2. digital
  3. 1060452773

XRCD Technology

I have received promotional material for these discs, but I don't really know what they are. What I gather is that they have been mastered using 24 bit digital resolution, and higher sampling rate. But I thought that this has long been true of all mastering equipment. Whatever the precision of the mastering process, the final result has to be truncated (or rounded) to 16 bits for the CD product.

The discs I have seen are performances that have always been recognized as superb examples of the original recording process. I suspect that if these discs really are above average it is probably due to the good work done 40 years ago..not the recent mixdown which, at best, can only avoid screwing things up.

Tell me why I should buy one of these things, instead of another SACD.
eldartford

Showing 3 responses by mrtennis

mrtennis
3,295 posts
 
i have a number of xrcds--early and 24 bit versions.

i am not keeen on them and probably would not buy anymore.

here are my observations:

there is a change in frequency response. when comparing an xrcd to an original i have observed greater resolution because the highs are more emphasized.

if you prefer this perspective, thats ok.

i compared many xrcds to their originals, and, especially for classical, on the london label, i preferred the original.

i also compare some xrcd to riverside recordings and didn't feel the increase in price in price was justified.
mrtennis
3,295 posts
 
hi smoothjazz:

do you find the highs a bit more emphasized than on the other 5 versions you have auditioned. i own a number of xrcds, including xrcd2s and find that compared to the commercial version, there is a change in frequency response and a feeling that the sound was a touch hardened. such an effect can reveal low-level detail hidden on a commercial recording, but that doesn't mean the xrcd pressing is superior to the commercial pressing, rather it is different.

of course the holst could be an exception. i would like to hear it for my self. i believe i have a version of mehta's performance on a commercial label--don't rember the label.

perhaps you could explain why you prefer the xrcd to the other 5 versions compared to it.

thanks.
mrtennis
3,295 posts
 
i have three hi rez dvrs, which i received from reference recordings, i listened to them both on my ps audio pwt and pwd and then i substituted the ess sabre dac fro the pwd. the sound was in another class compared to red book.

regrading xrcd, in many cases i found the bass extension and impact lacking, compared to the commercial recordings. there are two london recordings i compared to their xrcd counterparts and on two different systems, my friend and i were disappointed in the xrcd. here's another. the offenbach gaite parisienne is definitely lacking in bass in the xrcd version. the gold version is superior.

i would consider the mehta that smoothjazz likes, but i am concerned about the spectral balance. any comments ?
More to discover