Szell Complete edition remastering: Answer to a prayer

[LarryLap]

I have the complete Szell box on order at bullmoose.com, but in the meantime I have been listening to those of the individual disks that have appeared on Napster.com and Amazon.com. If you have not heard them, you really must. The seemingly intractable defects that have plagued those recordings through decades of format changes and remasterings seem at last to have been overcome. For example, I have both the Sony Original Jacket Collection of the Beethoven Symphonies, and the version of the same recordings in the Korean "Szell Edition" box. Though both are markedly superior to the Essential Classics edition, they pale before the remasterings in the new box. The papery quality of the violins'upper partials has vanished, as has the glutinous, monochrome tone of the 'cellos and violas. In their place, warmth and color. What was suavity and discipline is now passion and humane expressivity. I just listened to the Pastoral Symphony, and, as you may have been able to detect, can hardly contain my excitement.

LAL

[Oscar]

Thx, Larry. Will look for these on AppleMusic later tonight.

[drh8h]

Post by LarryLap
I have the complete Szell box on order at bullmoose.com, but in the meantime I have been listening to those of the individual disks that have appeared on Napster.com and Amazon.com. If you have not heard them, you really must. The seemingly intractable defects that have plagued those recordings through decades of format changes and remasterings seem at last to have been overcome. For example, I have both the Sony Original Jacket Collection of the Beethoven Symphonies, and the version of the same recordings in the Korean "Szell Edition" box. Though both are markedly superior to the Essential Classics edition, they pale before the remasterings in the new box. The papery quality of the violins'upper partials has vanished, as has the glutinous, monochrome tone of the 'cellos and violas. In their place, warmth and color. What was suavity and discipline is now passion and humane expressivity. I just listened to the Pastoral Symphony, and, as you may have been able to detect, can hardly contain my excitement.
LAL

I would imagine they have used the CD versions of the SACD hybrids of the Beethoven Symphonies released in JP. Given that quite a number of Szell recordings have received the Andreas Meyer treatment in hybrid SACD for the JP market recently, that is a good sign we will be getting a number of Red Book updates in the forthcoming box. It should include the Mozart Concertos with Casadesus, Slavonic Dances, Brahms, Mahler, Bruckner symphonies, and others.

DH

[Randy Lane]

Would sure be nice if Sony jumped on the BluRay Audio band wagon for high resolution Universal is doing.

[drh8h]

Post by Randy Lane
Would sure be nice if Sony jumped on the BluRay Audio band wagon for high resolution Universal is doing.

I am somewhat surprised that Universal has kept this up. The exit of of the only major "player" in the BluRay audiophile equipment business does not bode well for appealing to the group these issues presumably are targeting.

DH

[Oscar]

Listening to Szell’s Bruckner 3 (copyright 2018) on AppleMusic. Yes, it is in brilliant, glorious stereo. The man!

[j***@gmail.com]

Thanks for the info. $180 is a good price. What has been your past experience, if any, with bullmoose?

Post by LarryLap
I have the complete Szell box on order at bullmoose.com, but in the meantime I have been listening to those of the individual disks that have appeared on Napster.com and Amazon.com. If you have not heard them, you really must. The seemingly intractable defects that have plagued those recordings through decades of format changes and remasterings seem at last to have been overcome. For example, I have both the Sony Original Jacket Collection of the Beethoven Symphonies, and the version of the same recordings in the Korean "Szell Edition" box. Though both are markedly superior to the Essential Classics edition, they pale before the remasterings in the new box. The papery quality of the violins'upper partials has vanished, as has the glutinous, monochrome tone of the 'cellos and violas. In their place, warmth and color. What was suavity and discipline is now passion and humane expressivity. I just listened to the Pastoral Symphony, and, as you may have been able to detect, can hardly contain my excitement.
LAL

[n***@gmail.com]

Post by LarryLap
I have the complete Szell box on order at bullmoose.com, but in the meantime I have been listening to those of the individual disks that have appeared on Napster.com and Amazon.com. If you have not heard them, you really must. The seemingly intractable defects that have plagued those recordings through decades of format changes and remasterings seem at last to have been overcome. For example, I have both the Sony Original Jacket Collection of the Beethoven Symphonies, and the version of the same recordings in the Korean "Szell Edition" box. Though both are markedly superior to the Essential Classics edition, they pale before the remasterings in the new box. The papery quality of the violins'upper partials has vanished, as has the glutinous, monochrome tone of the 'cellos and violas. In their place, warmth and color. What was suavity and discipline is now passion and humane expressivity. I just listened to the Pastoral Symphony, and, as you may have been able to detect, can hardly contain my excitement.
LAL

I had the Szell LvB OJC and have CD-R copies of all ten of those discs
and have Sony's White (Masters) Box,'Szell Conducts Beethoven'. Instantaneous switching between two synced CDPs reveals very little or no difference between the CD-Rs vs. any of the 5 CDs in White box. I also swapped the discs between the players.

[drh8h]

Post by n***@gmail.com

Post by LarryLap
I have the complete Szell box on order at bullmoose.com, but in the meantime I have been listening to those of the individual disks that have appeared on Napster.com and Amazon.com. If you have not heard them, you really must. The seemingly intractable defects that have plagued those recordings through decades of format changes and remasterings seem at last to have been overcome. For example, I have both the Sony Original Jacket Collection of the Beethoven Symphonies, and the version of the same recordings in the Korean "Szell Edition" box. Though both are markedly superior to the Essential Classics edition, they pale before the remasterings in the new box. The papery quality of the violins'upper partials has vanished, as has the glutinous, monochrome tone of the 'cellos and violas. In their place, warmth and color. What was suavity and discipline is now passion and humane expressivity. I just listened to the Pastoral Symphony, and, as you may have been able to detect, can hardly contain my excitement.
LAL

I had the Szell LvB OJC and have CD-R copies of all ten of those discs
and have Sony's White (Masters) Box,'Szell Conducts Beethoven'. Instantaneous switching between two synced CDPs reveals very little or no difference between the CD-Rs vs. any of the 5 CDs in White box. I also swapped the discs between the players.

I don't think the box is going have either of those transfers. Almost certainly it will have the Andreas Meyer remastering of a couple of years ago for JP hybrid discs. Those are quite different from previous issues.

[m***@gmail.com]

Post by drh8h

Post by n***@gmail.com

Post by LarryLap
I have the complete Szell box on order at bullmoose.com, but in the meantime I have been listening to those of the individual disks that have appeared on Napster.com and Amazon.com. If you have not heard them, you really must. The seemingly intractable defects that have plagued those recordings through decades of format changes and remasterings seem at last to have been overcome. For example, I have both the Sony Original Jacket Collection of the Beethoven Symphonies, and the version of the same recordings in the Korean "Szell Edition" box. Though both are markedly superior to the Essential Classics edition, they pale before the remasterings in the new box. The papery quality of the violins'upper partials has vanished, as has the glutinous, monochrome tone of the 'cellos and violas. In their place, warmth and color. What was suavity and discipline is now passion and humane expressivity. I just listened to the Pastoral Symphony, and, as you may have been able to detect, can hardly contain my excitement.
LAL

I had the Szell LvB OJC and have CD-R copies of all ten of those discs
and have Sony's White (Masters) Box,'Szell Conducts Beethoven'. Instantaneous switching between two synced CDPs reveals very little or no difference between the CD-Rs vs. any of the 5 CDs in White box. I also swapped the discs between the players.

I don't think the box is going have either of those transfers. Almost certainly it will have the Andreas Meyer remastering of a couple of years ago for JP hybrid discs. Those are quite different from previous issues.

They sound fabulous even on Amazon and Apple music

[drh8h]

Post by m***@gmail.com

Post by drh8h

Post by n***@gmail.com

Post by LarryLap
I have the complete Szell box on order at bullmoose.com, but in the meantime I have been listening to those of the individual disks that have appeared on Napster.com and Amazon.com. If you have not heard them, you really must. The seemingly intractable defects that have plagued those recordings through decades of format changes and remasterings seem at last to have been overcome. For example, I have both the Sony Original Jacket Collection of the Beethoven Symphonies, and the version of the same recordings in the Korean "Szell Edition" box. Though both are markedly superior to the Essential Classics edition, they pale before the remasterings in the new box. The papery quality of the violins'upper partials has vanished, as has the glutinous, monochrome tone of the 'cellos and violas. In their place, warmth and color. What was suavity and discipline is now passion and humane expressivity. I just listened to the Pastoral Symphony, and, as you may have been able to detect, can hardly contain my excitement.
LAL

I had the Szell LvB OJC and have CD-R copies of all ten of those discs
and have Sony's White (Masters) Box,'Szell Conducts Beethoven'. Instantaneous switching between two synced CDPs reveals very little or no difference between the CD-Rs vs. any of the 5 CDs in White box. I also swapped the discs between the players.

I don't think the box is going have either of those transfers. Almost certainly it will have the Andreas Meyer remastering of a couple of years ago for JP hybrid discs. Those are quite different from previous issues.

They sound fabulous even on Amazon and Apple music

Then they must be the new remasterings. I am eagerly, and in poverty, awaiting them. Of course, if you really want to be broke, order the hybrids from JP. Why are they so expensive? The Living Stereo hybrids of years ago didn't cost anything like these.

Dennis

[Oscar]

Post by m***@gmail.com
They sound fabulous even on Amazon and Apple music

Hear, hear!

[Paul]

They sound fabulous even on Amazon and Apple music.

I'm listening to 256 kbps mp3s of the "Merry Overtures" LP from the forthcoming big box. The sound blows away every other version of this material that I have ever heard. The brass in particular has presence and timbral accuracy way beyond any previous incarnation in any format. Everything is in better focus, fuller sound, just breathtaking

This box may be the bomb.

Paul Goldstein

[drh8h]

Post by Paul

They sound fabulous even on Amazon and Apple music.

I'm listening to 256 kbps mp3s of the "Merry Overtures" LP from the forthcoming big box. The sound blows away every other version of this material that I have ever heard. The brass in particular has presence and timbral accuracy way beyond any previous incarnation in any format. Everything is in better focus, fuller sound, just breathtaking
This box may be the bomb.
Paul Goldstein

With all the talk, I suspect it will be OOP soon.

[Mark Zimmer]

Post by drh8h

Post by Paul

They sound fabulous even on Amazon and Apple music.

I'm listening to 256 kbps mp3s of the "Merry Overtures" LP from the forthcoming big box. The sound blows away every other version of this material that I have ever heard. The brass in particular has presence and timbral accuracy way beyond any previous incarnation in any format. Everything is in better focus, fuller sound, just breathtaking
This box may be the bomb.
Paul Goldstein

With all the talk, I suspect it will be OOP soon.

As with most Sony boxes, you can pay $150 now, or you can pay $700 in two years.

[drh8h]

Post by Mark Zimmer

Post by drh8h

Post by Paul

They sound fabulous even on Amazon and Apple music.

I'm listening to 256 kbps mp3s of the "Merry Overtures" LP from the forthcoming big box. The sound blows away every other version of this material that I have ever heard. The brass in particular has presence and timbral accuracy way beyond any previous incarnation in any format. Everything is in better focus, fuller sound, just breathtaking
This box may be the bomb.
Paul Goldstein

With all the talk, I suspect it will be OOP soon.

As with most Sony boxes, you can pay $150 now, or you can pay $700 in two years.

It is always hard to tell which sets will sell out. Not always the ones you suspect. The NYP and Serkin are still available. There was an old adage that Monteux didn't sell, but look how fast the RCA set went. The Fournier set on Universal did not last long at all--and there was very little in not available on other issues. I keep hoping they will do like the Quartetto Italiano set and repress it. The only time I believe Sony has done a repress was on the Reiner Box.

DH

[Mike]

Post by drh8h

Post by Mark Zimmer

Post by drh8h

Post by Paul

They sound fabulous even on Amazon and Apple music.

I'm listening to 256 kbps mp3s of the "Merry Overtures" LP from the forthcoming big box. The sound blows away every other version of this material that I have ever heard. The brass in particular has presence and timbral accuracy way beyond any previous incarnation in any format. Everything is in better focus, fuller sound, just breathtaking
This box may be the bomb.
Paul Goldstein

With all the talk, I suspect it will be OOP soon.

As with most Sony boxes, you can pay $150 now, or you can pay $700 in two years.

It is always hard to tell which sets will sell out. Not always the ones you suspect. The NYP and Serkin are still available. There was an old adage that Monteux didn't sell, but look how fast the RCA set went. The Fournier set on Universal did not last long at all--and there was very little in not available on other issues. I keep hoping they will do like the Quartetto Italiano set and repress it. The only time I believe Sony has done a repress was on the Reiner Box.
DH

Sony rereleased the Heifetz box. What surprised me is how quickly Sony's Istomin box disappeared and soared to stratospheric prices.

[Mike]

Post by drh8h

Post by Mark Zimmer

Post by drh8h

Post by Paul

They sound fabulous even on Amazon and Apple music.

I'm listening to 256 kbps mp3s of the "Merry Overtures" LP from the forthcoming big box. The sound blows away every other version of this material that I have ever heard. The brass in particular has presence and timbral accuracy way beyond any previous incarnation in any format. Everything is in better focus, fuller sound, just breathtaking
This box may be the bomb.
Paul Goldstein

With all the talk, I suspect it will be OOP soon.

As with most Sony boxes, you can pay $150 now, or you can pay $700 in two years.

It is always hard to tell which sets will sell out. Not always the ones you suspect. The NYP and Serkin are still available. There was an old adage that Monteux didn't sell, but look how fast the RCA set went. The Fournier set on Universal did not last long at all--and there was very little in not available on other issues. I keep hoping they will do like the Quartetto Italiano set and repress it. The only time I believe Sony has done a repress was on the Reiner Box.
DH

Sony rereleased the Heifetz box. What surprised me is how quickly Sony's Istomin and Rosen boxes disappeared and soared to stratospheric prices.

[Randy Lane]

Smoe take several years to Sell Out. Yo Yo Ma for example. And then follow the same OOP pricing tendencies.

[JohnA]

Post by Randy Lane
Smoe take several years to Sell Out. Yo Yo Ma for example. And then follow the same OOP pricing tendencies.

I believe that when the Ma set was first released, it was priced around $900. I bought it a few years later after the price dropped to about $200.

[Thornhill]

Post by Randy Lane
Smoe take several years to Sell Out. Yo Yo Ma for example. And then follow the same OOP pricing tendencies.

