Best audio format

[TLS Guy]

I have a Denon 3910 Universal Player that goes through 5.1 analog cables to my Audio Refinement Pre2DSP
The AR Pre2DSP manual states that "the input signal does not go through DSP processing but will be sent through by volume control and sent to 5.1 audio output"

I am all ears as to weather or not my system is properly set up for SACD listening. The Denon SACD light certainly comes on when I put in a disc. It also will show what channel's corresponding speakers will play from the disc..... L/R for two channel sacd's and L/R/C/RS/LS for multi channel sacds.

Dear David,
It sounds as though your AR Pre2DSP is set up exactly the same as my Rotel for SACD.

The real question is what does your DENON 3910 do?

Now my Marantz has two audio set ups. The SACD is set up on audio 2 set up.

Now you can specifically set the SACD to output from DSD or PCM. IF it outputs from DSD then the signal goes straight to the analog output ports and you can not change levels or delay. That makes sense as those functions are carried out within the PCM domain. You can only change levels and delay by selecting PCM and disabling digital out. The lights all look the same but you are only getting true SACD performance by selecting DSD processing. The instruction book is of course silent on these important
issues.

I have a strong suspicion that any player that sends an SACD signal out via a digital cable or allows processing such as time delay, is not really outputting DSD. I think if your player really is outputting DSD and you preamp is configured like ours you have to do level matching and route to the sub externally to the preamp. I suspect at least for classical multichannel SACD the delay issue is irrelevant, because they are discrete multichannel recordings. That means the rear channels are reproducing the signals from the rearward facing microphones. What is picked up by those microphones is already delayed by the acoustics of the recording venue.

 

[Joe Schmoe]

You have over 3,000 Cds???

Yes. Also, I don't only buy new ones, but get rid of old ones that are not "up to snuff" sometimes. This means that I have over 3,000 good CDs. (I have recently passed the 1,000 mark on DVDs as well.)

 

[adam71]

Yes. Also, I don't only buy new ones, but get rid of old ones that are not "up to snuff" sometimes. This means that I have over 3,000 good CDs. (I have recently passed the 1,000 mark on DVDs as well.)

Wow. Joe, you are a media god in the truest sense of the word. It's quite humbling for me when I thought my 600 CDs and 350 DVDs was a lot. Well, it is as far as most people I know are concerned.

 

[adam71]

The real question is what does your DENON 3910 do?

Now my Marantz has two audio set ups. The SACD is set up on audio 2 set up.

Now you can specifically set the SACD to output from DSD or PCM. IF it outputs from DSD then the signal goes straight to the analog output ports and you can not change levels or delay. That makes sense as those functions are carried out within the PCM domain. You can only change levels and delay by selecting PCM and disabling digital out. The lights all look the same but you are only getting true SACD performance by selecting DSD processing. The instruction book is of course silent on these important
issues.

I have a strong suspicion that any player that sends an SACD signal out via a digital cable or allows processing such as time delay, is not really outputting DSD. I think if your player really is outputting DSD and you preamp is configured like ours you have to do level matching and route to the sub externally to the preamp. I suspect at least for classical multichannel SACD the delay issue is irrelevant, because they are discrete multichannel recordings. That means the rear channels are reproducing the signals from the rearward facing microphones. What is picked up by those microphones is already delayed by the acoustics of the recording venue.

I also use a 3910 and use the DenonLink to my receiver. The receiver has a function or feature called "DSD DIRECT". It unfortunately goes into true 2 channel mode and it does NOT output any signal to the subwoofer. I use smaller mains and don't have the luxury of outputting good bass from them. Not only that deep bass would kill them. How would I know I'm getting true DSD processing?? Or is it since the DSD DIRECT is being displayed.?? I find this all confusing.

 

[Joe Schmoe]

Wow. Joe, you are a media god in the truest sense of the word. It's quite humbling for me when I thought my 600 CDs and 350 DVDs was a lot. Well, it is as far as most people I know are concerned.

It has taken many, many years to amass such a collection.

 

[davidtwotrees]

Dear David,
It sounds as though your AR Pre2DSP is set up exactly the same as my Rotel for SACD.
The real question is what does your DENON 3910 do?

