add to wish list | library


5 of 5 recommend this,
would you recommend it?

yes | no

Support this site by purchasing from these vendors using the links provided below. As an Amazon Associate SA-CD.net earns from qualifying purchases.
 
amazon.ca
amazon.co.uk
amazon.com
amazon.de
 
amazon.fr
amazon.it
 
jpc

Discussion: Shostakovich: String Quartets Nos 14 & 15, Two pieces, Op. 36 - Prazak Quartet

Posts: 25
Page: prev 1 2 3 next

Post by Fugue October 15, 2014 (11 of 25)
OK, "condemn" might be too strong of a word, but the lack of DSD seems to be causing some unease.

Post by fausto K October 15, 2014 (12 of 25)
Fugue said:

OK, "condemn" might be too strong of a word, but the lack of DSD seems to be causing some unease.

Admittedly, I still prefer DSD over PCM (wasn't SACD meant to be the carrier for DSD?), hence why I was excited to be able to have Shostakovich no. 15 in DSD, in contrast to the low-res of the Mandelring, which as noted sounds a little harsh ; but this might be due to different factors, e.g. close mic-ing, or the Mandelring's playing, which tends to emphasise the abrasive character of the music -- which I should note can be an advantage -- and so not necessarily have to do with lower-res PCM. I have many PCM SACD's that sound outstanding.
So no unease on that issue.
But my initial excitement of having a DSD recording of this composiiton was -- and this was my point in this thread -- a bit lessened by noting that Praga *might* have abandoned DSD. But again: I shall know whether it impacts the sound after having had time to actually listen!

Post by Iain October 15, 2014 (13 of 25)
Iain said:

I've always been puzzled as to the reason you lot single out the recording type (DSD/PCM) to focus on exclusively.

There are a host of variables that will affect the sound quality of the finished recording, but the recording type is almost inconsequential in comparison.

For a brief glimpse of a few of those variables, have a go at this forum:
http://www.soundonsound.com/forum/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=MRT

Since I'm no longer able to edit my post, I just want to add this production and mastering link:
http://www.soundonsound.com/forum/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=production

Lots of great information there, as well.

Post by Iain October 15, 2014 (14 of 25)
fausto K said:

Admittedly, I still prefer DSD over PCM (wasn't SACD meant to be the carrier for DSD?), ...
I have many PCM SACD's that sound outstanding.
...

Actually, DSD was originally designed as a professional archival medium in the early to mid 1990's. SA-CD came later.

Also conversely, I have several DSD SA-CD titles in which the sound quality is so bad, I never listen to them any longer.

Post by fausto K October 15, 2014 (15 of 25)
Iain said:

Actually, DSD was originally designed as a professional archival medium in the early to mid 1990's. SA-CD came later.

Also conversely, I have several DSD SA-CD titles in which the sound quality is so bad, I never listen to them any longer.

Yes, I know that DSD was earlier than SACD. I didn't say that DSD was designed for SACD. What I said is that SACD was the carrier meant for DSD, by which I mean that consumers like you and me, with CD-players and the like, could benefit from DSD.

Post by fausto K October 15, 2014 (16 of 25)
Iain said:

...

Also conversely, I have several DSD SA-CD titles in which the sound quality is so bad, I never listen to them any longer.

such as?

Post by Ubertrout October 15, 2014 (17 of 25)
Do we actually know that Praga was using DSD for recent recordings? Frankly the whole business with the misleadingly packaged out-of-copyright recordings doesn't inspire confidence in their honesty regarding recording methodology.

Of course, on the flip side if it sounds good it sounds good, regardless of methodology, and a SACD doesn't need to be DSD recorded to sound good.

Post by Iain October 15, 2014 (18 of 25)

Post by Domimag October 23, 2014 (19 of 25)
The quality of the recording (microphones, placement, room acoustics) = 99.95% of the final result.

The difference between DSD and PCM or DTS HD MA = 0.05%. Nobody is able to hear a difference. But shhh ... I'm politically incorrect.

Post by fausto K October 23, 2014 (20 of 25)
Domimag said:

The quality of the recording (microphones, placement, room acoustics) = 99.95% of the final result.

The difference between DSD and PCM or DTS HD MA = 0.05%. Nobody is able to hear a difference. But shhh ... I'm politically incorrect.

depends on your player and amplifier/receiver: if it converts DSD to PCM, then sure you can't hear the difference.

Page: prev 1 2 3 next

Closed