Yeah, but they likely produced a ton of the Ma boxes because he's such a popular artist.

[George M.]

Post by drh8h

Post by Paul

They sound fabulous even on Amazon and Apple music.

I'm listening to 256 kbps mp3s of the "Merry Overtures" LP from the forthcoming big box. The sound blows away every other version of this material that I have ever heard. The brass in particular has presence and timbral accuracy way beyond any previous incarnation in any format. Everything is in better focus, fuller sound, just breathtaking
This box may be the bomb.
Paul Goldstein

With all the talk, I suspect it will be OOP soon.

Qobuz.com is releasing them at the pace of about 10 each Monday, some in the hi-res, all with original covers.

For example https://www.qobuz.com/fr-fr/album/brahms-symphonies-nos-1-2-4-remastered-george-szell/z6hl4vozeq5da

So this should not go OOP anytime soon.

George M.

[drh8h]

Post by George M.

Post by drh8h

Post by Paul

They sound fabulous even on Amazon and Apple music.

I'm listening to 256 kbps mp3s of the "Merry Overtures" LP from the forthcoming big box. The sound blows away every other version of this material that I have ever heard. The brass in particular has presence and timbral accuracy way beyond any previous incarnation in any format. Everything is in better focus, fuller sound, just breathtaking
This box may be the bomb.
Paul Goldstein

With all the talk, I suspect it will be OOP soon.

Qobuz.com is releasing them at the pace of about 10 each Monday, some in the hi-res, all with original covers.
For example https://www.qobuz.com/fr-fr/album/brahms-symphonies-nos-1-2-4-remastered-george-szell/z6hl4vozeq5da
So this should not go OOP anytime soon.
George M.

Well, some of us are shut out of Qobuz. Apparently they can survive without 300+ million people.

DH

[Invocation]

在 2018年8月3日星期五 UTC-4下午4:55:08，drh8h写道：

Post by drh8h

Post by George M.

Post by drh8h

Post by Paul

They sound fabulous even on Amazon and Apple music.

I'm listening to 256 kbps mp3s of the "Merry Overtures" LP from the forthcoming big box. The sound blows away every other version of this material that I have ever heard. The brass in particular has presence and timbral accuracy way beyond any previous incarnation in any format. Everything is in better focus, fuller sound, just breathtaking
This box may be the bomb.
Paul Goldstein

With all the talk, I suspect it will be OOP soon.

Qobuz.com is releasing them at the pace of about 10 each Monday, some in the hi-res, all with original covers.
For example https://www.qobuz.com/fr-fr/album/brahms-symphonies-nos-1-2-4-remastered-george-szell/z6hl4vozeq5da
So this should not go OOP anytime soon.
George M.

Well, some of us are shut out of Qobuz. Apparently they can survive without 300+ million people.
DH

Those digital releases can be found on several websites. If you cannot access Qobuz, you can still buy them from Presto:

https://www.prestoclassical.co.uk/classical/labels/1333/browse?date_range=Last+90+Days&format=2&size=10&view=large&sort=relevance

[m***@gmail.com]

Post by Invocation
在 2018年8月3日星期五 UTC-4下午4:55:08，drh8h写道：

Post by drh8h

Post by George M.

Post by drh8h

Post by Paul

They sound fabulous even on Amazon and Apple music.

I'm listening to 256 kbps mp3s of the "Merry Overtures" LP from the forthcoming big box. The sound blows away every other version of this material that I have ever heard. The brass in particular has presence and timbral accuracy way beyond any previous incarnation in any format. Everything is in better focus, fuller sound, just breathtaking
This box may be the bomb.
Paul Goldstein

With all the talk, I suspect it will be OOP soon.

Qobuz.com is releasing them at the pace of about 10 each Monday, some in the hi-res, all with original covers.
For example https://www.qobuz.com/fr-fr/album/brahms-symphonies-nos-1-2-4-remastered-george-szell/z6hl4vozeq5da
So this should not go OOP anytime soon.
George M.

Well, some of us are shut out of Qobuz. Apparently they can survive without 300+ million people.
DH

https://www.prestoclassical.co.uk/classical/labels/1333/browse?date_range=Last+90+Days&format=2&size=10&view=large&sort=relevance

Yes they are also on Amazon Music and Apple Music

[Thornhill]

Post by George M.

Post by drh8h

Post by Paul

They sound fabulous even on Amazon and Apple music.

I'm listening to 256 kbps mp3s of the "Merry Overtures" LP from the forthcoming big box. The sound blows away every other version of this material that I have ever heard. The brass in particular has presence and timbral accuracy way beyond any previous incarnation in any format. Everything is in better focus, fuller sound, just breathtaking
This box may be the bomb.
Paul Goldstein

With all the talk, I suspect it will be OOP soon.

Qobuz.com is releasing them at the pace of about 10 each Monday, some in the hi-res, all with original covers.
For example https://www.qobuz.com/fr-fr/album/brahms-symphonies-nos-1-2-4-remastered-george-szell/z6hl4vozeq5da
So this should not go OOP anytime soon.
George M.

As usual, the download pricing is insane: $10 per album for 16/44, $20 for the 24/192 download.

Even the Japanse SACDs are only $20, and there you get the recording in both hi-rez and 16/44.

[LarryLap]

Post by Thornhill

Post by George M.

Post by drh8h

Post by Paul

They sound fabulous even on Amazon and Apple music.

I'm listening to 256 kbps mp3s of the "Merry Overtures" LP from the forthcoming big box. The sound blows away every other version of this material that I have ever heard. The brass in particular has presence and timbral accuracy way beyond any previous incarnation in any format. Everything is in better focus, fuller sound, just breathtaking
This box may be the bomb.
Paul Goldstein

With all the talk, I suspect it will be OOP soon.

Qobuz.com is releasing them at the pace of about 10 each Monday, some in the hi-res, all with original covers.
For example https://www.qobuz.com/fr-fr/album/brahms-symphonies-nos-1-2-4-remastered-george-szell/z6hl4vozeq5da
So this should not go OOP anytime soon.
George M.

As usual, the download pricing is insane: $10 per album for 16/44, $20 for the 24/192 download.
Even the Japanse SACDs are only $20, and there you get the recording in both hi-rez and 16/44.

Let me put in a word for Napster. I know that, for lovers of classical music, it does not have the cache of some of the other streaming and downloading websites, but I must say I use it a great deal, and am seldom disappointed. Searching requires some ingenuity, but it is rare that I am not ultimately successful in finding exactly what I am looking for, e.g. both the Rubinstein/Mitropoulos and Rubinstein/Leinsdorf recordings of the Tchaikovsky Concerto. The sound is fine, albeit admittedly lossy, which is for me more than compensated for by the enormous selection. It costs me $9/mo, I believe, and data charges are non-existent, thanks to an arrangement between Napster and my carrier, T-Mobile. Just sayin'.....

[Invocation]

在 2018年8月4日星期六 UTC-4下午1:17:36，Thornhill写道：

Post by Thornhill

Post by George M.

Post by drh8h

Post by Paul

They sound fabulous even on Amazon and Apple music.

I'm listening to 256 kbps mp3s of the "Merry Overtures" LP from the forthcoming big box. The sound blows away every other version of this material that I have ever heard. The brass in particular has presence and timbral accuracy way beyond any previous incarnation in any format. Everything is in better focus, fuller sound, just breathtaking
This box may be the bomb.
Paul Goldstein

With all the talk, I suspect it will be OOP soon.

Qobuz.com is releasing them at the pace of about 10 each Monday, some in the hi-res, all with original covers.
For example https://www.qobuz.com/fr-fr/album/brahms-symphonies-nos-1-2-4-remastered-george-szell/z6hl4vozeq5da
So this should not go OOP anytime soon.
George M.

As usual, the download pricing is insane: $10 per album for 16/44, $20 for the 24/192 download.
Even the Japanse SACDs are only $20, and there you get the recording in both hi-rez and 16/44.

Well, the price is not cheap but kind common. Most 16-44 digital releases are priced as 10 Euro on Qobuz and 10-12 USD on Presto, and 24bit versions are normally more expensive. Linn priced its 16bit digital downloads as 13 USD and 24bit as 24 USD. Most labels would not set the price of digital lower than the physical release. Maybe they have marketing concerns. Anyway this is how the digital albums are priced.

Since Sony would not release the Szell set in SACD, the only way to get the 24bit version is to go digital. Actually Sony in the recent years would release many of its reissue boxsets as single digital albums, in both 16bit and 24bit. Not sure about other sites but on Qobuz if you buy a 24bit album you will get 16bit and mp3 versions for free.

[Invocation]

在 2018年7月27日星期五 UTC-4下午8:21:34，LarryLap写道：

Post by LarryLap
I have the complete Szell box on order at bullmoose.com, but in the meantime I have been listening to those of the individual disks that have appeared on Napster.com and Amazon.com. If you have not heard them, you really must. The seemingly intractable defects that have plagued those recordings through decades of format changes and remasterings seem at last to have been overcome. For example, I have both the Sony Original Jacket Collection of the Beethoven Symphonies, and the version of the same recordings in the Korean "Szell Edition" box. Though both are markedly superior to the Essential Classics edition, they pale before the remasterings in the new box. The papery quality of the violins'upper partials has vanished, as has the glutinous, monochrome tone of the 'cellos and violas. In their place, warmth and color. What was suavity and discipline is now passion and humane expressivity. I just listened to the Pastoral Symphony, and, as you may have been able to detect, can hardly contain my excitement.
LAL

A large protion of the new Szell Edition uses new remastering at 24-96 and Sony also issue those HD format digital files as separate albums online. If someone believes 24-96 makes difference from 16-44 CD audio, this is a good way to get broke...

[drh8h]

Post by Invocation
在 2018年7月27日星期五 UTC-4下午8:21:34，LarryLap写道：

Post by LarryLap
I have the complete Szell box on order at bullmoose.com, but in the meantime I have been listening to those of the individual disks that have appeared on Napster.com and Amazon.com. If you have not heard them, you really must. The seemingly intractable defects that have plagued those recordings through decades of format changes and remasterings seem at last to have been overcome. For example, I have both the Sony Original Jacket Collection of the Beethoven Symphonies, and the version of the same recordings in the Korean "Szell Edition" box. Though both are markedly superior to the Essential Classics edition, they pale before the remasterings in the new box. The papery quality of the violins'upper partials has vanished, as has the glutinous, monochrome tone of the 'cellos and violas. In their place, warmth and color. What was suavity and discipline is now passion and humane expressivity. I just listened to the Pastoral Symphony, and, as you may have been able to detect, can hardly contain my excitement.
LAL

A large protion of the new Szell Edition uses new remastering at 24-96 and Sony also issue those HD format digital files as separate albums online. If someone believes 24-96 makes difference from 16-44 CD audio, this is a good way to get broke...

I don't know. For listening purposes it seems proven Red Book is more than enough for anyone, but the SACD layer still always sounds better. I don't want to be cynical and say that is intentional, but then how could they sell those or HD files or BluRay otherwise?

DH

[Gerard]

Post by drh8h

Post by Invocation
在 2018年7月27日星期五 UTC-4下午8:21:34，LarryLap写道：

Post by LarryLap
I have the complete Szell box on order at bullmoose.com, but in the meantime I have been listening to those of the individual disks that have appeared on Napster.com and Amazon.com. If you have not heard them, you really must. The seemingly intractable defects that have plagued those recordings through decades of format changes and remasterings seem at last to have been overcome. For example, I have both the Sony Original Jacket Collection of the Beethoven Symphonies, and the version of the same recordings in the Korean "Szell Edition" box. Though both are markedly superior to the Essential Classics edition, they pale before the remasterings in the new box. The papery quality of the violins'upper partials has vanished, as has the glutinous, monochrome tone of the 'cellos and violas. In their place, warmth and color. What was suavity and discipline is now passion and humane expressivity. I just listened to the Pastoral Symphony, and, as you may have been able to detect, can hardly contain my excitement.
LAL

A large protion of the new Szell Edition uses new remastering at 24-96 and Sony also issue those HD format digital files as separate albums online. If someone believes 24-96 makes difference from 16-44 CD audio, this is a good way to get broke...

I don't know. For listening purposes it seems proven Red Book is more than enough for anyone, but the SACD layer still always sounds better. I don't want to be cynical and say that is intentional, but then how could they sell those or HD files or BluRay otherwise?
DH

Marketing, advertising, "now with Lanolin" as M.B. Tepper used to say.

[drh8h]

Post by Gerard

Post by drh8h

Post by Invocation
在 2018年7月27日星期五 UTC-4下午8:21:34，LarryLap写道：

Post by LarryLap
I have the complete Szell box on order at bullmoose.com, but in the meantime I have been listening to those of the individual disks that have appeared on Napster.com and Amazon.com. If you have not heard them, you really must. The seemingly intractable defects that have plagued those recordings through decades of format changes and remasterings seem at last to have been overcome. For example, I have both the Sony Original Jacket Collection of the Beethoven Symphonies, and the version of the same recordings in the Korean "Szell Edition" box. Though both are markedly superior to the Essential Classics edition, they pale before the remasterings in the new box. The papery quality of the violins'upper partials has vanished, as has the glutinous, monochrome tone of the 'cellos and violas. In their place, warmth and color. What was suavity and discipline is now passion and humane expressivity. I just listened to the Pastoral Symphony, and, as you may have been able to detect, can hardly contain my excitement.
LAL

A large protion of the new Szell Edition uses new remastering at 24-96 and Sony also issue those HD format digital files as separate albums online. If someone believes 24-96 makes difference from 16-44 CD audio, this is a good way to get broke...

I don't know. For listening purposes it seems proven Red Book is more than enough for anyone, but the SACD layer still always sounds better. I don't want to be cynical and say that is intentional, but then how could they sell those or HD files or BluRay otherwise?
DH

Marketing, advertising, "now with Lanolin" as M.B. Tepper used to say.

He probably still does! But remastering techniques have advanced so much that even 24/96 masterings from ten or fifteen years ago can sound dull--by comparison. And the 24/192 masterings, mostly at least originally for the Asian market, have raised the bar higher. But I still wonder if comparable sound could not be replicated for the listener on a Red Book CD. I just think the layers do not have exactly the same mastering. If someone can show evidence to the contrary, I will happily accept it.