The real question is, imho, what doesn't the damn thing do?!
I am not much of a manual reader. I am a right brained leaning male.
I tend to muddle through my technology........
I can tell you my Denon is only hooked up via the analog interconnects. Denon has a Pure Direct Mode that assures the signal is output with no processing or digital interference. The only SACD offerings in the menu domain are for choosing which layer to output(multi, two, or cd). In the features it mentions using a "pure FIR filter for ideal DSD playback of SACD's"
I'm pretty confident my setup is correct for multichannel playback, but I am open to suggestions otherwise.........

 

[davidtwotrees]

It has taken many, many years to amass such a collection.

Well, the CD just turned 25 years old.......care to comment on the quality of the earlier recordings, say from the 80's? Or how about longevity......have any discs worn out? TIA.

 

[Joe Schmoe]

Well, the CD just turned 25 years old.......care to comment on the quality of the earlier recordings, say from the 80's? Or how about longevity......have any discs worn out? TIA.

On rare occasions, I have sold older discs because the sound seems too quiet or "weak" by today's standards. Sometimes I replace an old disc with a remastered version, if the sound has really been improved (eg Alan Parsons.) They don't wear out.
Now that I think about it, I suppose the majority were purchased within the last 10-12 years, and pretty much everything since 1995 sounds great unless it was ruined by excessive compression (something I have heard on maybe 8 or 10 CDs.)

 

[davidtwotrees]

.... and pretty much everything since 1995 sounds great unless it was ruined by excessive compression (something I have heard on maybe 8 or 10 CDs.)

I keep asking the Objectivists to help me "hear" the terrible compression that is being foisted on the audio world.......and hear you state that your modern collection containing thousands of discs only has a dozen compressed discs?!

Is that because you are buying Mapleshade and Stereophile jazz recordings?
Or what? Or is the compressed cd hyped here on Audioholics?

 

[fmw]

I keep asking the Objectivists to help me "hear" the terrible compression that is being foisted on the audio world.......and hear you state that your modern collection containing thousands of discs only has a dozen compressed discs?!

Is that because you are buying Mapleshade and Stereophile jazz recordings?
Or what? Or is the compressed cd hyped here on Audioholics?

You can't hear compression unless it is overdone to the point that the compressor starts pumping. That is pretty rare in my experience. You also can't really compare the compression to something unless you heard the live performance. So I would take the compression hearing thing will a little salt.

However, virtually every recording is compressed a little at recording time and more during the mastering. The reason is that most playback systems can't reproduce the available dynamic range without losing the quiet parts in the noise and loud parts to distortion or quantization errors. Rock recordings don't need and don't get much compression because there isn't much dynamic range. Classical orchestral recordings need and get more because the dynamic range can exceed 100 db. and very few recordings will provide that kind of range.

The amount of compression in a modern digital recording is quite a bit less than with an analog recording to be mastered to vinyl. No question about that. Compression has been a fact of life in the recording industry for as long as I can remember and will be for the future as well.

 

[Joe Schmoe]

I keep asking the Objectivists to help me "hear" the terrible compression that is being foisted on the audio world.......and hear you state that your modern collection containing thousands of discs only has a dozen compressed discs?!

Is that because you are buying Mapleshade and Stereophile jazz recordings?
Or what? Or is the compressed cd hyped here on Audioholics?

Various possibilities. I may simply be less sensitive to compression than some forum members.
I don't stick to audiophile labels (far from it), but my tastes are as obscure as they are broad, so I don't have much mainstream pop/rock (you will never find Britney, Justin, or any rap in my collection), and I have a lot of new age and jazz which tend to be well recorded/mastered. On the other hand, the worst example of compression I have heard was a CD by The Editors, who are an "indie" group.
Finally, some listeners may have some sort of internalized standard for what recordings "should" sound like, which might cause them to think of sounds that the musicians use intentionally as unwanted compression. (Examples include recent CDs by The Flaming Lips and The White Stripes, which have been accused of containing compression that I do not hear.)

 

[mr-ben]

I keep asking the Objectivists to help me "hear" the terrible compression that is being foisted on the audio world.......and hear you state that your modern collection containing thousands of discs only has a dozen compressed discs?!

Is that because you are buying Mapleshade and Stereophile jazz recordings?
Or what? Or is the compressed cd hyped here on Audioholics?

