SACD Hybrid

[dgb]

How do the regular CD layers of the SACD disks sound? Are they generally an improvement over older disks?

WIll probably get a SACD one day, but have seen lots of great issued on SACD that'd I'd like to try out.

[Parrot]

The CD layers are indeed generally better than run-of-the-mill CDs, largely due to extra care in mastering. Sometimes it can be due to using a better source tape, too. There have been plenty of old CDs made just from master tapes that were for LP production.

[leok]

I have a few and they're fine .. they tend to be well mastered (ones I have are classical).

leok

[dodger]

----------------

On 10/23/2003 11:15:57 AM paulparrot wrote:

The CD layers are indeed generally better than run-of-the-mill CDs, largely due to extra care in mastering. Sometimes it can be due to using a better source tape, too. There have been plenty of old CDs made just from master tapes that were for LP production.

----------------

Hello:

If the SACD tapes are made from Master Tapes for LPs, and sound better would that not be changing or altering what we know as the mix from out LPs?

For example, the Mastering done on some of the Beatles CDs and resulting SACDs was different in the end product than the LP. Guitar licks were altered as were vocals, etc. than the LP.

If the Artist chose the the Mastering and resulting mix for the LP and one does not hear a guitar riff on a CD or SACD or it is subdued compared to the LP The result is just an ide by the Engineer to change/alter. This is apart from RIAA eaulization and actually a departure from what the artist wanted.

The RIAA equalization was post recording and the Master Tapes should be true if no altering of the final mix takes, or took place, post final mix.

The Engineering for an SACD is more complex than standard CD but that should be the reason for sound diferentiation. The Master is the Master whether for LP or CD save for RIAA equalization. Removing that equalization to the normal recording for CD should make no difference or alteration of mix.

dodger

Edit: This is in the case of true Master Tapes, rather than second or third generation copies of the Master.

2nd edit: For the amount an Engineer is paid, and personal pride most Engineers take in their work, knowing the result can lead to more, or less, work in the future, the result should be the same whether for LP, CD, or SACD.

[AndyKubicki]

2nd edit: For the amount an Engineer is paid, and personal pride most Engineers take in their work, knowing the result can lead to more, or less, work in the future, the result should be the same whether for LP, CD, or SACD.

In some past posts here, the departure from this happened in the 80s when engineers were told to give recordings that 10-12KHz bump in eq so that those buying CDs would percieve them as more "clear" than vinyl. That ultimately created the perception that CDs are too bright...

[Parrot]

Dodger,

Many masters, actually most masters, that were made for LP production would have the low end shaved off and squished dynamics because they knew a record player wouldn't be able to handle it otherwise. An alternative way was to have the master full quality but reduce the extremes each time a record was cut from it.

Now, with the advent of digital, if you take the original multi-track tape, and make a new stereo master from it for CD or SACD, you don't need to worry about too much low end or too much dynamic range.

In actual practice, unfortunately, some CDs have almost no dynamic range and are squished far more than good LPs, but I'm talking about what is possible, not necessarily what is done.

As far as artist input into mixes, that varies with the artist and the circumstances. An LP can be remixed just as easily as a CD can.

[AndyKubicki]

I thought that's what the RIAA curve was about. Decreasing the lower frequencies and boosting the upper frequencies to the record and reversing the eq at playback to be normal, otherwise the groove with LF content would make your stylus jump out of the groove. For some reason, in my system, vinyl has better bass than my CD player, but I do have a cheap DVD player for my CD playback, so I wonder if a better one or SACD would improve the bass.

As to compression, pop music is susceptible to this because the labels want the CD to be as loud as possible when played on the radio, so to do that, the music is squashed into being the loudest it can be (loosing most dynamics). They believe if it's louder, it will sell more copies.

[rowooo]

I've read that some SACD's cd layers are horrible, worse than the original plain cd. Some say in an attempt to distinguish the superiority of the SACD layer. Therefore when people compare the two they will hear an appreciable difference in formats. I would not put this past them either.

[ssh]

rowoo,

It makes more sense to me that promoters of SACD would want their CD layer to be as top notch as possible,to provide a more marketable dual layer medium.There is a significant improvement in SACD,& it may be that is the reason some say the CD sounds "bad".I have not experienced "bad" CD layers,but CD is thin-sounding when compared to SACD.

SSH

[Parrot]

rowooo,

This is just a silly rumor for conspiracy theorists.

[dodger]

Hello:

To Note, the ORIGINAL multi-track tape is the actual Master. After the recording on the multi track tape it can be mixed down, added to, shipped and tracks added in another studio, etc.. Some have referred to the multi track tape as the Mother tape.

It can be mixed down or left alone and set up with the RIAA curve as Andy states or the mix down can be left without the curve for CD. Or some of the Engineers did not bother to go back to the multi track or the mixdown without equalization tape. But in the true recording sense, the Multi Track is the Master for the mix down. It is semantics. Some call the final mixdown tape the Master, some the Multi track which in using that multi track Goerge Martin and Engineers he used came up with a different mix resulting in the CDs at points sounding different than the original mix.

Some of the early CD recording equipment had a bump built in as there were some mistaken company owners still believed the public was listening for a great part to AM, which needs a bump - and would have benefitted by a bump in both ends.