DH

[weary flake]

Post by drh8h

Post by Gerard

Post by drh8h

Post by Invocation
在 2018年7月27日星期五 UTC-4下午8:21:34，LarryLap写道：

Post by LarryLap
I have the complete Szell box on order at bullmoose.com, but in the
meantime I have been listening to those of the individual disks that
have appeared on Napster.com and Amazon.com. If you have not heard
them, you really must. The seemingly intractable defects that have
plagued those recordings through decades of format changes and
remasterings seem at last to have been overcome. For example, I have
both the Sony Original Jacket Collection of the Beethoven Symphonies,
and the version of the same recordings in the Korean "Szell Edition"
box. Though both are markedly superior to the Essential Classics
edition, they pale before the remasterings in the new box. The papery
quality of the violins'upper partials has vanished, as has the
glutinous, monochrome tone of the 'cellos and violas. In their place,
warmth and color. What was suavity and discipline is now passion and
humane expressivity. I just listened to the Pastoral Symphony, and, as
you may have been able to detect, can hardly contain my excitement.
LAL

A large protion of the new Szell Edition uses new remastering at 24-96
and Sony also issue those HD format digital files as separate albums
online. If someone believes 24-96 makes difference from 16-44 CD audio,
this is a good way to get broke...

I don't know. For listening purposes it seems proven Red Book is more
than enough for anyone, but the SACD layer still always sounds better.
I don't want to be cynical and say that is intentional, but then how
could they sell those or HD files or BluRay otherwise?
DH

Marketing, advertising, "now with Lanolin" as M.B. Tepper used to say.

He probably still does! But remastering techniques have advanced so
much that even 24/96 masterings from ten or fifteen years ago can sound
dull--by comparison.

Noise Reduction was more popular fifteen years ago, thus the dull sound. Take
the best recording in the world, add noise reductiom, and produce a dull
sound; go back to the same recording before it was processed and it will sound
amazing.

Post by drh8h
And the 24/192 masterings, mostly at least originally for the Asian
market, have raised the bar higher. But I still wonder if comparable
sound could not be replicated for the listener on a Red Book CD. I just
think the layers do not have exactly the same mastering. If someone can
show evidence to the contrary, I will happily accept it.

Engineers are a dodgy bunch, so their releases have to be judged without
their help. Using different re-masterings for a stereo SACD and CD layer to
prevent a comparison of the formats is an example of dodginess.

[drh8h]

Post by weary flake

Post by drh8h

Post by Gerard

Post by drh8h

Post by Invocation
在 2018年7月27日星期五 UTC-4下午8:21:34，LarryLap写道：

Post by LarryLap
I have the complete Szell box on order at bullmoose.com, but in the
meantime I have been listening to those of the individual disks that
have appeared on Napster.com and Amazon.com. If you have not heard
them, you really must. The seemingly intractable defects that have
plagued those recordings through decades of format changes and
remasterings seem at last to have been overcome. For example, I have
both the Sony Original Jacket Collection of the Beethoven Symphonies,
and the version of the same recordings in the Korean "Szell Edition"
box. Though both are markedly superior to the Essential Classics
edition, they pale before the remasterings in the new box. The papery
quality of the violins'upper partials has vanished, as has the
glutinous, monochrome tone of the 'cellos and violas. In their place,
warmth and color. What was suavity and discipline is now passion and
humane expressivity. I just listened to the Pastoral Symphony, and, as
you may have been able to detect, can hardly contain my excitement.
LAL

A large protion of the new Szell Edition uses new remastering at 24-96
and Sony also issue those HD format digital files as separate albums
online. If someone believes 24-96 makes difference from 16-44 CD audio,
this is a good way to get broke...

I don't know. For listening purposes it seems proven Red Book is more
than enough for anyone, but the SACD layer still always sounds better.
I don't want to be cynical and say that is intentional, but then how
could they sell those or HD files or BluRay otherwise?
DH

Marketing, advertising, "now with Lanolin" as M.B. Tepper used to say.

He probably still does! But remastering techniques have advanced so
much that even 24/96 masterings from ten or fifteen years ago can sound
dull--by comparison.

Noise Reduction was more popular fifteen years ago, thus the dull sound. Take
the best recording in the world, add noise reductiom, and produce a dull
sound; go back to the same recording before it was processed and it will sound
amazing.

Post by drh8h
And the 24/192 masterings, mostly at least originally for the Asian
market, have raised the bar higher. But I still wonder if comparable
sound could not be replicated for the listener on a Red Book CD. I just
think the layers do not have exactly the same mastering. If someone can
show evidence to the contrary, I will happily accept it.

Engineers are a dodgy bunch, so their releases have to be judged without
their help. Using different re-masterings for a stereo SACD and CD layer to
prevent a comparison of the formats is an example of dodginess.

I think noise reduction, like everything, has greatly improved. Also, engineers have gotten the message to use with extreme care. Below a certain threshold, the mind seems to make the noise part of the music and enhances the sound. Even with dither, many early digital recordings sound dull to me. I think it is the lack of mild audible noise, which is processed by us as ambience and brightness.

DH

[weary flake]

Post by drh8h

Post by weary flake

Post by Gerard

Post by Invocation
在 2018年7月27日星期五 UTC-4下午8:21:34，LarryLap写道：

I have the complete Szell box on order at bullmoose.com, but in the>

Post by drh8h

Post by Invocation

Post by LarryLap
meantime I have been listening to those of the individual disks

that> >>>>> have appeared on Napster.com and Amazon.com. If you have
not heard> >>>>> them, you really must. The seemingly intractable
defects that have> >>>>> plagued those recordings through decades of
format changes and> >>>>> remasterings seem at last to have been
overcome. For example, I have> >>>>> both the Sony Original Jacket
Collection of the Beethoven Symphonies,> >>>>> and the version of the
same recordings in the Korean "Szell Edition"> >>>>> box. Though both
are markedly superior to the Essential Classics> >>>>> edition, they
pale before the remasterings in the new box. The papery> >>>>> quality
of the violins'upper partials has vanished, as has the> >>>>>
glutinous, monochrome tone of the 'cellos and violas. In their place,>

Post by drh8h

Post by Invocation

Post by LarryLap
warmth and color. What was suavity and discipline is now passion

and> >>>>> humane expressivity. I just listened to the Pastoral
Symphony, and, as> >>>>> you may have been able to detect, can hardly
contain my excitement.
LAL

A large protion of the new Szell Edition uses new remastering at 24-96>

Post by drh8h

Post by Invocation
and Sony also issue those HD format digital files as separate

albums> >>>> online. If someone believes 24-96 makes difference from
16-44 CD audio,> >>>> this is a good way to get broke...

I don't know. For listening purposes it seems proven Red Book is more>

Post by Invocation

Post by drh8h
than enough for anyone, but the SACD layer still always sounds

better.> >>> I don't want to be cynical and say that is intentional,
but then how> >>> could they sell those or HD files or BluRay otherwise?
DH

Marketing, advertising, "now with Lanolin" as M.B. Tepper used to say.

He probably still does! But remastering techniques have advanced so> >
much that even 24/96 masterings from ten or fifteen years ago can
sound> > dull--by comparison.

Noise Reduction was more popular fifteen years ago, thus the dull sound. Take
the best recording in the world, add noise reductiom, and produce a dull
sound; go back to the same recording before it was processed and it will sound
amazing.

And the 24/192 masterings, mostly at least originally for the Asian> >
market, have raised the bar higher. But I still wonder if comparable> >
sound could not be replicated for the listener on a Red Book CD. I
just> > think the layers do not have exactly the same mastering. If
someone can> > show evidence to the contrary, I will happily accept it.

Engineers are a dodgy bunch, so their releases have to be judged without
their help. Using different re-masterings for a stereo SACD and CD layer to
prevent a comparison of the formats is an example of dodginess.

I think noise reduction, like everything, has greatly improved. Also,
engineers have gotten the message to use with extreme care. Below a
certain threshold, the mind seems to make the noise part of the music
and enhances the sound. Even with dither, many early digital recordings
sound dull to me. I think it is the lack of mild audible noise, which
is processed by us as ambience and brightness.

I associate noise reduction with noisy distorted sound; Richter's BMG-Molidya
issue form 1995 of Russian Piano School 6 is a good example: it is distorted
throughout by NoNOISE and the end of the Ballade has artificial silence between
the notes. Anyway, it's impossible for noise reduction software to distinguish
between ambience and noise, and so they still remove the orginal ambience and
replace it with artificial ambience; so software is better with synthesizing
ambience but the noise reduction step itself hasn't yet achieved the
impossible,
despite what the unscrupulous software industry says.

[n***@gmail.com]

Post by drh8h
I don't know. For listening purposes it seems proven Red Book is more than enough for anyone, but the SACD layer still always sounds better. I don't want to be cynical and say that is intentional, but then how could they sell those or HD files or BluRay otherwise?

The same way you sell a 0.5 Meter $2000. power cord: http://www.audioadvisor.com/prodinfo.asp?number=CRCLBEXPC

Post by drh8h
DH

[drh8h]

Post by n***@gmail.com

Post by drh8h
I don't know. For listening purposes it seems proven Red Book is more than enough for anyone, but the SACD layer still always sounds better. I don't want to be cynical and say that is intentional, but then how could they sell those or HD files or BluRay otherwise?

The same way you sell a 0.5 Meter $2000. power cord: http://www.audioadvisor.com/prodinfo.asp?number=CRCLBEXPC

Post by drh8h
DH

I have long been tempted to patch the audio output of an SACD to my handheld digital recorder at 16/44.1 and see if there is any noticeable difference in sound except a tiny increase in noise. The problem is I find it very, very hard to detect any but gross differences in sound even if I am rapidly switching between sources. Years ago, when I had very slow download speeds, I had no choice but to accept mp3 downloads of some Argo/L'Oiseau records. Later, I bought CD-quality versions of a few favorites from Presto Classical. Different yes, but superior? It was not clear cut. Worth the extra $ to get the "better" sound? Probably not. My hearing has been tested. It is fine, BTW.

DH

DH

[Thornhill]

Post by drh8h

Post by n***@gmail.com

Post by drh8h
I don't know. For listening purposes it seems proven Red Book is more than enough for anyone, but the SACD layer still always sounds better. I don't want to be cynical and say that is intentional, but then how could they sell those or HD files or BluRay otherwise?

The same way you sell a 0.5 Meter $2000. power cord: http://www.audioadvisor.com/prodinfo.asp?number=CRCLBEXPC

Post by drh8h
DH

I have long been tempted to patch the audio output of an SACD to my handheld digital recorder at 16/44.1 and see if there is any noticeable difference in sound except a tiny increase in noise. The problem is I find it very, very hard to detect any but gross differences in sound even if I am rapidly switching between sources. Years ago, when I had very slow download speeds, I had no choice but to accept mp3 downloads of some Argo/L'Oiseau records. Later, I bought CD-quality versions of a few favorites from Presto Classical. Different yes, but superior? It was not clear cut. Worth the extra $ to get the "better" sound? Probably not. My hearing has been tested. It is fine, BTW.

There are a few variables that you're not taking into account:

How is the audio from your SACD player getting to your receiver? Are you bit streaming the DSD signal over HDMI, is the SACD player converting the signal to hi-rez PCM and sending it over HDMI, or are you outputting over analog cables where the SACD player is converting to 16/44 PCM?

If the SACD player is converting the signal to 16/44, then it makes sense why you're not hearing a difference. And if it's converting to hi-rez PCM, I wouldn't really trust a DAC in a SACD player to do that well.

[drh8h]

Post by Thornhill

Post by drh8h

Post by n***@gmail.com

Post by drh8h
I don't know. For listening purposes it seems proven Red Book is more than enough for anyone, but the SACD layer still always sounds better. I don't want to be cynical and say that is intentional, but then how could they sell those or HD files or BluRay otherwise?

The same way you sell a 0.5 Meter $2000. power cord: http://www.audioadvisor.com/prodinfo.asp?number=CRCLBEXPC

Post by drh8h
DH

I have long been tempted to patch the audio output of an SACD to my handheld digital recorder at 16/44.1 and see if there is any noticeable difference in sound except a tiny increase in noise. The problem is I find it very, very hard to detect any but gross differences in sound even if I am rapidly switching between sources. Years ago, when I had very slow download speeds, I had no choice but to accept mp3 downloads of some Argo/L'Oiseau records. Later, I bought CD-quality versions of a few favorites from Presto Classical. Different yes, but superior? It was not clear cut. Worth the extra $ to get the "better" sound? Probably not. My hearing has been tested. It is fine, BTW.

How is the audio from your SACD player getting to your receiver? Are you bit streaming the DSD signal over HDMI, is the SACD player converting the signal to hi-rez PCM and sending it over HDMI, or are you outputting over analog cables where the SACD player is converting to 16/44 PCM?
If the SACD player is converting the signal to 16/44, then it makes sense why you're not hearing a difference. And if it's converting to hi-rez PCM, I wouldn't really trust a DAC in a SACD player to do that well.

Not really the point. I am questioning why the SACD sounds dramatically so much better when an ordinary CD layer should be able to provide a resolution far above normal human hearing. At best it really should be an incremental improvement most people could not detect. I wish I had the citation around, but there was an experiment along these lines, and the results suggested only a few people could really hear the difference.

[Thornhill]

Post by drh8h

Post by Thornhill

Post by drh8h

Post by n***@gmail.com

Post by drh8h
I don't know. For listening purposes it seems proven Red Book is more than enough for anyone, but the SACD layer still always sounds better. I don't want to be cynical and say that is intentional, but then how could they sell those or HD files or BluRay otherwise?

The same way you sell a 0.5 Meter $2000. power cord: http://www.audioadvisor.com/prodinfo.asp?number=CRCLBEXPC

Post by drh8h
DH

I have long been tempted to patch the audio output of an SACD to my handheld digital recorder at 16/44.1 and see if there is any noticeable difference in sound except a tiny increase in noise. The problem is I find it very, very hard to detect any but gross differences in sound even if I am rapidly switching between sources. Years ago, when I had very slow download speeds, I had no choice but to accept mp3 downloads of some Argo/L'Oiseau records. Later, I bought CD-quality versions of a few favorites from Presto Classical. Different yes, but superior? It was not clear cut. Worth the extra $ to get the "better" sound? Probably not. My hearing has been tested. It is fine, BTW.

How is the audio from your SACD player getting to your receiver? Are you bit streaming the DSD signal over HDMI, is the SACD player converting the signal to hi-rez PCM and sending it over HDMI, or are you outputting over analog cables where the SACD player is converting to 16/44 PCM?
If the SACD player is converting the signal to 16/44, then it makes sense why you're not hearing a difference. And if it's converting to hi-rez PCM, I wouldn't really trust a DAC in a SACD player to do that well.

