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
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.
Main system: Mac Mini 2011 > HRT II+ DAC • Cyrus 2 & PSX • Cyrus tuner • MS 10i speakers [on loan]
Also cluttering-up the place: Thorens TD160 (no cart) • Marantz CD 63 mkII KI & PM66 KI • Technics SL-P777 • Nakamichi DR-1
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.
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...
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.
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 EDITED 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.
HiFi / A/V / Bedroom
Thanks Ben, at least one person is prepared to speak out in my favour.
Then what precisely is the point of an upsampling DAC when using a CD transport?
Origin Live Aurora Gold+Illustrious Mk2 arm+Zyx R100-02/Stello CDT200+Stello DA220 dac/Tom Evans Groove Anniversary phono amp/Tom Evans Vibe preamp/Linear A power amp/Acoustic Zen Adagios/Chord cables/Oppo 105EU.
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"
Rega RP1 Golding 2100 Cart. Marantz pm6004. Marantz cd6004. MA BX2s,AEX
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.
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
Pioneer PDP5090, Pioneer BDP LX08, Pioneer DV868, Pioneer A6mk2 amp Pioneer PD D6mk2 cd player, Bowers & Wilkins 704 maple, Kimber Kable KS1030 KS1011 Monacle XL speaker cable KS9033 jumpers Russ Andrews signature mains, purifier block, silencerx2 and mega clampx2 Torlyte rack and stands
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.
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.
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?
© 2013 Haymarket Publishing