Dire Straits SACDs

[pauln]

In the days of vinyl it used to be common practise for us poor students to lend each other our albums and copy them onto cassettes. I suppose that was theft as well but nobody seemed too concerned about it; there was no way we could afford to buy everything. One chap I knew had over a thousand cassettes each with 2 albums on.

Has the perception of this practise somehow changed with the advent of torrents and pristine digital copies instead of cheap hissy cassettes?

How many here can honestly put their hands up and say that they have never done anything like this with audio or video?

If one adopts this whiter than white approach, can that person claim that for everything in life? Never exceeded the speed limit, never parked where you shouldn't, never went to a pub before you were 18, never smoked a joint??

"Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone"

 

[baz]

Hear hear Pauln.....the voice of reason speaks !

 

[BenLaw]

In the days of vinyl it used to be common practise for us poor students to lend each other our albums and copy them onto cassettes. I suppose that was theft as well but nobody seemed too concerned about it; there was no way we could afford to buy everything. One chap I knew had over a thousand cassettes each with 2 albums on.

Has the perception of this practise somehow changed with the advent of torrents and pristine digital copies instead of cheap hissy cassettes?

How many here can honestly put their hands up and say that they have never done anything like this with audio or video?

If one adopts this whiter than white approach, can that person claim that for everything in life? Never exceeded the speed limit, never parked where you shouldn't, never went to a pub before you were 18, never smoked a joint??

"Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone"

Given his kit list, and the 'justification' he's provided, I don't think bigcolz has the excuse of poverty. So I don't see your point? People should never reform if they did something in their past? People shouldn't point out wrongdoing? We all love music and what bigcolz does is not only illegal but damages our hobby in the long term. We can't stop people stealing music but surely we should abstain from it ourselves and point out that it's wrong when others do it?

 

[MajorFubar]

it's how stone-faced and blasé he is about it on a public forum that amazed me...

Also amazed by the low-profile this site's mods are keeping about it tbh.

Should we have members on here who have no issue with admitting they torrent and stream music illegally whenever the whim takes them? It's alright having a disclaimer somewhere* saying that the views and opinions expressed on the forums are not necessarily those of the magazine, its staff or its publishers, but exactly what crime has someone got to admit to on here before it's seen as a step too far?

*not that I have actually seen such a disclaimer...I'm sure there must be one somewhere.

 

[Al ears]

you can get brothers in arms on sacd for under a tenner , 60bucks is just a joke

if you have a high end sacd player , they can sound superb in stereo or 5.1

or rip them on a PS1 and play them on a DSD Dac like playback , mytek , benchmark

DSD direct stream digital downloads with replace Sacds in the future

It's because they are SHM-SACD's :wall:

 

[Al ears]

EOf coxactly. (In reply to altruistic.lemon)

It can never 'sound better' than CD because it was both recorded AND mastered (the original studio master) in 16/44.1.

As I said earlier, a complete remix would not yeald a higher bitrate, because the original tracking was done in 16/44.1.

The only possible way would be to re-record the album from scratch. Better get on to Mark.

Of course it can sound better than CD. Even if the master is a 16/44.1 recording it is upsampled when recorded onto SACD

 

[pauln]

A lot of Dire Straits fans on Steve Hoffman forum claim that the original CD pressings (Vertigo blue/orange swirl) are the best: http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/vertigo-blue-swirl-cd-version-of-communiqu%C3%A9-by-dire-straits-is-coming-to-me.245219/

And yes, I'm a fan and have original pressings of the first 4 albums.

These can be picked up relatively easily on ebay or charity shops if you're lucky. Slightly longer versions of some tracks as well. If you want the original "as vinyl" version.

This is backed up somewhat by data from the dynamic range database here: http://www.dr.loudness-war.info/

Personally I doubt that SHM-CD or SACD is worth the effort but that's not the point.

 

[MajorFubar]

Of course it can sound better than CD. Even if the master is a 16/44.1 recording it is upsampled when recorded onto SACD

No not really, a new remaster might sound better than the original, but it will never have anything to do with it being HD. With albums like BIA which were tracked at 16/44, no upsampling of the master or increasing its bitdepth will genuinely put back what isn't there. It can't. It's not like going back to an analogue recording and re-digitising it with better ADC converters at a higher resolution. The ultimate resolution of digital recordings can never be better than that of the original.