Not really the point. I am questioning why the SACD sounds dramatically so much better when an ordinary CD layer should be able to provide a resolution far above normal human hearing. At best it really should be an incremental improvement most people could not detect. I wish I had the citation around, but there was an experiment along these lines, and the results suggested only a few people could really hear the difference.

No, that is the point.

Everyone has different equipment that can affect the output of sound. If the DSD signal is never even making it to your receiver — because the SACD player is down converting it — than you cannot even conduct an A/B test.

The SACD test you cited was flawed because it did not first screen for people whose hearing had not degraded because of age, as well as those who could hear the difference if they knew what to look for.

[drh8h]

Post by Thornhill

Post by drh8h

Post by Thornhill

Post by drh8h

Post by n***@gmail.com

Post by drh8h
I don't know. For listening purposes it seems proven Red Book is more than enough for anyone, but the SACD layer still always sounds better. I don't want to be cynical and say that is intentional, but then how could they sell those or HD files or BluRay otherwise?

The same way you sell a 0.5 Meter $2000. power cord: http://www.audioadvisor.com/prodinfo.asp?number=CRCLBEXPC

Post by drh8h
DH

I have long been tempted to patch the audio output of an SACD to my handheld digital recorder at 16/44.1 and see if there is any noticeable difference in sound except a tiny increase in noise. The problem is I find it very, very hard to detect any but gross differences in sound even if I am rapidly switching between sources. Years ago, when I had very slow download speeds, I had no choice but to accept mp3 downloads of some Argo/L'Oiseau records. Later, I bought CD-quality versions of a few favorites from Presto Classical. Different yes, but superior? It was not clear cut. Worth the extra $ to get the "better" sound? Probably not. My hearing has been tested. It is fine, BTW.

How is the audio from your SACD player getting to your receiver? Are you bit streaming the DSD signal over HDMI, is the SACD player converting the signal to hi-rez PCM and sending it over HDMI, or are you outputting over analog cables where the SACD player is converting to 16/44 PCM?
If the SACD player is converting the signal to 16/44, then it makes sense why you're not hearing a difference. And if it's converting to hi-rez PCM, I wouldn't really trust a DAC in a SACD player to do that well.

Not really the point. I am questioning why the SACD sounds dramatically so much better when an ordinary CD layer should be able to provide a resolution far above normal human hearing. At best it really should be an incremental improvement most people could not detect. I wish I had the citation around, but there was an experiment along these lines, and the results suggested only a few people could really hear the difference.

No, that is the point.
Everyone has different equipment that can affect the output of sound. If the DSD signal is never even making it to your receiver — because the SACD player is down converting it — than you cannot even conduct an A/B test.
The SACD test you cited was flawed because it did not first screen for people whose hearing had not degraded because of age, as well as those who could hear the difference if they knew what to look for.

So you are saying some SACD players convert the signal down to Red Book? Wouldn't that defeat the purpose? I sure paid enough for the unit to expect more than that. But in any case, the SACD layer still sounds better. I am wondering why it does if all that resolution is largely wasted for listening purposes, not editing or mastering.

DH

[Thornhill]

Post by drh8h

Post by Thornhill

Post by drh8h

Post by Thornhill

Post by drh8h

Post by n***@gmail.com

Post by drh8h
I don't know. For listening purposes it seems proven Red Book is more than enough for anyone, but the SACD layer still always sounds better. I don't want to be cynical and say that is intentional, but then how could they sell those or HD files or BluRay otherwise?

The same way you sell a 0.5 Meter $2000. power cord: http://www.audioadvisor.com/prodinfo.asp?number=CRCLBEXPC

Post by drh8h
DH

I have long been tempted to patch the audio output of an SACD to my handheld digital recorder at 16/44.1 and see if there is any noticeable difference in sound except a tiny increase in noise. The problem is I find it very, very hard to detect any but gross differences in sound even if I am rapidly switching between sources. Years ago, when I had very slow download speeds, I had no choice but to accept mp3 downloads of some Argo/L'Oiseau records. Later, I bought CD-quality versions of a few favorites from Presto Classical. Different yes, but superior? It was not clear cut. Worth the extra $ to get the "better" sound? Probably not. My hearing has been tested. It is fine, BTW.

How is the audio from your SACD player getting to your receiver? Are you bit streaming the DSD signal over HDMI, is the SACD player converting the signal to hi-rez PCM and sending it over HDMI, or are you outputting over analog cables where the SACD player is converting to 16/44 PCM?
If the SACD player is converting the signal to 16/44, then it makes sense why you're not hearing a difference. And if it's converting to hi-rez PCM, I wouldn't really trust a DAC in a SACD player to do that well.

Not really the point. I am questioning why the SACD sounds dramatically so much better when an ordinary CD layer should be able to provide a resolution far above normal human hearing. At best it really should be an incremental improvement most people could not detect. I wish I had the citation around, but there was an experiment along these lines, and the results suggested only a few people could really hear the difference.

No, that is the point.
Everyone has different equipment that can affect the output of sound. If the DSD signal is never even making it to your receiver — because the SACD player is down converting it — than you cannot even conduct an A/B test.
The SACD test you cited was flawed because it did not first screen for people whose hearing had not degraded because of age, as well as those who could hear the difference if they knew what to look for.

So you are saying some SACD players convert the signal down to Red Book? Wouldn't that defeat the purpose? I sure paid enough for the unit to expect more than that. But in any case, the SACD layer still sounds better. I am wondering why it does if all that resolution is largely wasted for listening purposes, not editing or mastering.
DH

Yes, and it depends on how you're connecting the SACD player to your receiver.

Not all SACD players bitstream DSD over HDMI. Some will convert to PCM. Not all receivers can accept a DSD signal; even if your SACD player can bitstream DSD you may still have to have it convert the signal before output.

If you're connecting you SACD player to your receiver with analog cables then the SACD player is making the digital to analog conversion.

HDMI didn't support DSD until 2006, and due to piracy fears there weren't many SACD players with HDMI out until ~2010. So in the early days everyone's SACD players were making the conversation from DSD to analog — the joke was kind of on us.

Now obviously the signal is going to get converted to analog at some point, but the DAC in your receiver is going to do a better job than the one in your SACD player. When I switched from a SACD player that connected to my receiver via analog to one that bit streamed DSD over HDMI, the sound was noticeably better (more presence) and the receiver did a much better job with the bass management.

[Ed Romans]

Post by Thornhill
Now obviously the signal is going to get converted to analog at some point, but the DAC in your receiver is going to do a better job than the one in your SACD player. When I switched from a SACD player that connected to my receiver via analog to one that bit streamed DSD over HDMI, the sound was noticeably better (more presence) and the receiver did a much better job with the bass management.

Why do you say the DAC in a receiver would necessarily do a better job than one in an SACD player? Most DACs are more than adequate. In your experiment you are likely to have slightly different analogue output levels after the different DACs which makes it hard to compare even if you are able to rapidly switch between them.

Ed

[drh8h]

Post by Ed Romans

Post by Thornhill
Now obviously the signal is going to get converted to analog at some point, but the DAC in your receiver is going to do a better job than the one in your SACD player. When I switched from a SACD player that connected to my receiver via analog to one that bit streamed DSD over HDMI, the sound was noticeably better (more presence) and the receiver did a much better job with the bass management.

Why do you say the DAC in a receiver would necessarily do a better job than one in an SACD player? Most DACs are more than adequate. In your experiment you are likely to have slightly different analogue output levels after the different DACs which makes it hard to compare even if you are able to rapidly switch between them.
Ed

I guess I am not making myself very clear on the question.

Put it this way, comparing SACD vs. CD layers of remastered analogue recordings, if the CD were simply a downsampled version of the higher resolution (2-channel) file , I would expect maybe a small, but very subtle difference. Instead, the differences are usually dramatic--a softening of "hardness" as some might call it, much greater space and ambience, and maybe occasionally slightly greater dynamic range, although I haven't often noticed that. Instead, they sound sometimes like totally different masterings--the CD layer like an edited but unprocessed straight high quality transfer, and the SACD with something "added." I simply don't believe greater resolution than 16/44 would make that much difference. Of course, it *has* to make a difference or they couldn't sell the product. I suspect in Szell's case the "defects" of previous transfers reflected the inherent limitations of the recordings. The wonderful sound of the SACDs (I have the LvB cycle and overtures) is due to high-resolution editing and could be achieved on the CD layer, but for marketing purposes just plain isn't. If you want to know what they really sound like and sounded like when the masters were heard in the 60s, I bet the CD layer tells you. That is my point. For listening, higher resolution is a luxury, but you can get the same for far fewer bytes.

DH

[Ed Romans]

Post by drh8h
I guess I am not making myself very clear on the question.
Put it this way, comparing SACD vs. CD layers of remastered analogue >recordings, if the CD were simply a downsampled version of the higher >resolution (2-channel) file , I would expect maybe a small, but very subtle >difference. Instead, the differences are usually dramatic--a softening of >"hardness" as some might call it, much greater space and ambience

How have you eliminated unconscious bias from your observation of the differences? It seems to me record companies more rely on this to sell HD files, rather than deliberately sabotaging the 16/44.1 versions produced at the same time. The Mercury Living Presence SACDs were well known examples where an earlier CD mix was retained (and publicised as such), but I can't believe that reputable recording engineers these days try and make the CD layer sound worse. Much of this remastering work these days is done by third party firms who have their own professional reputation to think about.

Ed

Ed

[drh8h]

Post by Ed Romans

Post by drh8h
I guess I am not making myself very clear on the question.
Put it this way, comparing SACD vs. CD layers of remastered analogue >recordings, if the CD were simply a downsampled version of the higher >resolution (2-channel) file , I would expect maybe a small, but very subtle >difference. Instead, the differences are usually dramatic--a softening of >"hardness" as some might call it, much greater space and ambience

How have you eliminated unconscious bias from your observation of the differences? It seems to me record companies more rely on this to sell HD files, rather than deliberately sabotaging the 16/44.1 versions produced at the same time. The Mercury Living Presence SACDs were well known examples where an earlier CD mix was retained (and publicised as such), but I can't believe that reputable recording engineers these days try and make the CD layer sound worse. Much of this remastering work these days is done by third party firms who have their own professional reputation to think about.
Ed
Ed

I am not suggesting they make it "worse." In fact, my suspicion is that the CD layer is probably closer to the original tape. But I always prefer the SACD layer. The DAC in the player has nothing to do with it. SACD playback is always better, and I have had two players, neither in the bargain category. I suspect this is true with the cheapest player. My question is: why do I prefer the higher resolution version, even though the medium is not inherently superior for listening?

[Invocation]

在 2018年7月30日星期一 UTC-4上午11:11:54，drh8h写道：

Post by drh8h

Post by Ed Romans

Post by drh8h
I guess I am not making myself very clear on the question.
Put it this way, comparing SACD vs. CD layers of remastered analogue >recordings, if the CD were simply a downsampled version of the higher >resolution (2-channel) file , I would expect maybe a small, but very subtle >difference. Instead, the differences are usually dramatic--a softening of >"hardness" as some might call it, much greater space and ambience

How have you eliminated unconscious bias from your observation of the differences? It seems to me record companies more rely on this to sell HD files, rather than deliberately sabotaging the 16/44.1 versions produced at the same time. The Mercury Living Presence SACDs were well known examples where an earlier CD mix was retained (and publicised as such), but I can't believe that reputable recording engineers these days try and make the CD layer sound worse. Much of this remastering work these days is done by third party firms who have their own professional reputation to think about.
Ed
Ed

I am not suggesting they make it "worse." In fact, my suspicion is that the CD layer is probably closer to the original tape. But I always prefer the SACD layer. The DAC in the player has nothing to do with it. SACD playback is always better, and I have had two players, neither in the bargain category. I suspect this is true with the cheapest player. My question is: why do I prefer the higher resolution version, even though the medium is not inherently superior for listening?

I guess the easiest way to test for yourself is that rip a SACD into iso if you can, or to find whether the SACD you feel makes a difference to your ear has an iso shared somewhere online already (you actually can find iso of many Japanese SACDs online), and then convert that iso into 16-44, and do an A-B test by yourself. This will tell you whether the differece between the SACD layer and the CD layer, if there is one, is caused by different transfers were used, or a higher resolution is offered in the SACD version. Otherwise, I think it is not easy to answer your qeuestion, because you ask "why do I prefer..." and this can be subjective to each individual's ears and listening taste.

[j***@gmail.com]

Apparently, the Szell megabox has been expanded to 112 discs from 106. To include live Salzberg performances.

[Frank Berger]

Post by j***@gmail.com
Apparently, the Szell megabox has been expanded to 112 discs from 106. To include live Salzberg performances.

I thought I would try to look this up before asking, so I did. I
couldn't find any source for this. Can you provide one?

[s***@gmail.com]

https://www.europadisc.co.uk/classical/138579/George_Szell:_The_Complete_Columbia_Album_Collection.htm

[Frank Berger]

Post by s***@gmail.com
https://www.europadisc.co.uk/classical/138579/George_Szell:_The_Complete_Columbia_Album_Collection.htm

Wel, this listing confirms that there are 112 CDs and includes (some of)
the Salzbug recordings: Bruckner 3 & 7 and Mozart chamber music.
Unless this is old and they decided to remove the Salzburg material. I
guess we'll find out in 10 days or so.

[s***@gmail.com]

I think the expansion to 112 is new, I've been watching this thing like a hawk and the Europadisk listing just showed up in the last few days. To add confusion, Presto Classical has it both ways on their listing for it! Goodness!

[Frank Berger]

Post by s***@gmail.com
I think the expansion to 112 is new, I've been watching this thing like a hawk and the Europadisk listing just showed up in the last few days. To add confusion, Presto Classical has it both ways on their listing for it! Goodness!

Well, I ordered it last week for about $165 from Target. My luck,
they'll press some 106 CD versions and I'll get one of those.

[Randy Lane]

Hmmm - Another Haydn?

Haydn - Symphony no.4 in A major, op.90 "Italian"

[Randy Lane]

I wonder which version I will get with mynpre order from Barnes and Noble for $107?

[Frank Berger]

Post by Randy Lane
I wonder which version I will get with mynpre order from Barnes and Noble for $107?

$107! Well done. Did you have a coupon or something?

