Modern Recorded Sound

[mikealdren]

roles of recording producer and engineer are

Mangerton, I always wondered the same until I was involved in a recording. In the simplest terms on the day, the engineer is technical (microphones amplifiers, mixers, tape/computers etc.) whereas the producer oversees the musical side (which take was best, what to redo, do the takes match etc.) and tends to schedule the session. The producer may be in with the performers with the engineer in another room.

Obviously the producer has planning functions in getting everything together and the engineer does post recording processing.

And nowadays, many of the roles cross over or recordings are even made with just and engineer/producer.

Mike

[Pianorak]

Originally Posted by Pianorak View Post
roles of recording producer and engineer are

Not guilty!

[Bryn]

The Decca recording of Ashkenazy playing Rachmaninov's Moments Musicaux is labelled: Plays on SACD & CD players - super audio CD.
The sound reproduction if played on my conventional CD player abysmal. My question: Do SACDs ideally require a special SACD player?
It's the only SACD I have so far - and I really don't want another one.

Not knowing that particular recording, it is difficult to know for sure. However, in most cases with hybrid SACDs the recording will have been mastered using 'Direct Stream Digital ' technology, rather than the Pulse Code Modulation used for CD. The hybrid SACD has two recording layers, one for the high resolution DSD version, and the other for the Red Book CD version derived from it. However, it is just possible that some CD layers contain an original PCM version made in parallel with the DSD recording. To make matters worse, many Universal Group SACD issues (they have now given up on the format) were conversions from PCM to DSD). On the whole though, I would expect that if you find the CD layer of a hybrid SACD to sound poor, the DSD 'high resolution' will suffer similarly. The chances are that the problems you perceive derive from such issues as microphone positioning, editorial decisions, etc., rather than the format.

[Pianorak]

Thanks, Bryn. The implication seems to be I do not need a special SACD player.

[Bryn]

Thanks, Bryn. The implication seems to be I do not need a special SACD player.

The format has been abandoned by most of the 'majors'. However, when used with care, as by BIS, Hyperion, Linn, etc., the increase in resolution can be discerned by some. However, I would refer you to the Wikipedia article on the subject, which appears in this instance to be well researched and referenced. Note particularly section 6.2 on the audible differences between the SACD and CD layer versions.

On a personal level, I see SACD going the same way as DVD Audio, to be replaced, for those who want higher definition and surround sound, by Blu-ray Audio, which has higher standards available to it than either SACD or DVD Audio, let alone 'bog standard' Red Book CD. Those who favour downloads can opt for 96/24 PCM, or whatever higher standards follow on from that.

[Ferretfancy]

Bryn,
I have been collecting the BIS recordings of Bach Cantatas with Suzuki and the Bach Collegium Japan. These are fine performances recorded in a rather reverberant acoustic.
Although they are now appearing in sets, I have been collecting them one disc at a time, and halfway through the release, BIS started issuing in hybrid SACD. To my ears, listening on CD, there is a a slight metallic edge which is not there on the earlier volumes. I don't have SACD, but I listen on a Meridian surround sound system using the option to create rear ambience with their digital processor. This gives clean and spacious results on normal stereo material, perhaps not true surround, but effective none the less with no odd anomalies.
I'm a bit suspicious of the hype attached to SACD, as so many recordings seem to have been processed from non SACD sources.

[Chris Newman]

Bryn,
I have been collecting the BIS recordings of Bach Cantatas with Suzuki and the Bach Collegium Japan. These are fine performances recorded in a rather reverberant acoustic.
Although they are now appearing in sets, I have been collecting them one disc at a time, and halfway through the release, BIS started issuing in hybrid SACD. To my ears, listening on CD, there is a a slight metallic edge which is not there on the earlier volumes. I don't have SACD, but I listen on a Meridian surround sound system using the option to create rear ambience with their digital processor. This gives clean and spacious results on normal stereo material, perhaps not true surround, but effective none the less with no odd anomalies.
I'm a bit suspicious of the hype attached to SACD, as so many recordings seem to have been processed from non SACD sources.

Is that why a number of companies appear to be quietly dropping SACD?

[Bryn]

I only have the boxed sets, Ff, which are all Red Book CDs. Can you indicate the two cantatas which demonstrate the change in recording technology, i.e. the last of the CD only, and first of the hybrid SACD issues please? I will then try listening closely to them from the relevant boxed issues.