To give you an extreme example, if you rip a 44.1k CD, downsample it to 8K, then upsample it again to 44.1k, you won't get back what you lost and it won't sound the same as the original.

 

[pauln]

Given his kit list, and the 'justification' he's provided, I don't think bigcolz has the excuse of poverty. So I don't see your point? People should never reform if they did something in their past? People shouldn't point out wrongdoing? We all love music and what bigcolz does is not only illegal but damages our hobby in the long term. We can't stop people stealing music but surely we should abstain from it ourselves and point out that it's wrong when others do it?

Well, I can't condone it because it is illegal and it is affecting the music business but it's also something that is widespread, virtually impossible to police and maybe needs looking at. There's certainly something wrong with a system where it costs more to download a compressed version of an album than it does to buy the CD. Where does the saving from not having physical media to manufacture and transport go to? I believe the consumer is getting ripped off just as much as the record companies are.

(A quick look on Amazon showed Communique as £5 with free delivery for the CD vs £5.49 for the mp3 download)

My point was that the (over)reaction of the major smacked to me of sanctimony...

 

[MajorFubar]

My point was that the (over)reaction of the major smacked to me of sanctimony...

It wasn't over-reaction. Only an absolute EDITED comes on a public forum like WHF and admits to illegal torrenting so matter-of-factly like it isn't an issue. Yet the person - me - who actually had the EDITED to speak up, is labelled as some sanctimonius crank :wall: . How ironic. No wonder the world's EDITED. :roll:

If the majority view is that I'm out of touch with reality then I'll happily leave.

Yes I do feel THAT strongly about it.

 

[BenLaw]

Given his kit list, and the 'justification' he's provided, I don't think bigcolz has the excuse of poverty. So I don't see your point? People should never reform if they did something in their past? People shouldn't point out wrongdoing? We all love music and what bigcolz does is not only illegal but damages our hobby in the long term. We can't stop people stealing music but surely we should abstain from it ourselves and point out that it's wrong when others do it?

Well, I can't condone it because it is illegal and it is affecting the music business but it's also something that is widespread, virtually impossible to police and maybe needs looking at. There's certainly something wrong with a system where it costs more to download a compressed version of an album than it does to buy the CD. Where does the saving from not having physical media to manufacture and transport go to? I believe the consumer is getting ripped off just as much as the record companies are.

(A quick look on Amazon showed Communique as £5 with free delivery for the CD vs £5.49 for the mp3 download)

My point was that the (over)reaction of the major smacked to me of sanctimony...

So because lots of people have done it in the past, lots of people do it now and it's difficult to police it should be ignored? Just think about your argument in the context of any other crime (people have been getting raped forever and it's really hard to convict people, so don't worry about it / jimmy drove whilst drunk when he was 17 so it doesn't matter if he keeps doing it), and you'll realise how stupid it is. +1 to the major for this being described as an overreaction. If one person reading this thread realises what a **** they're being then it was worth it.

The prof has set out previously some good reasons why downloads cost so much. Just think of the infrastructure, staff, security, electricity etc used to build and maintain the servers etc. Btw, the price will come down if there were more legitimate purchases.

 

[MajorFubar]

Thanks Ben, at least one person is prepared to speak out in my favour.

 

[Al ears]

Of course it can sound better than CD. Even if the master is a 16/44.1 recording it is upsampled when recorded onto SACD

No not really, a new remaster might sound better than the original, but it will never have anything to do with it being HD. With albums like BIA which were tracked at 16/44, no upsampling of the master or increasing its bitdepth will genuinely put back what isn't there. It can't. It's not like going back to an analogue recording and re-digitising it with better ADC converters at a higher resolution. The ultimate resolution of digital recordings can never be better than that of the original.

To give you an extreme example, if you rip a 44.1k CD, downsample it to 8K, then upsample it again to 44.1k, you won't get back what you lost and it won't sound the same as the original.

Then what precisely is the point of an upsampling DAC when using a CD transport?