[Randy Lane]

All CDs were 50% off 07/20 - 07/23. Not well advertised though. I posted here after I found out about it Sunday and got back home from rushing around to different stores placing special orders.

[Frank Berger]

Post by Randy Lane
All CDs were 50% off 07/20 - 07/23. Not well advertised though. I posted here after I found out about it Sunday and got back home from rushing around to different stores placing special orders.

Oh yes. I remember now.

[Mark Zimmer]

Post by Frank Berger

Post by s***@gmail.com
I think the expansion to 112 is new, I've been watching this thing like a hawk and the Europadisk listing just showed up in the last few days. To add confusion, Presto Classical has it both ways on their listing for it! Goodness!

Well, I ordered it last week for about $165 from Target. My luck,
they'll press some 106 CD versions and I'll get one of those.

I got notification from Target that my box shipped yesterday so I'll find out soon what it is that they have.

[drh8h]

Post by Mark Zimmer

Post by Frank Berger

Post by s***@gmail.com
I think the expansion to 112 is new, I've been watching this thing like a hawk and the Europadisk listing just showed up in the last few days. To add confusion, Presto Classical has it both ways on their listing for it! Goodness!

Well, I ordered it last week for about $165 from Target. My luck,
they'll press some 106 CD versions and I'll get one of those.

I got notification from Target that my box shipped yesterday so I'll find out soon what it is that they have.

The Szell box? It's issue date is next week. Strange.

[s***@gmail.com]

And I just received confirmation from Sony Classical that the box is indeed 106 discs, not the expanded 112. So no Salzburg and Szigeti, and the original list is the correct one. (From the Sony Classical Facebook page).

[drh8h]

Post by s***@gmail.com
And I just received confirmation from Sony Classical that the box is indeed 106 discs, not the expanded 112. So no Salzburg and Szigeti, and the original list is the correct one. (From the Sony Classical Facebook page).

Why would Szigeti be out? Aren't they just recreating the contents of the original lp? Which, btw bought for a small fortune (for me).

[s***@gmail.com]

The 2 Szigeti/Szell Mozart piano/violin sonatas are not going to be included, as I believe they are owned by Vanguard (and are available on that label) even though they were issued by Columbia on lp at some point, or originally.

[drh8h]

Post by s***@gmail.com
The 2 Szigeti/Szell Mozart piano/violin sonatas are not going to be included, as I believe they are owned by Vanguard (and are available on that label) even though they were issued by Columbia on lp at some point, or originally.

These are Handel and Tartini performances. There is no reason they should not be included. The Mozart Sonatas and Bach Partitas and Sonatas were sold to Vanguard and never issued by Columbia, except for the one record of Mozart with Szell. The only CD issue of these "new" performances was on Biddulph, likely mastered from commercial lps. What we really need from Sony is a Szigeti remastered collection with all of his recordings for the American label, 78 and LP, that they still own or control.

DH

[s***@gmail.com]

The Szigeti Handel/Tartini are contained on disc 9 of the upcoming Szell box.

[drh8h]

Post by s***@gmail.com
The Szigeti Handel/Tartini are contained on disc 9 of the upcoming Szell box.

Someone said "no Szigeti" and that didn't ring true to me. If you have ever heard the "Thurber Carnival" sketch, we shall call it, in which he is writing letters to his publisher and with each crossing of mail and answers every party involved becomes more and more confused and flustered--that's what these forums can be like!

DH

[s***@gmail.com]

Sorry, yes that was me, I should have said no "additional" Szigeti (the 2 Szigeti/Szell Mozart sonatas) just the contents of the disc 9 in the upcoming Sony Szell box, Bach, Tartini, Handel, etc. Hope that is slightly more clear!

[drh8h]

Post by s***@gmail.com
Sorry, yes that was me, I should have said no "additional" Szigeti (the 2 Szigeti/Szell Mozart sonatas) just the contents of the disc 9 in the upcoming Sony Szell box, Bach, Tartini, Handel, etc. Hope that is slightly more clear!

If you knew what I paid for that record years ago, you might shed a tear!

DH

[Bob Harper]

Post by Mark Zimmer

Post by Frank Berger

Post by s***@gmail.com
I think the expansion to 112 is new, I've been watching this thing like a hawk and the Europadisk listing just showed up in the last few days. To add confusion, Presto Classical has it both ways on their listing for it! Goodness!

Well, I ordered it last week for about $165 from Target. My luck,
they'll press some 106 CD versions and I'll get one of those.

I got notification from Target that my box shipped yesterday so I'll find out soon what it is that they have.

This site shows 112 discs:

http://www.sonymusic.pl/albumy/george-szell-the-complete-album-collection

The difference appears to be the discs recorded in Europe with other
orchestras (VPO, Czech Phil), and which appeared on Sony a number of
years ago, plus the Szigeti Mozart Violin Sonatas.

The lists appear to match through Disc 103, but differences and appear
thereafter:

Sony US:
DISC 104: Mozart: Piano Quartets Nos. 1 & 2 I Budapest String Quartet

DISC 105: Mozart: Violin Sonatas K 296, 301, 304 & 376 I Druian

DISC 106: Christmas Melodies & Interviews


Sony Poland:
DISC 104:
Mozart: Piano Concerto No. 9 in E-Flat major, K. 271
Mozart: Symphony No. 41 in C major, K.551 “Jupiter”
DISC 105:
Mozart: Symphonie No. 35 in D Major, K. 385, “Haffner”
Mozart: Violin Concerto No. 5 in A Major, K. 219
Haydn: Symphony in G Major, Hob. I:92, “Oxford”
DISC 106:
Beethoven: “Egmont” Overture, Op. 84
Beethoven: Symphony No. 3 in E-Flat Major, Op. 55 “Eroica”
DISC 107:
Bruckner: Symphony No. 3 in D Minor, WAB 103
DISC 108:
Bruckner: Symphony No. 7 in E Major, WAB 107
DISC 109:
Mozart: Piano Quartet in G Minor, K. 478 (George Szell, piano)
Mozart: Piano Quartet in E-Flat Major, K. 493 (George Szell, piano)
DISC 110:
Mozart: Violin Sonata in E-Flat Major, K 481 (Joseph Szigeti, violin;
George Szell, piano)
Mozart: Violin Sonata in B-Flat Major, K. 454 (Joseph Szigeti, violin;
George Szell, piano)
DISC 111:
Mozart: Sonata No. 7 in F Major for Piano and Violin, K. 376 (Rafael
Druian, violin; George Szell, piano)
Mozart: Violin Sonata in G Major, K.301/293a (Rafael Druian, violin;
George Szell, piano)
Mozart: Violin Sonata in E Minor, K. 304/300c (Rafael Druian, violin;
George Szell, piano)
Mozart: Violin Sonata in C Major, K. 296 (Rafael Druian, violin; George
Szell, piano)
DISC 112:
Deck the Halls with Boughs of Holly
Joy to the World
Pat-a-pan
George Szell talks with Columbia Records Producer Paul Myers about
Music, Musicians and his Life as Conductor
George Szell Speaks
George Szell in Interview, Winter 1964/65
George Szell in Interview, Summer 1966
George Szell in Interview, Autumn 1966
George Szell in Interview, Spring 1967

Bob Harper

[drh8h]

Post by Bob Harper

Post by Mark Zimmer

Post by Frank Berger

Post by s***@gmail.com
I think the expansion to 112 is new, I've been watching this thing like a hawk and the Europadisk listing just showed up in the last few days. To add confusion, Presto Classical has it both ways on their listing for it! Goodness!

Well, I ordered it last week for about $165 from Target. My luck,
they'll press some 106 CD versions and I'll get one of those.

I got notification from Target that my box shipped yesterday so I'll find out soon what it is that they have.

http://www.sonymusic.pl/albumy/george-szell-the-complete-album-collection
The difference appears to be the discs recorded in Europe with other
orchestras (VPO, Czech Phil), and which appeared on Sony a number of
years ago, plus the Szigeti Mozart Violin Sonatas.
The lists appear to match through Disc 103, but differences and appear
DISC 104: Mozart: Piano Quartets Nos. 1 & 2 I Budapest String Quartet
DISC 105: Mozart: Violin Sonatas K 296, 301, 304 & 376 I Druian
DISC 106: Christmas Melodies & Interviews
Mozart: Piano Concerto No. 9 in E-Flat major, K. 271
Mozart: Symphony No. 41 in C major, K.551 “Jupiter”
Mozart: Symphonie No. 35 in D Major, K. 385, “Haffner”
Mozart: Violin Concerto No. 5 in A Major, K. 219
Haydn: Symphony in G Major, Hob. I:92, “Oxford”
Beethoven: “Egmont” Overture, Op. 84
Beethoven: Symphony No. 3 in E-Flat Major, Op. 55 “Eroica”
Bruckner: Symphony No. 3 in D Minor, WAB 103
Bruckner: Symphony No. 7 in E Major, WAB 107
Mozart: Piano Quartet in G Minor, K. 478 (George Szell, piano)
Mozart: Piano Quartet in E-Flat Major, K. 493 (George Szell, piano)
Mozart: Violin Sonata in E-Flat Major, K 481 (Joseph Szigeti, violin;
George Szell, piano)
Mozart: Violin Sonata in B-Flat Major, K. 454 (Joseph Szigeti, violin;
George Szell, piano)
Mozart: Sonata No. 7 in F Major for Piano and Violin, K. 376 (Rafael
Druian, violin; George Szell, piano)
Mozart: Violin Sonata in G Major, K.301/293a (Rafael Druian, violin;
George Szell, piano)
Mozart: Violin Sonata in E Minor, K. 304/300c (Rafael Druian, violin;
George Szell, piano)
Mozart: Violin Sonata in C Major, K. 296 (Rafael Druian, violin; George
Szell, piano)
Deck the Halls with Boughs of Holly
Joy to the World
Pat-a-pan
George Szell talks with Columbia Records Producer Paul Myers about
Music, Musicians and his Life as Conductor
George Szell Speaks
George Szell in Interview, Winter 1964/65
George Szell in Interview, Summer 1966
George Szell in Interview, Autumn 1966
George Szell in Interview, Spring 1967
Bob Harper

I magnified the picture on Amazon but I can't count how many discs are in that box! Guess we will all know soon. I suppose there could be different versions for different markets, based on licensing, but that seems like a stretch. If they couldn't get things for all markets, wouldn't they likely just leave them out?

DH

[Thornhill]

Post by Mark Zimmer

Post by Frank Berger

Post by s***@gmail.com
I think the expansion to 112 is new, I've been watching this thing like a hawk and the Europadisk listing just showed up in the last few days. To add confusion, Presto Classical has it both ways on their listing for it! Goodness!

Well, I ordered it last week for about $165 from Target. My luck,
they'll press some 106 CD versions and I'll get one of those.

I got notification from Target that my box shipped yesterday so I'll find out soon what it is that they have.

Did you receive it? My order from Target — placed July 3 — has been listed as backordered and not shipping until the middle of the month.

[Frank Berger]

Post by Thornhill

Post by Mark Zimmer

Post by Frank Berger

Post by s***@gmail.com
I think the expansion to 112 is new, I've been watching this thing like a hawk and the Europadisk listing just showed up in the last few days. To add confusion, Presto Classical has it both ways on their listing for it! Goodness!

Well, I ordered it last week for about $165 from Target. My luck,
they'll press some 106 CD versions and I'll get one of those.

I got notification from Target that my box shipped yesterday so I'll find out soon what it is that they have.

Did you receive it? My order from Target — placed July 3 — has been listed as backordered and not shipping until the middle of the month.

IT could easily be that "backordered" simply means the original release
data of August 10 hasn't yet been reached and the estimated ship date of
August 13-16 may not mean the release has been delayed either.

[Thornhill]

Post by Frank Berger

Post by Thornhill

Post by Mark Zimmer

Post by Frank Berger

Post by s***@gmail.com
I think the expansion to 112 is new, I've been watching this thing like a hawk and the Europadisk listing just showed up in the last few days. To add confusion, Presto Classical has it both ways on their listing for it! Goodness!

Well, I ordered it last week for about $165 from Target. My luck,
they'll press some 106 CD versions and I'll get one of those.

I got notification from Target that my box shipped yesterday so I'll find out soon what it is that they have.

Did you receive it? My order from Target — placed July 3 — has been listed as backordered and not shipping until the middle of the month.

IT could easily be that "backordered" simply means the original release
data of August 10 hasn't yet been reached and the estimated ship date of
August 13-16 may not mean the release has been delayed either.

Target's website no longer has it available for order. All you can do is sign up to be notified of when it's back in stock. I bet they didn't reserve enough inventory to cover the pre-sales — boxes like this probably aren't big sellers for them.

[Frank Berger]

Post by Thornhill

Post by Frank Berger

Post by Thornhill

Post by Mark Zimmer

Post by Frank Berger

Post by s***@gmail.com
I think the expansion to 112 is new, I've been watching this thing like a hawk and the Europadisk listing just showed up in the last few days. To add confusion, Presto Classical has it both ways on their listing for it! Goodness!

Well, I ordered it last week for about $165 from Target. My luck,
they'll press some 106 CD versions and I'll get one of those.

I got notification from Target that my box shipped yesterday so I'll find out soon what it is that they have.

Did you receive it? My order from Target — placed July 3 — has been listed as backordered and not shipping until the middle of the month.

IT could easily be that "backordered" simply means the original release
data of August 10 hasn't yet been reached and the estimated ship date of
August 13-16 may not mean the release has been delayed either.

Target's website no longer has it available for order. All you can do is sign up to be notified of when it's back in stock. I bet they didn't reserve enough inventory to cover the pre-sales — boxes like this probably aren't big sellers for them.

Reminds me of the old (Jewish) joke: Mrs. Schwartz goes to the butcher
and wants lamb chops. He tells her they are $30/lb. "$30," exclaims
Mrs. Schwartz, "Abramowitz across the street has them for $20/lb." "So
go buy them by Abramowitz," says the butcher. "Ambramowitz is out of
stock," says Mrs. Schwartz. The butcher says, "If I was out of stock I
would also sell them for $20." (Yiddish inflection mandatory).

Why this is a Jewish joke, I don't know.

[drh8h]

Post by Frank Berger

Post by Thornhill

Post by Mark Zimmer

Post by Frank Berger

Post by s***@gmail.com
I think the expansion to 112 is new, I've been watching this thing like a hawk and the Europadisk listing just showed up in the last few days. To add confusion, Presto Classical has it both ways on their listing for it! Goodness!

