Forums dot lukpac.org

I've made an A/D capture from the SACD DSD layer, a rip of the DVD-A PCM version, and a rip of the SACD CD layer. So far they're all objectively very much alike. I'm curious to compare them to some older CD versions, but I no longer own any. If anyone is willing to upload flacs of same, let me know. I'll post the comparison results when I'm done. For now, here's what the SACD CD layer rip waveform looks like:







There is limiting, but no clipping. Those peaks often go to 0dB, but there are never more than two consecutive samples at 0dB (and only rarely that many)

I find the extra resolution due to just a quality mastering capturing lots of detail on the master tape, much like the DCCs.

Andreas wrote:I find the extra resolution due to just a quality mastering capturing lots of detail on the master tape, much like the DCCs.

Sorry, but this sort of statement is just a cloud of vagueness to me.

Maybe just using the original Kit Lambert master tapes for the first time for any digital version, made the biggest difference.

Maybe it's the loudness. 'Louder' can sound 'more detailed' . I would be shocked if this version wasn't significantly louder than every version released before the '93 remix (and I'm curious to see how it compared to the remix)

Maybe it's the EQ. A touch of treble boost or bass cut can produce considerable sense of increased 'resolution'. and 'detail' in a comparison.

Maybe it's noise reduction.

Assuming it actually DOES sound more 'detailed' and has 'more resolution' than previous versions, that is.

These are some of the things I hope to cast some light on by comparison. I'd be interested to compare the double disc set, the one-disc remaster, and the one-disc remix, to the SACD and DVDA stereo.

Here's what the DSD version looks like, after capture at 88khs/24bits an normalized to 0 dBFS peak.



[/img]

Here's a couple of clips for comparison:


1993 MCA Single Disc Remaster CD-

http://www.mediafire.com/?n5n0pym1lmw



MFSL Gold UD I CD-

http://www.mediafire.com/?n5n0pym1lmw

krabapple wrote:Maybe it's the loudness. 'Louder' can sound 'more detailed' . I would be shocked if this version wasn't significantly louder than every version released before the '93 remix (and I'm curious to see how it compared to the remix)

FWIW, the remix is from '96. The '93 disc is a remaster.

krabapple wrote:

Andreas wrote:I find the extra resolution due to just a quality mastering capturing lots of detail on the master tape, much like the DCCs.

Sorry, but this sort of statement is just a cloud of vagueness to me.

Sorry, that was my attempt at humour.
http://stevehoffman.tv/forums/showpost. ... ostcount=5

Intriguing how analog-out from a SACD can look like that. It says a lot about the accuracy of the D--->A--->D process.

Andreas wrote:

krabapple wrote:

Andreas wrote:I find the extra resolution due to just a quality mastering capturing lots of detail on the master tape, much like the DCCs.

Sorry, but this sort of statement is just a cloud of vagueness to me.

Sorry, that was my attempt at humour.
http://stevehoffman.tv/forums/showpost. ... ostcount=5

Ah. My apologies...I'd have gotten that joke if it had been posted on Stereo Central.

Xenu wrote:Intriguing how analog-out from a SACD can look like that. It says a lot about the accuracy of the D--->A--->D process.

True dat. For completeness' sake I'll also do a DAD of the CD layer.

Thanks for the clips.