PF: Wish You Were Here - a question!

[Johnny Vinyl]

According to Acoustic Sounds the SACD was produced using the Orginal Analogue tapes...why wasn't the LP version?

 

[MylesBAstor]

According to Acoustic Sounds the SACD was produced using the Orginal Analogue tapes...why wasn't the LP version?

Maybe it's because EMI can send a hi-Rez file but not the master tape to Chad/Kevin/Doug/George?

 

[Andre Marc]

Probably because DSD archiving, done correctly, can be indistinguishable from the source.

So rewinding and respooling priceless analog master tapes is not worth the risk when you can just
cut the vinyl from the DSD master.

According to Acoustic Sounds the SACD was produced using the Orginal Analogue tapes...why wasn't the LP version?

 

[MylesBAstor]

Probably because DSD archiving, done correctly, can be indistinguishable from the source.

So rewinding and respooling priceless analog master tapes is not worth the risk when you can just
cut the vinyl from the DSD master.

Bruce/J. Tinn have demoed foe me the second gen tape vs the DSD copy (which should sound exactly like the tape). Playback was a Studer 810 vs the Playback Design DAC/Mac music server. The DSD copy isn't even close! The most egregious departures from the master tape lie in the upper octaves, resolution and three dimensionality. Plus the music just sounded mechanical next to the tape. PS, the PD gear is the best digital I've heard.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Bruce/J. Tinn have demoed foe me the second gen tape vs the DSD copy (which should sound exactly like the tape). Playback was a Studer 810 vs the Playback Design DAC/Mac music server. The DSD copy isn't even close! The most egregious departures from the master tape lie in the upper octaves, resolution and three dimensionality. Plus the music just sounded mechanical next to the tape. PS, the PD gear is the best digital I've heard.

Let's clarify: The DSD copy was a copy of exactly the same tape it was being compared to on the Studer, and had been copied to DSD from that very same Studer?

Tim

 

[Bruce B]

Let's clarify: The DSD copy was a copy of exactly the same tape it was being compared to on the Studer, and had been copied to DSD from that very same Studer?

Tim

The DSD file was a rip of the SACD

 

[Andre Marc]

Hi Myles:

I trust your experience was accurate, but hardly definitive.

I have also participated in such listening sessions, and even found, on SOTA systems, that 24/96 was indistinguishable from tape playback.

T Bone Burnett has said.

Bob Ludwig last year said that DSD, again, when done correctly, is virtually indistinguishable from the source.

I also think people hear what they want to hear. Many vinyl heads proclaim that a record mastered off of a digital master is better than the than the digital file. There is no technical reason why this would be so and actually it is technically worse since it is one generation removed.

Bruce/J. Tinn have demoed foe me the second gen tape vs the DSD copy (which should sound exactly like the tape). Playback was a Studer 810 vs the Playback Design DAC/Mac music server. The DSD copy isn't even close! The most egregious departures from the master tape lie in the upper octaves, resolution and three dimensionality. Plus the music just sounded mechanical next to the tape. PS, the PD gear is the best digital I've heard.

 

[Andre Marc]

Hi Bruce:

what did you think, do you agree with Myles?

also, sorry to bug you, is the new HDTracks Norah Jones 192 download an archive of the analog mixdown?

 

[Bruce B]

Hi Bruce:

what did you think, do you agree with Myles?

also, sorry to bug you, is the new HDTracks Norah Jones 192 download an archive of the analog mixdown?

Myles is spot on. I wouldn't say the divide is night/day. If no one heard the tapes, you'd think it was the best you've ever heard.

Yes, the NJ is a 2-track mixdown archive.

I did some vinyl archives at Mike L's place and used the very best equipment available ( >$50k). As good as it was, it just isn't quite there yet.

 

[Andre Marc]

Thank you Bruce. Interesting. Myles...that is +1!

Thanks for the note on Norah. I love her music. I will purchase that download today. I also have my eyes on the new
Marvin Gaye WGO, probably one of my top ten favorite albums of all time.

Are you a liberty to say if there are any other interesting things coming down the pike from HDTracks?

Myles is spot on. I wouldn't say the divide is night/day. If no one heard the tapes, you'd think it was the best you've ever heard.

Yes, the NJ is a 2-track mixdown archive.

 

[Bruce B]

Are you a liberty to say if there are any other interesting things coming down the pike from HDTracks?

Sorry, wish I could. We did just get a shipment of 27 master tapes last week!! The "original" masters!

 

[Andre Marc]

Thanks Bruce!

Your honesty, input, and opinion are greatly valued!!!

I will be waiting for news of those new masters!

Sorry, wish I could. We did just get a shipment of 27 master tapes last week!! The "original" masters!

 

[Johnny Vinyl]

Does anyone know what in fact was used for the vinyl of this? And I'm still not understanding why the orginal master analog tapes were used for the SACD and not the vinyl.

 

[garylkoh]

It's interesting...... during the Genesis Dragon event, we had by coincidence visitors bringing in copies of this album. But they were all vinyl - and they all sounded different. A early UK pressing, a US pressing, an Israeli first pressing, and a re-issue. I didn't take notes, so I don't have the details. In terms of preference, two of us much preferred the UK pressing over the Israeli pressing when we played them back to back. The other two copies were at different times, and musical memory being what it is, there are members who will call me out if I do any attempt at comparisons.