But, a GOOD Engineer works with the Producer and the Artist both in the recording and the final mix. What happens to the fequency range after the final mix is decided by the company, the RIAA or the secondary Engineer making the Masters for pressing or burning.

Win dodger

[Parrot]

In common parlance, the master is a two-track stereo open reel tape, mixed down from the multi-track tape.

Until recently with the popularity of 5.1 SACD mixes, the multi-tracks have not been touched since the master tape was made. A lot of work goes into mixing and some mixes are so complex they could never be recreated. So when you have all these audiophile CDs that say from the original master tapes, they are *never* from the multi-tracks. They are from a mixed-down two-track master.

"Tommy" is coming out Tuesday on SACD with a multi-channel mix. Obviously they had to go to the multi-tracks for this new mix made by Peter Townshend.

[artto]

I havent noticed any difference in the CD layer of a hybrid SACD disc being played back on a regular CD player. I have noticed improvements playing almost any CD on a SACD player.

If the CD layer was remastered as Paul mentioned, then you might hear an improvement. Keep in mind that not all are remastered.

[artto]

----------------

On 10/23/2003 11:40:18 AM dodger wrote:

----------------

On 10/23/2003 11:15:57 AM paulparrot wrote:

The CD layers are indeed generally better than run-of-the-mill CDs, largely due to extra care in mastering. Sometimes it can be due to using a better source tape, too. There have been plenty of old CDs made just from master tapes that were for LP production.

----------------

Hello:

If the SACD tapes are made from Master Tapes for LPs, and sound better would that not be changing or altering what we know as the mix from out LPs?

For example, the Mastering done on some of the Beatles CDs and resulting SACDs was different in the end product than the LP. Guitar licks were altered as were vocals, etc. than the LP.

If the Artist chose the the Mastering and resulting mix for the LP and one does not hear a guitar riff on a CD or SACD or it is subdued compared to the LP The result is just an ide by the Engineer to change/alter. This is apart from RIAA eaulization and actually a departure from what the artist wanted.

The RIAA equalization was post recording and the Master Tapes should be true if no altering of the final mix takes, or took place, post final mix.

The Engineering for an SACD is more complex than standard CD but that should be the reason for sound diferentiation. The Master is the Master whether for LP or CD save for RIAA equalization. Removing that equalization to the normal recording for CD should make no difference or alteration of mix.

dodger

Edit: This is in the case of true Master Tapes, rather than second or third generation

copies of the Master.

2nd edit: For the amount an Engineer is paid, and personal pride most Engineers take in their work, knowing the result can lead to more, or less, work in the future, the result should be the same whether for LP, CD, or SACD.

----------------

Youve got that a little backwards Dodger.

1. First of all, SACD tapes are NOT made from the master tapes for LPs. That was the initial mistake of CDs. Making CDs from the master tapes that were used (equalized) for LP production was a major early mistake of CD. I dont know of anyone who is making CDs that is not aware of this today (20 years later). Usually any SACD transfers from original analogue master tapes (thee original, not the master used for LP production) are not altered.

2. There seems to be some misunderstanding of what the mastering process is. And what the mixing process is. In the mixing process, all that is basically trying to be accomplished is that everything that needs to be heard at any particular time, gets heard. In the mastering process we get the feel, or timing right between songs, song sequence, etc.. Very minute adjustments are made in volume so the sound level sounds appropriate from track to track. Very minute (0.25 to 0.50dB) adjustments MIGHT also made to frequency response, etc.

3. In the LP days, then, they applied the RIAA equalization curve to a production master tape that was used to cut the LP.

4. Its rarely the artist that has anything to say about the final resulting mix or mastering. They are usually not paying for it. The Producer is. So until, as an artist, you get to the point where you are doing your own Producing, you probably wont hear the final product until its on the market.

Finally, to make matters even more confusing, consider that there are usually more than one 'take' at the recording session. And that subsequent re-issues, in any format, may indeed not be the same 'take' as the original release.

[AndyKubicki]

I have not compared many "remastered" CD releases, but there was one Gentle Giant release where two different labels put out the same CD, which was a rerelease of an LP. One used the same mix as the original LP, whereas the other definately did their own remix, and it was definately a step down as it was missing some crucial instruments, giving the new mix a different flavor. But this was the only instance of this I have ever seen.

Personally, I would like Dave Mallett to come up with a player with a self contained mixer where you can mix to your own taste. Of course, the companies would have to issue a 192K 24 Bit version with the 24 (or whatever amount) tracks, but think of the possibilities! You could eq each track to sound good on YOUR system in YOUR room suited to YOUR ears....hey, maybe I should patent this... the ultimate Karioki (sorry, don't know the spelling there)...ideal for musicians too! The guitar player can turn down the original and play his new part, or imitate the original...so can the drummer, bass player, vocalist...you name it!

Of course, you would save your settings so if someone else in the house wants it played their way, they can mix their own and save it too. Of course, for the time you are entertaining and maybe under the influence, they would come with original preset mix levels for those more difficult occasions!

[AndyKubicki]

Dr. Edgar mentioned something about this, but his observations were the inverse of yours. He (and his friends) said these redbook layer versions sounded better than their redbook only CD counterparts, and thought it might have something to do with easier tracking due to the newer layering.