Well, I ordered it last week for about $165 from Target. My luck,
they'll press some 106 CD versions and I'll get one of those.

I got notification from Target that my box shipped yesterday so I'll find out soon what it is that they have.

Did you receive it? My order from Target — placed July 3 — has been listed as backordered and not shipping until the middle of the month.

IT could easily be that "backordered" simply means the original release
data of August 10 hasn't yet been reached and the estimated ship date of
August 13-16 may not mean the release has been delayed either.

Amazon still says I am going to get it Friday. I will believe it when I see a shipment confirmation. Guess I should plan on not going anywhere for about a week.

DH

[Paul]

Target just cancelled my order without explanation. LOL.

[Mark Obert-Thorn]

I just got an e-mail from Target saying my order has been cancelled because "the item became unavailable after you placed your order." I see that I can re-order it at their price of $158.69, but I don't know if that order will meet the same fate.

Has anyone who got an e-mail from Target saying that their set has shipped actually received it yet?

Mark O-T

[Mark Obert-Thorn]

Further update: I tried to re-order, and Target's website would not let me.

MO-T

[Mike]

Post by Mark Obert-Thorn
I just got an e-mail from Target saying my order has been cancelled because "the item became unavailable after you placed your order." I see that I can re-order it at their price of $158.69, but I don't know if that order will meet the same fate.
Has anyone who got an e-mail from Target saying that their set has shipped actually received it yet?
Mark O-T

When did you order? I placed mine on July 11.

[Mark Zimmer]

Post by Thornhill

Post by Mark Zimmer

Post by Frank Berger

Post by s***@gmail.com
I think the expansion to 112 is new, I've been watching this thing like a hawk and the Europadisk listing just showed up in the last few days. To add confusion, Presto Classical has it both ways on their listing for it! Goodness!

Well, I ordered it last week for about $165 from Target. My luck,
they'll press some 106 CD versions and I'll get one of those.

I got notification from Target that my box shipped yesterday so I'll find out soon what it is that they have.

Did you receive it? My order from Target — placed July 3 — has been listed as backordered and not shipping until the middle of the month.

No, nothing yet. :( No tracking provided either, so who knows where it is, or where they shipped it from.

[Thornhill]

Post by Frank Berger

Post by s***@gmail.com
I think the expansion to 112 is new, I've been watching this thing like a hawk and the Europadisk listing just showed up in the last few days. To add confusion, Presto Classical has it both ways on their listing for it! Goodness!

Well, I ordered it last week for about $165 from Target. My luck,
they'll press some 106 CD versions and I'll get one of those.

I'd be shocked if there were two versions.

Websites listing it as having 116 discs are using the same catalogue number as those listing 106 discs.

I think Sony was just slow to provide new information. Or, the set was originally going to have those live recordings and they were later removed.

[drh8h]

Post by Thornhill

Post by Frank Berger

Post by s***@gmail.com
I think the expansion to 112 is new, I've been watching this thing like a hawk and the Europadisk listing just showed up in the last few days. To add confusion, Presto Classical has it both ways on their listing for it! Goodness!

Well, I ordered it last week for about $165 from Target. My luck,
they'll press some 106 CD versions and I'll get one of those.

I'd be shocked if there were two versions.
Websites listing it as having 116 discs are using the same catalogue number as those listing 106 discs.
I think Sony was just slow to provide new information. Or, the set was originally going to have those live recordings and they were later removed.

I have asked this question before, but never received an answer. Just how long does it take from conception to market for one of these mega boxes? Very hard for me to believe they could make any but the most minor changes, with a flyleaf of errata stuck in, to a set once it was past the "drawing board" phase. I'm not sure Sony has the rights on those Salzburg performances. Don't they belong to Orfeo now?

DH

[Mark Zimmer]

Post by drh8h

Post by Thornhill

Post by Frank Berger

Post by s***@gmail.com
I think the expansion to 112 is new, I've been watching this thing like a hawk and the Europadisk listing just showed up in the last few days. To add confusion, Presto Classical has it both ways on their listing for it! Goodness!

Well, I ordered it last week for about $165 from Target. My luck,
they'll press some 106 CD versions and I'll get one of those.

I'd be shocked if there were two versions.
Websites listing it as having 116 discs are using the same catalogue number as those listing 106 discs.
I think Sony was just slow to provide new information. Or, the set was originally going to have those live recordings and they were later removed.

I have asked this question before, but never received an answer. Just how long does it take from conception to market for one of these mega boxes? Very hard for me to believe they could make any but the most minor changes, with a flyleaf of errata stuck in, to a set once it was past the "drawing board" phase. I'm not sure Sony has the rights on those Salzburg performances. Don't they belong to Orfeo now?
DH

Depends on what you mean by "conception." One could guess most of the majors knew Beethoven's 250th birthday is coming up in 2020 and have had a space for that pencilled in for years. But a contact at Universal tells me that from serious work beginning on a box set to release is around two to two and a half years generally, depending on the size of the project and how much new material needs to be recorded; in the case of things like the Szell it's all reissues but then you have to figure in the time for remastering if needed. If recordings need to be licensed that can add time and expense as well. I think I read somewhere the Mozart 225 box was three years in the works, but that seems to be at the outer extreme.

[drh8h]

Post by Mark Zimmer

Post by drh8h

Post by Thornhill

Post by Frank Berger

Post by s***@gmail.com
I think the expansion to 112 is new, I've been watching this thing like a hawk and the Europadisk listing just showed up in the last few days. To add confusion, Presto Classical has it both ways on their listing for it! Goodness!

Well, I ordered it last week for about $165 from Target. My luck,
they'll press some 106 CD versions and I'll get one of those.

I'd be shocked if there were two versions.
Websites listing it as having 116 discs are using the same catalogue number as those listing 106 discs.
I think Sony was just slow to provide new information. Or, the set was originally going to have those live recordings and they were later removed.

I have asked this question before, but never received an answer. Just how long does it take from conception to market for one of these mega boxes? Very hard for me to believe they could make any but the most minor changes, with a flyleaf of errata stuck in, to a set once it was past the "drawing board" phase. I'm not sure Sony has the rights on those Salzburg performances. Don't they belong to Orfeo now?
DH

Depends on what you mean by "conception." One could guess most of the majors knew Beethoven's 250th birthday is coming up in 2020 and have had a space for that pencilled in for years. But a contact at Universal tells me that from serious work beginning on a box set to release is around two to two and a half years generally, depending on the size of the project and how much new material needs to be recorded; in the case of things like the Szell it's all reissues but then you have to figure in the time for remastering if needed. If recordings need to be licensed that can add time and expense as well. I think I read somewhere the Mozart 225 box was three years in the works, but that seems to be at the outer extreme.

"Conception" could be either when the project is proposed; when management approves it; or when work actually begins. We have engineers, writers, printers, box makers, lawyers, copyright licenses, pressing schedules and Lord knows what else. I could easily believe even the Szell project took two years. It would almost have made more sense if it had come out last year, at least a year ending in seven. Twenty-twenty would have made sense too. Maybe those disappearing Salzburg performances give us a hint as to why it was late. I don't know that I have ever heard any of them, but the general reaction when issued was they were mostly duplications of his existing recorded repertory, and the orchestras were not as good (of course!)

I agree the best material is in the Cleveland broadcasts. If I were doing it, I would start with Harold in Italy and the Franck Symphony. Szell had a habit of exaggerated rallentandos (or rallentandi?) in concerts, most notably at the end of Harold. But they are still astonishing performances rivaling any I have ever heard. And that includes Toscanini.

DH

[Thornhill]

Post by drh8h

Post by Thornhill

Post by Frank Berger

Post by s***@gmail.com
I think the expansion to 112 is new, I've been watching this thing like a hawk and the Europadisk listing just showed up in the last few days. To add confusion, Presto Classical has it both ways on their listing for it! Goodness!

Well, I ordered it last week for about $165 from Target. My luck,
they'll press some 106 CD versions and I'll get one of those.

I'd be shocked if there were two versions.
Websites listing it as having 116 discs are using the same catalogue number as those listing 106 discs.
I think Sony was just slow to provide new information. Or, the set was originally going to have those live recordings and they were later removed.

I have asked this question before, but never received an answer. Just how long does it take from conception to market for one of these mega boxes? Very hard for me to believe they could make any but the most minor changes, with a flyleaf of errata stuck in, to a set once it was past the "drawing board" phase. I'm not sure Sony has the rights on those Salzburg performances. Don't they belong to Orfeo now?
DH

Either way, I don't think these live recordings really add much to the Szell discography.

The real radio broadcast gems are owned by the Cleveland Orchestra: Missa Solemnis, Sibelius 4, Walton Violin Concerto, DLVE, Mozart 38, etc. (and everything from 1956 on was recorded in good stereo sound). As I said in another thread, I would have preferred if Sony had worked with the Orchestra to release its radio recordings a la what they've done with the Met rather than this box.

[Bob Harper]

Post by Thornhill

Post by drh8h

Post by Thornhill

Post by Frank Berger

Post by s***@gmail.com
I think the expansion to 112 is new, I've been watching this thing like a hawk and the Europadisk listing just showed up in the last few days. To add confusion, Presto Classical has it both ways on their listing for it! Goodness!

Well, I ordered it last week for about $165 from Target. My luck,
they'll press some 106 CD versions and I'll get one of those.

I'd be shocked if there were two versions.
Websites listing it as having 116 discs are using the same catalogue number as those listing 106 discs.
I think Sony was just slow to provide new information. Or, the set was originally going to have those live recordings and they were later removed.

I have asked this question before, but never received an answer. Just how long does it take from conception to market for one of these mega boxes? Very hard for me to believe they could make any but the most minor changes, with a flyleaf of errata stuck in, to a set once it was past the "drawing board" phase. I'm not sure Sony has the rights on those Salzburg performances. Don't they belong to Orfeo now?
DH

Either way, I don't think these live recordings really add much to the Szell discography.
The real radio broadcast gems are owned by the Cleveland Orchestra: Missa Solemnis, Sibelius 4, Walton Violin Concerto, DLVE, Mozart 38, etc. (and everything from 1956 on was recorded in good stereo sound). As I said in another thread, I would have preferred if Sony had worked with the Orchestra to release its radio recordings a la what they've done with the Met rather than this box.

I've not heard all those items, but both the Missa Solemnis and the
Sibelius 4 are tremendous. The opening of the Gloria just about blows
the roof off! I hope etcetera included the Tchaikovsky 6 from Blossom,
after the 3rd movement of which there is an ovation that lasts two
minutes or so before the Finale begins. 'Wrong', I suppose, but boy is
it exciting, and one can imagine Szell standing there, grinning and
milking the audience for all its worth. Also, I did not notice whether
the Tokyo concert is there or not. If not, a serious omission, even if
it, like the other items you mention, isn't really a Sony recording.

Bob Harper

[m***@gmail.com]

Post by s***@gmail.com
I think the expansion to 112 is new, I've been watching this thing like a hawk and the Europadisk listing just showed up in the last few days. To add confusion, Presto Classical has it both ways on their listing for it! Goodness!

It's 112 discs squeezed onto 106 by removing all the exposition repeats.

[Frank Berger]

Post by m***@gmail.com

Post by s***@gmail.com
I think the expansion to 112 is new, I've been watching this thing like a hawk and the Europadisk listing just showed up in the last few days. To add confusion, Presto Classical has it both ways on their listing for it! Goodness!

It's 112 discs squeezed onto 106 by removing all the exposition repeats.

They better not cut out Happy Birthday and Deck the Halls with Boughs of
Holly.

[Thornhill]

Post by drh8h

Post by Ed Romans

Post by Thornhill
Now obviously the signal is going to get converted to analog at some point, but the DAC in your receiver is going to do a better job than the one in your SACD player. When I switched from a SACD player that connected to my receiver via analog to one that bit streamed DSD over HDMI, the sound was noticeably better (more presence) and the receiver did a much better job with the bass management.

Why do you say the DAC in a receiver would necessarily do a better job than one in an SACD player? Most DACs are more than adequate. In your experiment you are likely to have slightly different analogue output levels after the different DACs which makes it hard to compare even if you are able to rapidly switch between them.
Ed

I guess I am not making myself very clear on the question.
Put it this way, comparing SACD vs. CD layers of remastered analogue recordings, if the CD were simply a downsampled version of the higher resolution (2-channel) file , I would expect maybe a small, but very subtle difference. Instead, the differences are usually dramatic--a softening of "hardness" as some might call it, much greater space and ambience, and maybe occasionally slightly greater dynamic range, although I haven't often noticed that. Instead, they sound sometimes like totally different masterings--the CD layer like an edited but unprocessed straight high quality transfer, and the SACD with something "added." I simply don't believe greater resolution than 16/44 would make that much difference. Of course, it *has* to make a difference or they couldn't sell the product.

You'd have to talk to the people who created the SACD. I'm sure in some cases that the CD layer isn't simply a downsampling — that for whatever reasons additional adjustments are being made.

I suspect in Szell's case the "defects" of previous transfers reflected the inherent limitations of the recordings. The wonderful sound of the SACDs (I have the LvB cycle and overtures) is due to high-resolution editing and could be achieved on the CD layer, but for marketing purposes just plain isn't. If you want to know what they really sound like and sounded like when the masters were heard in the 60s, I bet the CD layer tells you. That is my point. For listening, higher resolution is a luxury, but you can get the same for far fewer bytes.
That has more to do with low-rez analog to digital transfers, and then artificial reverb and noise reduction being added. CBS' "Great Performances" and Sony's Essential Classic were hack jobs.

[Thornhill]

Post by Ed Romans

Post by Thornhill
Now obviously the signal is going to get converted to analog at some point, but the DAC in your receiver is going to do a better job than the one in your SACD player. When I switched from a SACD player that connected to my receiver via analog to one that bit streamed DSD over HDMI, the sound was noticeably better (more presence) and the receiver did a much better job with the bass management.

Why do you say the DAC in a receiver would necessarily do a better job than one in an SACD player? Most DACs are more than adequate. In your experiment you are likely to have slightly different analogue output levels after the different DACs which makes it hard to compare even if you are able to rapidly switch between them.
Ed

Lower-end SACD players are putting the cheapest possible DACs in there to keep the cost down. The fact that it even has a DAC is to accommodate people with legacy A/V receivers that cannot decode surround sound formats. It's basically an afterthought.