 

[geordie777]

In the days of vinyl it used to be common practise for us poor students to lend each other our albums and copy them onto cassettes. I suppose that was theft as well but nobody seemed too concerned about it; there was no way we could afford to buy everything. One chap I knew had over a thousand cassettes each with 2 albums on.

Has the perception of this practise somehow changed with the advent of torrents and pristine digital copies instead of cheap hissy cassettes?

How many here can honestly put their hands up and say that they have never done anything like this with audio or video?

If one adopts this whiter than white approach, can that person claim that for everything in life? Never exceeded the speed limit, never parked where you shouldn't, never went to a pub before you were 18, never smoked a joint??

"Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone"

+1

well said.

 

[pauln]

So because lots of people have done it in the past, lots of people do it now and it's difficult to police it should be ignored? Just think about your argument in the context of any other crime (people have been getting raped forever and it's really hard to convict people, so don't worry about it / jimmy drove whilst drunk when he was 17 so it doesn't matter if he keeps doing it), and you'll realise how stupid it is. +1 to the major for this being described as an overreaction. If one person reading this thread realises what a **** they're being then it was worth it.

The prof has set out previously some good reasons why downloads cost so much. Just think of the infrastructure, staff, security, electricity etc used to build and maintain the servers etc. Btw, the price will come down if there were more legitimate purchases.

To use your own words, I realise how stupid it is to compare rape and drunk driving to downloading music without paying for it. There are obviously different degrees of crime and I was careful to compare this particular offence with other illegal acts that would perhaps incur a fine as opposed to 10 years in prison.

As to the cost of downloads, I can see that there is a cost involved to the supplier but I cannot accept that it is greater than the cost of manufacturing, transporting, distributing, packaging and posting a physical item such as a CD. As I said before, if the majority of the public have the perception, whether rightly or wrongly, that they are getting ripped off, they will not accept it.

Both you and MajorFubar feel strongly about this, possibly because of your love for music or perhaps because you really are both "whiter than white" however if either of you have ever driven at 80mph on a motorway or indulged in a joint at a party then you have also broken "a law" and if that's the case, that's where the hypocrisy lies. If you are going to be so vehement about one law then you should be as vehement about all laws. Perhaps you are - I don't know.

 

[noddy1977]

reply to original post,

I recently brought the sacd version of brothers in arms, i have to say it sounds excellent and over the hdcd version sultans of swing album sounds more open and detailed.

in regards to previous comments about copying/downloading illegally, i think it is harmful to the industry however through the use of said methods and sharing also promotes free advertising for the artist, there is always you tube which also allows you to stream at no additional cost apart from the cost you pay to your ISP, is this ilegal too?

why are cd's (high quality) often less to buy then mp3's (lower quality) beats me

further more, a cd/,mps is sold on release for say £8 then wait a few months and then you can buy for generally half price, is it any wonder why there are folk out there who choose to obtain media through other means.

IMO you should be able to buy a cd for £5 at realease then stay that price and an mp3 for £4 respectively

Happy listening all

Pioneer A6 Pioneer D6 B&W 704 full Kimber Select wiring from mains interconnects and speaker cables sitting on Torlyte units

 

[BenLaw]

Actually I'm far more into morality than law, which can change substantially geographically and culturally etc. So depending on the circumstances speeding and use of recreational drugs doesn't bother me. Even theft can occasionally be justified. But not here, bigcolz's attempts at self-justification (and yours, if you partake in illegal downloading) are pathetic and intellectually disingenuous. Obviously the analogies I gave are more serious, that was the whole point. Theft of music (intellectual property) is still immoral (and illegal) albeit less serious.

You might notice we're on a hifi forum, so it seems odd that you appear so outraged by this reaction. You might not get the same vehement reaction down the pub, but this is an issue (most decent) people take to heart if they love music. To suggest that if someone might have driven at 80mph that on a hifi forum they should not condemn illegal downloading seems pretty warped to me.

 

[pauln]

FWIW I have never downloaded any music, legally or otherwise. No way would I pay extra for mp3's so CD's only for me.

Ben - if everybody only observed the laws that they personally believed in, as you seem to do, the world would be a dangerous place.

Anyway, back to more pressing things - the rugby.