This little video is a good introduction to "hear" dynamic compression (the loudest and quietest parts of a song are closer in volume than they were recorded at), as well as see it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Gmex_4hreQ

The way I'm able to tell the amount of dynamic compression in a disc, is by listening to it in the car. If it sounds the same as in my living room, it's highly compressed. If I'm in the car and I keep adjusting the volume because I lose a lot of quiet detail to the road noise, and loud parts are too loud, then it's much more dynamic and will sound great in my quiet house. Compression is good if there's background noise, or if for some other reason the quiet parts are going to get lost, such as listening to it in the background, converting it into an mp3, etc.

Personally, I can see why the record companies keep raising the compression. People don't listen to music in the quiet home anymore - it's always on the go. Compression makes it sound better for this situation, but worse for those of us really listening to the music.

Back to the "best format" argument - as has been said many times, the CD format can sound great. But due to dynamic compression the sound isn't as accurate as it could be. I believe that people purchasing SACD, DVDA, and vinyl are more likely to be listening to the music in a more optimal environment, and so the engineers are less likely to compress it. I'm not saying anything new here - several here have already stated this same argument, but maybe my personal spin on it will help someone.

 

[mtrycrafts]

... Classical orchestral recordings need and get more because the dynamic range can exceed 100 db. and very few recordings will provide that kind of range.

The amount of compression in a modern digital recording is quite a bit less than with an analog recording to be mastered to vinyl. No question about that. Compression has been a fact of life in the recording industry for as long as I can remember and will be for the future as well.

Not sure a home environment could support a 100dB dynamic range though, not with 30dB noise floors or higher. Even the CD limit of 96 dB is pushing it., You'd need speakers that are linear at such high spl levels. And, kind neighbors who will put up with 130 dB spl next door.

 

[mtrycrafts]

I keep asking the Objectivists to help me "hear" the terrible compression that is being foisted on the audio world.......?

As Mr-ben posted the link so has wmax has shown a number of recordings with barely any dynamic range on the scope. So, as was posted, unless you know what was the original recording like and the final CD, one could think that what is on the CD is how it was played on the stage, recording studio or live.
If vinyl was able to be played in cars, I bet it too would be compressed.

 

[TLS Guy]

Not sure a home environment could support a 100dB dynamic range though, not with 30dB noise floors or higher. Even the CD limit of 96 dB is pushing it., You'd need speakers that are linear at such high spl levels. And, kind neighbors who will put up with 130 dB spl next door.

I live on a lake in the middle of a forest and my speakers can take it.

http://mdcarter.smugmug.com/gallery/2424008#127077096

Seriously though. I have made quite a few live recordings myself, and been around some good recording engineers. In the classical field I have never seen a compressor used. We all did resort to a little manual gain riding now and again. You had to know the work though, and be able to follow the score!

The best LP mastering engineers were very skilled and used manual gain riding rather than electronic circuits. Radio broadcasting however is quite a different matter.

 

[astrodon]

To get back to the original post, I vote for DVD-Audio and SACD hands down.

 

[mtrycrafts]

I live on a lake in the middle of a forest and my speakers can take it.

http://mdcarter.smugmug.com/gallery/2424008#127077096

Seriously though. I have made quite a few live recordings myself, and been around some good recording engineers. In the classical field I have never seen a compressor used. We all did resort to a little manual gain riding now and again. You had to know the work though, and be able to follow the score!

The best LP mastering engineers were very skilled and used manual gain riding rather than electronic circuits. Radio broadcasting however is quite a different matter.

Yes, your speakers may take it but how about you? those high levels just hurts some folks
Gain riding also reduces dynamic range though, in the end.

 

[TLS Guy]

Yes, your speakers may take it but how about you? those high levels just hurts some folks
Gain riding also reduces dynamic range though, in the end.

Well of course gain riding compressed the dynamic range, that was the point of doing it. In skilled hands it was more subtle than the old analog gated compressors.

The fortissimos in classical music are relatively infrequent. The average SPL is quite low. You want to make the big moments though, and good engineers deliver and allow superior systems to reproduce them, as Peter Walker always said, "The Closest Approach to the Original Sound." That's the goal, or should be.

 

[allsop4now]

All that matters to me is the fidelity it offers over CD. I hear things in a vinyl recording that I've NEVER heard in the CD counterpart. Nucances are more evident in vinyl than on CD.

click pop pop click pop

 

[allsop4now]

i would give a strong recommendation to Vivaldi's La Stravaganza with Rachael Podger violin, with Arte Dei Suonatori on Channal Classics CCS SA 19503.

Even better is Vivaldi: Late Violin Concertos - Carmignola, at least the playing.