[Ed Romans]

Lower-end SACD players are putting the cheapest possible DACs in there to keep >the cost down. The fact that it even has a DAC is to accommodate people with >legacy A/V receivers that cannot decode surround sound formats. It's basically an >afterthought.

DAC chips are cheap (as chips!) Even in gear costing $1000's from hi-end manufacturers the DAC chip itself might cost ~$10. Although there might be measureable differences between a $5 chip and a $10 chip, generally these are unlikely to audible.

Ed

[weary flake]

Post by drh8h

Post by Invocation
在 2018年7月27日星期五 UTC-4下午8:21:34，LarryLap写道：

Post by LarryLap
I have the complete Szell box on order at bullmoose.com, but in the
meantime I have been listening to those of the individual disks that
have appeared on Napster.com and Amazon.com. If you have not heard
them, you really must. The seemingly intractable defects that have
plagued those recordings through decades of format changes and
remasterings seem at last to have been overcome. For example, I have
both the Sony Original Jacket Collection of the Beethoven Symphonies,
and the version of the same recordings in the Korean "Szell Edition"
box. Though both are markedly superior to the Essential Classics
edition, they pale before the remasterings in the new box. The papery
quality of the violins'upper partials has vanished, as has the
glutinous, monochrome tone of the 'cellos and violas. In their place,
warmth and color. What was suavity and discipline is now passion and
humane expressivity. I just listened to the Pastoral Symphony, and, as
you may have been able to detect, can hardly contain my excitement.
LAL

A large protion of the new Szell Edition uses new remastering at 24-96
and Sony also issue those HD format digital files as separate albums
online. If someone believes 24-96 makes difference from 16-44 CD audio,
this is a good way to get broke...

I don't know. For listening purposes it seems proven Red Book is more
than enough for anyone, but the SACD layer still always sounds better.
I don't want to be cynical and say that is intentional, but then how
could they sell those or HD files or BluRay otherwise?

The SACD and CD might be mastered differently, for the very point of providing
a different sound. A different EQ is all it takes to sound different,
but the engineer might also screw around with compression levels,
stereo fields,
noise reduction, etc. With popular music it's standard practice to heavily
compress music for most releases, while using less compression for vinyl, never
mind it makes more technical sense to do it the other way around.

[drh8h]

Post by weary flake

Post by drh8h

Post by Invocation
在 2018年7月27日星期五 UTC-4下午8:21:34，LarryLap写道：

Post by LarryLap
I have the complete Szell box on order at bullmoose.com, but in the
meantime I have been listening to those of the individual disks that
have appeared on Napster.com and Amazon.com. If you have not heard
them, you really must. The seemingly intractable defects that have
plagued those recordings through decades of format changes and
remasterings seem at last to have been overcome. For example, I have
both the Sony Original Jacket Collection of the Beethoven Symphonies,
and the version of the same recordings in the Korean "Szell Edition"
box. Though both are markedly superior to the Essential Classics
edition, they pale before the remasterings in the new box. The papery
quality of the violins'upper partials has vanished, as has the
glutinous, monochrome tone of the 'cellos and violas. In their place,
warmth and color. What was suavity and discipline is now passion and
humane expressivity. I just listened to the Pastoral Symphony, and, as
you may have been able to detect, can hardly contain my excitement.
LAL

A large protion of the new Szell Edition uses new remastering at 24-96
and Sony also issue those HD format digital files as separate albums
online. If someone believes 24-96 makes difference from 16-44 CD audio,
this is a good way to get broke...

I don't know. For listening purposes it seems proven Red Book is more
than enough for anyone, but the SACD layer still always sounds better.
I don't want to be cynical and say that is intentional, but then how
could they sell those or HD files or BluRay otherwise?

The SACD and CD might be mastered differently, for the very point of providing
a different sound. A different EQ is all it takes to sound different,
but the engineer might also screw around with compression levels,
stereo fields,
noise reduction, etc. With popular music it's standard practice to heavily
compress music for most releases, while using less compression for vinyl, never
mind it makes more technical sense to do it the other way around.

I agree. I have downsampled excellent digital recordings on iTunes (!) and could hear little or no difference to the original. If it is so hard to hear the distinction at those resolutions, how could an improvement at vastly higher bit and sampling rates be that much of an improvement? We must be talking at minuscule fractions of marginal improvement, which would be lost in most listening environments. Wonder how much it would take to bribe an engineer to tell us the truth.

DH

[weary flake]

Post by drh8h

Post by weary flake

Post by Invocation
在 2018年7月27日星期五 UTC-4下午8:21:34，LarryLap写道：

I have the complete Szell box on order at bullmoose.com, but in the>

Post by Invocation

Post by LarryLap
meantime I have been listening to those of the individual disks

that> >>> have appeared on Napster.com and Amazon.com. If you have not
heard> >>> them, you really must. The seemingly intractable defects
that have> >>> plagued those recordings through decades of format
changes and> >>> remasterings seem at last to have been overcome. For
example, I have> >>> both the Sony Original Jacket Collection of the
Beethoven Symphonies,> >>> and the version of the same recordings in
the Korean "Szell Edition"> >>> box. Though both are markedly superior
to the Essential Classics> >>> edition, they pale before the
remasterings in the new box. The papery> >>> quality of the
violins'upper partials has vanished, as has the> >>> glutinous,
monochrome tone of the 'cellos and violas. In their place,> >>> warmth
and color. What was suavity and discipline is now passion and> >>>
humane expressivity. I just listened to the Pastoral Symphony, and,
as> >>> you may have been able to detect, can hardly contain my
excitement.
LAL

A large protion of the new Szell Edition uses new remastering at 24-96>

Post by Invocation
and Sony also issue those HD format digital files as separate

albums> >> online. If someone believes 24-96 makes difference from
16-44 CD audio,> >> this is a good way to get broke...

I don't know. For listening purposes it seems proven Red Book is more>

Post by Invocation
than enough for anyone, but the SACD layer still always sounds

better.> > I don't want to be cynical and say that is intentional, but
then how> > could they sell those or HD files or BluRay otherwise?

The SACD and CD might be mastered differently, for the very point of providing
a different sound. A different EQ is all it takes to sound different,
but the engineer might also screw around with compression levels,>
stereo fields,
noise reduction, etc. With popular music it's standard practice to heavily
compress music for most releases, while using less compression for vinyl, never
mind it makes more technical sense to do it the other way around.

I agree. I have downsampled excellent digital recordings on iTunes (!)
and could hear little or no difference to the original. If it is so
hard to hear the distinction at those resolutions, how could an
improvement at vastly higher bit and sampling rates be that much of an
improvement? We must be talking at minuscule fractions of marginal
improvement, which would be lost in most listening environments. Wonder
how much it would take to bribe an engineer to tell us the truth.

Has this experiment ever been done: take a stereo master digital file and then
use it to press to vinyl, to make a CD, hybrid SACD, .mp3, .acc, blu-ray audio,
etc., *without* altering the sound between formats, in other words, a flat
transfer? It would be evidence of one or the other way and would allow direct
comparisons between formats, so maybe that's the reason the experiment hasn't
been made. All the professional journalists have ever done is compare released
products which don't contain the same mastering between formats, and then
proclaim one or the other is better.

[drh8h]

Post by weary flake

Post by drh8h

Post by weary flake

Post by Invocation
在 2018年7月27日星期五 UTC-4下午8:21:34，LarryLap写道：

I have the complete Szell box on order at bullmoose.com, but in the>

Post by Invocation

Post by LarryLap
meantime I have been listening to those of the individual disks

that> >>> have appeared on Napster.com and Amazon.com. If you have not
heard> >>> them, you really must. The seemingly intractable defects
that have> >>> plagued those recordings through decades of format
changes and> >>> remasterings seem at last to have been overcome. For
example, I have> >>> both the Sony Original Jacket Collection of the
Beethoven Symphonies,> >>> and the version of the same recordings in
the Korean "Szell Edition"> >>> box. Though both are markedly superior
to the Essential Classics> >>> edition, they pale before the
remasterings in the new box. The papery> >>> quality of the
violins'upper partials has vanished, as has the> >>> glutinous,
monochrome tone of the 'cellos and violas. In their place,> >>> warmth
and color. What was suavity and discipline is now passion and> >>>
humane expressivity. I just listened to the Pastoral Symphony, and,
as> >>> you may have been able to detect, can hardly contain my
excitement.
LAL

A large protion of the new Szell Edition uses new remastering at 24-96>

Post by Invocation
and Sony also issue those HD format digital files as separate

albums> >> online. If someone believes 24-96 makes difference from
16-44 CD audio,> >> this is a good way to get broke...

I don't know. For listening purposes it seems proven Red Book is more>

Post by Invocation
than enough for anyone, but the SACD layer still always sounds

better.> > I don't want to be cynical and say that is intentional, but
then how> > could they sell those or HD files or BluRay otherwise?

The SACD and CD might be mastered differently, for the very point of providing
a different sound. A different EQ is all it takes to sound different,
but the engineer might also screw around with compression levels,>
stereo fields,
noise reduction, etc. With popular music it's standard practice to heavily
compress music for most releases, while using less compression for vinyl, never
mind it makes more technical sense to do it the other way around.

I agree. I have downsampled excellent digital recordings on iTunes (!)
and could hear little or no difference to the original. If it is so
hard to hear the distinction at those resolutions, how could an
improvement at vastly higher bit and sampling rates be that much of an
improvement? We must be talking at minuscule fractions of marginal
improvement, which would be lost in most listening environments. Wonder
how much it would take to bribe an engineer to tell us the truth.

Has this experiment ever been done: take a stereo master digital file and then
use it to press to vinyl, to make a CD, hybrid SACD, .mp3, .acc, blu-ray audio,
etc., *without* altering the sound between formats, in other words, a flat
transfer? It would be evidence of one or the other way and would allow direct
comparisons between formats, so maybe that's the reason the experiment hasn't
been made. All the professional journalists have ever done is compare released
products which don't contain the same mastering between formats, and then
proclaim one or the other is better.

Somehow they always seem to skirt around doing anything like a real test such as you propose. Arguments about what equipment, cables, converters were used. What shelving was the equipment sitting on? How to do the quadruple-blind study. Will refreshments be served? Speakers or headphones. Time out breaks to cleanse the ears. And the following embarrassment when someone picks an mp3 as best. Do you switch back and forth. Fade into. Are the levels really matched? You can't use THAT player; it is great on SACD but lousy on Red Book or vice versa. But now you are using different equipment. Those speakers aren't resolving enough. On and on.

DH

DH

[drh8h]

Post by weary flake

Post by drh8h

Post by weary flake

Post by Invocation
在 2018年7月27日星期五 UTC-4下午8:21:34，LarryLap写道：

I have the complete Szell box on order at bullmoose.com, but in the>

Post by Invocation

Post by LarryLap
meantime I have been listening to those of the individual disks

that> >>> have appeared on Napster.com and Amazon.com. If you have not
heard> >>> them, you really must. The seemingly intractable defects
that have> >>> plagued those recordings through decades of format
changes and> >>> remasterings seem at last to have been overcome. For
example, I have> >>> both the Sony Original Jacket Collection of the
Beethoven Symphonies,> >>> and the version of the same recordings in
the Korean "Szell Edition"> >>> box. Though both are markedly superior
to the Essential Classics> >>> edition, they pale before the
remasterings in the new box. The papery> >>> quality of the
violins'upper partials has vanished, as has the> >>> glutinous,
monochrome tone of the 'cellos and violas. In their place,> >>> warmth
and color. What was suavity and discipline is now passion and> >>>
humane expressivity. I just listened to the Pastoral Symphony, and,
as> >>> you may have been able to detect, can hardly contain my
excitement.
LAL

A large protion of the new Szell Edition uses new remastering at 24-96>

Post by Invocation
and Sony also issue those HD format digital files as separate

albums> >> online. If someone believes 24-96 makes difference from
16-44 CD audio,> >> this is a good way to get broke...

I don't know. For listening purposes it seems proven Red Book is more>

Post by Invocation
than enough for anyone, but the SACD layer still always sounds

better.> > I don't want to be cynical and say that is intentional, but
then how> > could they sell those or HD files or BluRay otherwise?

The SACD and CD might be mastered differently, for the very point of providing
a different sound. A different EQ is all it takes to sound different,
but the engineer might also screw around with compression levels,>
stereo fields,
noise reduction, etc. With popular music it's standard practice to heavily
compress music for most releases, while using less compression for vinyl, never
mind it makes more technical sense to do it the other way around.

I agree. I have downsampled excellent digital recordings on iTunes (!)
and could hear little or no difference to the original. If it is so
hard to hear the distinction at those resolutions, how could an
improvement at vastly higher bit and sampling rates be that much of an
improvement? We must be talking at minuscule fractions of marginal
improvement, which would be lost in most listening environments. Wonder
how much it would take to bribe an engineer to tell us the truth.

Has this experiment ever been done: take a stereo master digital file and then
use it to press to vinyl, to make a CD, hybrid SACD, .mp3, .acc, blu-ray audio,
etc., *without* altering the sound between formats, in other words, a flat
transfer? It would be evidence of one or the other way and would allow direct
comparisons between formats, so maybe that's the reason the experiment hasn't
been made. All the professional journalists have ever done is compare released
products which don't contain the same mastering between formats, and then
proclaim one or the other is better.

Somehow they always seem to skirt around doing anything like a real test such as you propose. Arguments about what equipment, cables, converters were used. What shelving was the equipment sitting on? How to do the quadruple-blind study. Will refreshments be served? Speakers or headphones. Time out breaks to cleanse the ears. And the following embarrassment when someone picks an mp3 as best. Do you switch back and forth. Fade into. Are the levels really matched? You can't use THAT player; it is great on SACD but lousy on Red Book or vice versa. But now you are using different equipment. Those speakers aren't resolving enough. On and on.

