings that offer exceptional fidelity, over those of lower word lengths and sampling rates. BUT… the playback system and surely the source unit will play key roles in determining which recorded format sounds best… Red Book,, SACD, DVD, HD CD, or even DVDA, and as well, the disc type and mastering process itself.

Fafafion

Huh?

Try rereading my last paragraph.

if your RB source is top notch and your SACD player only converts DSD to PCM output, it's entirely possible the RB could sound better than the SACD.. as the SACD aspect is not the optimum DSD throughput. BTW not all SACD are purely DSD masters front to back, as I understand it and so some of my own SACDs indicate.

I also have some SACD discs which simply do not sound any better than the orig RB CD to me…. Just as some CDs don’t sound very good either. Hence my mention of the ‘process’ being as important as are those higher res numbers to achieve HIGH FIDELITY in the recording, and the note on the system’s needs to fully realize the benefit of such software!

An extreme ex would be playing back an HD, or SACD disc via a boom box vs a home audio system, given both can play those formats.

BTW… regardless the range of the speakers, be they full or limited, the advantages of more resolute discs will reveal themselves within that band width the loud speakers can reproduce. So a full range speaker isn’t a necessity to see the benefits of a well recorded high res disc… it’s merely more advantageous to have such reproducers on hand.

Kijanki

My bad... the article I read was a while back. I must have confused the statements. Could have sworn it was 20 though. Must be more as you say here though as I can’t find any note of the word or sampling rate changes with HD CD, only an encoding decoding process that is added to the hardware/software for enhancement of that format over standard RB Cds.

I did see where several chip makers have added the decoding in some of their chips, eg., Burr Brown 1732. MS Media Player from version 9 up also have this tech included into them for HD CD playback. One note said MP would at times show the HD logo when playing a HD CD.

The term High Definition gets thrown about a lot too and doesn’t always hold purely to the technology PMI developed originally.

Thanks for those links to save on SACD. Thanks a lot.

K's right though... SACD is a classical lover's sanctuary. DVDA though seems to have tried to gain the younger more pop oriented audience.

the numbers I saw on the Wickopedia site for HD was similar to the numbers for SACD. Around 5000 titles. of which how many were dupes for the SACD format wasn't mentioned.

The immediate future given the Apple business model is excelling and quite succesful now, will definitely be in downloading music over that of buying the orig hard copies. personally, I've no problems with that what so ever.... so long as those files remain cost effective. $2.50 per is stretching it for me. Given the usual 2 or 3 best tracks on any album and the balance seems more filler than fun, any higher tarriff there will simply point me towards the CD instead.

The downside to the HR files is the compilation of them into a playlist that makes snese. I prefer sessions at times vs random cuts being cast about, and then there's the levels to contend with too. I never attunuate volume levels of files for consistency. I just run higher to lower in the so & so playlist. that works best for me.

I guess it all comes down to just what one can or will be able to live with... and I'm quite OK with Red Book generally speaking. A little A/B'ing of HR files to lossless ones will tell me that tale in a better light.

Rwwear

Agreed.

The lack of titles & artists is for me the whole thing. of course it is nice to find a plumb in all of it.

Same thing goes for the Mo Fi remastered CDs, and XR. I really gotta love it before I'd drop $30 on an album. Maybe the next itteration of Waiting For Columbus, on XR, or SACD.... or some Johnny Nocturne in likewise formats.

www.half.com is another online joint I've been using for years now, a sub of ebay, and all indy sellers.

Buying 'digipak' is another path for savings, if the case type is of little concern. Same disc, lesser packing, and less costly.