 

[MajorFubar]

Then what precisely is the point of an upsampling DAC when using a CD transport?

Hi Alears, the theory as I understand it, a proposed benefit of oversampling/upsampling is that digital artifiacts from the D->A process are pushed up way beyond the threshold of our hearing, meaning that the low-pass filters in the analogue part of the the DAC don't have to be as severe.

 

[MajorFubar]

perhaps because you really are both "whiter than white"

I'm not whiter than white, and I never said I was. But to continue with the motoring analogy used earlier, neither have I joined a road-safety forum and nonchalantly said how I regularly blast through built-up areas at twice the speed-limit. I was more astonished not by the fact that he downloads music illegally, but that he chose to admit it so casually on a public HiFi forum.

 

[Al ears]

Then what precisely is the point of an upsampling DAC when using a CD transport?

Hi Alears, the theory as I understand it, a proposed benefit of oversampling/upsampling is that digital artifiacts from the D->A process are pushed up way beyond the threshold of our hearing, meaning that the low-pass filters in the analogue part of the the DAC don't have to be as severe.

You lost me there. 'Digital artifacts from the D>A process'?

Lets take this Dire Straits thing originally recorded as all digital master (DDD) at 16/44.1kHz.

This is then processed onto a CD (also 16/44.1kHz PCM format).

The SACD format is a 1bit DSD 2.8224MHz type with higher Dynamic range and higher Frequency range.

Are you saying if that 16/44.1kHz master recording is transferred to SACD I will not hear any difference to one transferred to a CD?

 

[BenLaw]

perhaps because you really are both "whiter than white"

I'm not whiter than white, and I never said I was. But to continue with the motoring analogy used earlier, neither have I joined a road-safety forum and nonchalantly said how I regularly blast through built-up areas at twice the speed-limit. I was more astonished not by the fact that he downloads music illegally, but that he chose to admit it so casually on a public HiFi forum.

Like you, I'm amazed both at the gall of bigcolz and also that the number of people willing to speak out on the issue appears to be 4-2 in favour of illegal downloading

 

[MajorFubar]

Ah well Ben if you can't beat them...reckon I'll just download BitTorrent. There's a few CDs and DVDs I fancy, as well as BDs, that it being near Xmas I can't really afford. But hey, who cares? I'll torrent them. Let me know what you want mate and I'll post them to you on a memory stick.

 

[MajorFubar]

Sorry Alears, I'll try to write things in a way which is less confusing Please bear with me.

You lost me there. 'Digital artifacts from the D>A process'?

Yes, the analogue part of the DAC uses low-pass filters to remove noise beyond 20kHz. The filters have to be quite steep. With oversampling, the theory is the filters can be much gentler, which is said to be beneficial for the sound quality.

Lets take this Dire Straits thing originally recorded as all digital master (DDD) at 16/44.1kHz.

This is then processed onto a CD (also 16/44.1kHz PCM format).

The SACD format is a 1bit DSD 2.8224MHz type with higher Dynamic range and higher Frequency range.

Are you saying if that 16/44.1kHz master recording is transferred to SACD I will not hear any difference to one transferred to a CD?

Well you might here a difference, and in fact you probably will because the album has been remastered.

'Remastering' is quite a simple term, which literlly means 'making a new master'. Yet, it covers a multitude of potential processes. With analogue recordings, it can mean re-sampling the original tape using better equipment or sampling it at higher resolutions and bitdepths. From that new capture they would make a new digital master. It can also mean taking the current digital master and changing the eq curve, adding compression/volume maximisation and other processes to create a new master which has a more pleasing sound than the original.

This is probably what they've done with the HD version of BIA, and yes, it could end up sounding better than the original CD because of it. But one thing any improvement can't be because of is the fact that it's now on a HD medium, because the multitracks were only 16/44 to start with. Convert the audio on your BIA SACD to 16/44 CD accurately and it will probably sound the same, assuming your player is as equally good at playing normally CDs.

I hope I've clarified things. Please ask again if you're more confused than you were to start with!

 

[BenLaw]

Will do Major, ta. I'm in town tomorrow anyway so I thought I might just pop into HMV and grab a handful of CDs. I wouldn't buy them normally anyway, so it seems fair enough.