DH

[Thornhill]

Post by weary flake

Post by drh8h

Post by weary flake

Post by Invocation
在 2018年7月27日星期五 UTC-4下午8:21:34，LarryLap写道：

I have the complete Szell box on order at bullmoose.com, but in the>

Post by Invocation

Post by LarryLap
meantime I have been listening to those of the individual disks

that> >>> have appeared on Napster.com and Amazon.com. If you have not
heard> >>> them, you really must. The seemingly intractable defects
that have> >>> plagued those recordings through decades of format
changes and> >>> remasterings seem at last to have been overcome. For
example, I have> >>> both the Sony Original Jacket Collection of the
Beethoven Symphonies,> >>> and the version of the same recordings in
the Korean "Szell Edition"> >>> box. Though both are markedly superior
to the Essential Classics> >>> edition, they pale before the
remasterings in the new box. The papery> >>> quality of the
violins'upper partials has vanished, as has the> >>> glutinous,
monochrome tone of the 'cellos and violas. In their place,> >>> warmth
and color. What was suavity and discipline is now passion and> >>>
humane expressivity. I just listened to the Pastoral Symphony, and,
as> >>> you may have been able to detect, can hardly contain my
excitement.
LAL

A large protion of the new Szell Edition uses new remastering at 24-96>

Post by Invocation
and Sony also issue those HD format digital files as separate

albums> >> online. If someone believes 24-96 makes difference from
16-44 CD audio,> >> this is a good way to get broke...

I don't know. For listening purposes it seems proven Red Book is more>

Post by Invocation
than enough for anyone, but the SACD layer still always sounds

better.> > I don't want to be cynical and say that is intentional, but
then how> > could they sell those or HD files or BluRay otherwise?

The SACD and CD might be mastered differently, for the very point of providing
a different sound. A different EQ is all it takes to sound different,
but the engineer might also screw around with compression levels,>
stereo fields,
noise reduction, etc. With popular music it's standard practice to heavily
compress music for most releases, while using less compression for vinyl, never
mind it makes more technical sense to do it the other way around.

I agree. I have downsampled excellent digital recordings on iTunes (!)
and could hear little or no difference to the original. If it is so
hard to hear the distinction at those resolutions, how could an
improvement at vastly higher bit and sampling rates be that much of an
improvement? We must be talking at minuscule fractions of marginal
improvement, which would be lost in most listening environments. Wonder
how much it would take to bribe an engineer to tell us the truth.

Has this experiment ever been done: take a stereo master digital file and then
use it to press to vinyl, to make a CD, hybrid SACD, .mp3, .acc, blu-ray audio,
etc., *without* altering the sound between formats, in other words, a flat
transfer? It would be evidence of one or the other way and would allow direct
comparisons between formats, so maybe that's the reason the experiment hasn't
been made. All the professional journalists have ever done is compare released
products which don't contain the same mastering between formats, and then
proclaim one or the other is better.

It doesn't work like that because the formats have different levels of resolution.

For example, the dynamic range of an analog recording made on 1/4 inch tape is between 60 and 70 dB.

The dynamic range of an LP is 55-65 dB. CD is 96 dB. SACD 120 dB.

So with analog recordings on LP, the dynamic range is likely being compressed.

There are other oddities with LP that require alteration to the recording to accommodate the format, such as the bass being mixed to mono to prevent the needle from popping out of the groove.

Similarly, it's now common for digital recordings to be recorded at 24/96. That surpasses what CD is capable of reproducing.

[weary flake]

Post by Thornhill

Post by weary flake

Post by weary flake

Post by Invocation
在 2018年7月27日星期五 UTC-4下午8:21:34，LarryLap写道：

I have the complete Szell box on order at bullmoose.com, but in the>>

Post by LarryLap
meantime I have been listening to those of the individual

disks> >>>>> that> >>> have appeared on Napster.com and Amazon.com. If
you have not> >>>>> heard> >>> them, you really must. The seemingly
intractable defects> >>>>> that have> >>> plagued those recordings
through decades of format> >>>>> changes and> >>> remasterings seem at
last to have been overcome. For> >>>>> example, I have> >>> both the
Sony Original Jacket Collection of the> >>>>> Beethoven Symphonies,>

and the version of the same recordings in> >>>>> the Korean "Szell

Edition"> >>> box. Though both are markedly superior> >>>>> to the
Essential Classics> >>> edition, they pale before the> >>>>>
remasterings in the new box. The papery> >>> quality of the> >>>>>
violins'upper partials has vanished, as has the> >>> glutinous,> >>>>>
monochrome tone of the 'cellos and violas. In their place,> >>>
warmth> >>>>> and color. What was suavity and discipline is now
passion and> >>>> >>>>> humane expressivity. I just listened to the
Pastoral Symphony, and,> >>>>> as> >>> you may have been able to
detect, can hardly contain my> >>>>> excitement.
LAL

A large protion of the new Szell Edition uses new remastering at
24-96>> >>>> >> and Sony also issue those HD format digital files as
separate> >>>> albums> >> online. If someone believes 24-96 makes
difference from> >>>> 16-44 CD audio,> >> this is a good way to get
broke...

I don't know. For listening purposes it seems proven Red Book is more>>

Post by Invocation

than enough for anyone, but the SACD layer still always sounds>

better.> > I don't want to be cynical and say that is intentional,

but> >>> then how> > could they sell those or HD files or BluRay
otherwise?

The SACD and CD might be mastered differently, for the very point of providing
a different sound. A different EQ is all it takes to sound different,
but the engineer might also screw around with compression levels,>> >>
stereo fields,
noise reduction, etc. With popular music it's standard practice to heavily
compress music for most releases, while using less compression for vinyl, never
mind it makes more technical sense to do it the other way around.

I agree. I have downsampled excellent digital recordings on iTunes (!)>

Post by weary flake
and could hear little or no difference to the original. If it is so>
hard to hear the distinction at those resolutions, how could an> >

improvement at vastly higher bit and sampling rates be that much of an>

Post by weary flake
improvement? We must be talking at minuscule fractions of marginal> >

improvement, which would be lost in most listening environments.
Wonder> > how much it would take to bribe an engineer to tell us the
truth.

Has this experiment ever been done: take a stereo master digital file and then
use it to press to vinyl, to make a CD, hybrid SACD, .mp3, .acc, blu-ray audio,
etc., *without* altering the sound between formats, in other words, a flat
transfer? It would be evidence of one or the other way and would allow direct
comparisons between formats, so maybe that's the reason the experiment hasn't
been made. All the professional journalists have ever done is compare released
products which don't contain the same mastering between formats, and then
proclaim one or the other is better.

It doesn't work like that because the formats have different levels of resolution.

To elaborate, the stereo high-res digital master can be pressed to vinyl, CDs,
.mp3, .acc, blu-ray audio, SACD, etc., the digital formats downsampled to the
reslolution that the format is capable, and the resulting files can be played
in the same Digital to Analog converter to then be high-res sampled
from an Analog
to Digital converter into high-res files. The resulting files can then be
played in a high-res player to compare with the original file as to
what the formats
did to alter the sound, or how good they are at preserving the sound.
No issue of
speakers or disc players, cables, etc., would have any difference, the
only thing
to quarrel with would be how good the vinyl pressing and how good the
record player.

Post by Thornhill
For example, the dynamic range of an analog recording made on 1/4 inch
tape is between 60 and 70 dB.
The dynamic range of an LP is 55-65 dB. CD is 96 dB. SACD 120 dB.
So with analog recordings on LP, the dynamic range is likely being compressed.
There are other oddities with LP that require alteration to the
recording to accommodate the format, such as the bass being mixed to
mono to prevent the needle from popping out of the groove.
Similarly, it's now common for digital recordings to be recorded at
24/96. That surpasses what CD is capable of reproducing.

That's not what engineers are doing to popular music! They are highly
compressing the dynamic range of CDs and other digital formats and
releasing more dynamic recordings on LP. Arrogant engineers are saying
that CDs must be compressed because "it's a compressed format" similar to
the way they used to say that NoNOISE is required for CDs because the
CD format is defined as "without analog noise", rather than being a mere
container for data.

[Thornhill]

Post by weary flake

Post by Thornhill

Post by weary flake

Post by weary flake

Post by Invocation
在 2018年7月27日星期五 UTC-4下午8:21:34，LarryLap写道：

I have the complete Szell box on order at bullmoose.com, but in the>>

Post by LarryLap
meantime I have been listening to those of the individual

disks> >>>>> that> >>> have appeared on Napster.com and Amazon.com. If
you have not> >>>>> heard> >>> them, you really must. The seemingly
intractable defects> >>>>> that have> >>> plagued those recordings
through decades of format> >>>>> changes and> >>> remasterings seem at
last to have been overcome. For> >>>>> example, I have> >>> both the
Sony Original Jacket Collection of the> >>>>> Beethoven Symphonies,>

and the version of the same recordings in> >>>>> the Korean "Szell

Edition"> >>> box. Though both are markedly superior> >>>>> to the
Essential Classics> >>> edition, they pale before the> >>>>>
remasterings in the new box. The papery> >>> quality of the> >>>>>
violins'upper partials has vanished, as has the> >>> glutinous,> >>>>>
monochrome tone of the 'cellos and violas. In their place,> >>>
warmth> >>>>> and color. What was suavity and discipline is now
passion and> >>>> >>>>> humane expressivity. I just listened to the
Pastoral Symphony, and,> >>>>> as> >>> you may have been able to
detect, can hardly contain my> >>>>> excitement.
LAL

A large protion of the new Szell Edition uses new remastering at
24-96>> >>>> >> and Sony also issue those HD format digital files as
separate> >>>> albums> >> online. If someone believes 24-96 makes
difference from> >>>> 16-44 CD audio,> >> this is a good way to get
broke...

I don't know. For listening purposes it seems proven Red Book is more>>

Post by Invocation

than enough for anyone, but the SACD layer still always sounds>

better.> > I don't want to be cynical and say that is intentional,

but> >>> then how> > could they sell those or HD files or BluRay
otherwise?

The SACD and CD might be mastered differently, for the very point of providing
a different sound. A different EQ is all it takes to sound different,
but the engineer might also screw around with compression levels,>> >>
stereo fields,
noise reduction, etc. With popular music it's standard practice to heavily
compress music for most releases, while using less compression for vinyl, never
mind it makes more technical sense to do it the other way around.

I agree. I have downsampled excellent digital recordings on iTunes (!)>

Post by weary flake
and could hear little or no difference to the original. If it is so>
hard to hear the distinction at those resolutions, how could an> >

improvement at vastly higher bit and sampling rates be that much of an>

Post by weary flake
improvement? We must be talking at minuscule fractions of marginal> >

improvement, which would be lost in most listening environments.
Wonder> > how much it would take to bribe an engineer to tell us the
truth.

Has this experiment ever been done: take a stereo master digital file and then
use it to press to vinyl, to make a CD, hybrid SACD, .mp3, .acc, blu-ray audio,
etc., *without* altering the sound between formats, in other words, a flat
transfer? It would be evidence of one or the other way and would allow direct
comparisons between formats, so maybe that's the reason the experiment hasn't
been made. All the professional journalists have ever done is compare released
products which don't contain the same mastering between formats, and then
proclaim one or the other is better.

It doesn't work like that because the formats have different levels of resolution.

To elaborate, the stereo high-res digital master can be pressed to vinyl, CDs,
.mp3, .acc, blu-ray audio, SACD, etc., the digital formats downsampled to the
reslolution that the format is capable, and the resulting files can be played
in the same Digital to Analog converter to then be high-res sampled
from an Analog
to Digital converter into high-res files. The resulting files can then be
played in a high-res player to compare with the original file as to
what the formats
did to alter the sound, or how good they are at preserving the sound.
No issue of
speakers or disc players, cables, etc., would have any difference, the
only thing
to quarrel with would be how good the vinyl pressing and how good the
record player.

Vinyl objectively cannot accurately reproduce the best sound. Even if the pressing was absolutely perfect, there are all kinds of other issues, such as the needle's speed changing the closer you get to the end of a side (the inside of the LP), the bass needing to be mixed to mono so the needle doesn't jump the groove, and high frequencies causing distortions. These are simply not problems you have with a digital format.

Post by weary flake

Post by Thornhill
For example, the dynamic range of an analog recording made on 1/4 inch
tape is between 60 and 70 dB.
The dynamic range of an LP is 55-65 dB. CD is 96 dB. SACD 120 dB.
So with analog recordings on LP, the dynamic range is likely being compressed.
There are other oddities with LP that require alteration to the
recording to accommodate the format, such as the bass being mixed to
mono to prevent the needle from popping out of the groove.
Similarly, it's now common for digital recordings to be recorded at
24/96. That surpasses what CD is capable of reproducing.

That's not what engineers are doing to popular music! They are highly
compressing the dynamic range of CDs and other digital formats and
releasing more dynamic recordings on LP. Arrogant engineers are saying
that CDs must be compressed because "it's a compressed format" similar to
the way they used to say that NoNOISE is required for CDs because the
CD format is defined as "without analog noise", rather than being a mere
container for data.

The dynamic range of CDs being compressed was mainly an issue with pop music to make recordings sound good on crappy systems (not all that different than the mid-range of LPs being boosted in the 60s and 70s for the benefit of junk systems). While the major classical labels may still add a bit of compression, indie labels are pretty good at adding none. I cannot count the number of reviews I've read over the years where people complain about the quiet passages being too quiet — that's what no compression sounds like.

[Thornhill]

Post by LarryLap
I have the complete Szell box on order at bullmoose.com, but in the meantime I have been listening to those of the individual disks that have appeared on Napster.com and Amazon.com. If you have not heard them, you really must. The seemingly intractable defects that have plagued those recordings through decades of format changes and remasterings seem at last to have been overcome. For example, I have both the Sony Original Jacket Collection of the Beethoven Symphonies, and the version of the same recordings in the Korean "Szell Edition" box. Though both are markedly superior to the Essential Classics edition, they pale before the remasterings in the new box. The papery quality of the violins'upper partials has vanished, as has the glutinous, monochrome tone of the 'cellos and violas. In their place, warmth and color. What was suavity and discipline is now passion and humane expressivity. I just listened to the Pastoral Symphony, and, as you may have been able to detect, can hardly contain my excitement.
LAL

I bought from Japan the recently released Mahler recordings on SACD.

The Mahler 6 is night and day better. Much fuller and clearer sound that leaves the previous CD releases sounding shrill.

Mahler 10 also much better.

Only a slight improvement to the Mahler 4, mostly stemming from the elimination of artificial reverb added to the Essential Classics release that left some instruments and especially Raskin sounding cavernous.

Hardly any difference with Symphonia Domestica (which was included with the Mahler recordings). I'm sure it helped that both it and the Mahler 4 were well recorded.

In all of the recordings there is no noise reduction — there's plenty of tape hiss (especially the Mahler 10).

I also have all of the single layer SACDs Sony released back in 1999 and 2000. Most of the recordings were generally better to night and day better than CD releases. The Slavonic Dances in particular was vastly improved.