[Mahlerei]

There has been a fair bit of discussion about BIS SACDs on various forums. For instance, BIS ditched DSD in favour of PCM a while ago, and some feel that the lower bit rate they use means these SACDs are technically not high-res recordings. It's a fierce and ultimately pointless debate; as always, some SACDs sound better than others, but then there are so many factors involved besides recording resolution.

I've been a champion of SACDs for about five years now, and I'm a firm believer in the quality advantages on offer (if properly expedited, that is).Sadly, I think Bryn is right, and that SACDs will eventually be supplanted by BD-A. That said, a number of niche labels are sticking with it for the moment, but more and more are starting to offer 24/96 and 24/192 flac downloads. I have heard a couple of these and they are very impressive indeed.

[Ferretfancy]

Bryn,
The change in the Suzuki series started after Vol 27, and the last on that disc was BWV115," Mache dich, mein Geist, bereit" Volume 28 is hybrid SACd, and starts with BWV62 " Nun komm, der Heiden Heiland "
I have to admit that there have been more than one engineer for the series, Vol.27 is Dirk Ludemann, and Vol 28 is Thore Brinkmann, but the general balance is fairly consistent, it's the rather metallic top that bothers me.
Incidentally, on my synthesised surround courtesy of Meridian, early recordings such as the first EMI stereos, Mercury and RCA Living Stereo can sound superb, possibly due to simple microphone techniques. There is a vivid sense of atmosphere and depth within the acoustic of the hall. Meridian did not take up the cause of SACD, and there is no provision for it on my processor, but I'm happy with what I've got

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

I thought I might revive this thread.

I've just been listening to the 1966 VPO/Bernstein Decca recording of Mahler's Ds Lied von der Erde, ansd it has convinced me of something I have thought for many years.

Cylinders could produce a sound that was better than nothing, and we can be thankful for some of the recordings made.
Acoustically recorded shellac discs were an improvement and we have even more to be thankful for.
Electrically recorded shellac discs were a giant leap forward, and we had a BaL recommendation from this era very recently.
Mono vinyl LPs, dating from the late 1940s, were a revelation, with low surface noise and excellent frequency response.
Then in the late '50s came stereo LPs. WOW!

Since then? Dolby noise reduction, quadraphonic sound, digital sound, etc.

My point is that sound has improved very little since the late 1950s. I have opera recordings from that time which sound superb, and are more than equal to many recent recordings.

Radio 3 sound reached a high point in the late 70s, and has been a bit uneven ever since.

[MrGongGong]

My point is that sound has improved very little since the late 1950s. .

Really ?

I know this to be otherwise
Sound quality today can be (and I stress CAN) awesome and far superior to anything from the 1950's if it's clarity, separation, lack of distortion / artefacts and so on that you seek

[Serial_Apologist]

I thought I might revive this thread.

I've just been listening to the 1966 VPO/Bernstein Decca recording of Mahler's Ds Lied von der Erde, ansd it has convinced me of something I have thought for many years.

Cylinders could produce a sound that was better than nothing, and we can be thankful for some of the recordings made.
Acoustically recorded shellac discs were an improvement and we have even more to be thankful for.
Electrically recorded shellac discs were a giant leap forward, and we had a BaL recommendation from this era very recently.
Mono vinyl LPs, dating from the late 1940s, were a revelation, with low surface noise and excellent frequency response.
Then in the late '50s came stereo LPs. WOW!

Since then? Dolby noise reduction, quadraphonic sound, digital sound, etc.

My point is that sound has improved very little since the late 1950s. I have opera recordings from that time which sound superb, and are more than equal to many recent recordings.

Radio 3 sound reached a high point in the late 70s, and has been a bit uneven ever since.

I would tend to agree with the last point. I have kept several cassettes which I transcribed 15 years ago from reel-to-reels of R3 broadcasts from the late 1960s. Beautiful clarity, albeit in mono, with scarcely any sound compression. By contrast with the narrow dynamic range of today's broadcasts, exceeded only in decibels by the pre and post announcements, I have CDs where I have to leap up to depress the volume for fear of infuriating my upstairs neighbours, and then re-turn up the volume to be able to hear the quietest passages. But we will get the same arguments that always come up when discussing this - that the volume range cannot by virtue of one's listening facilities be equivalent to that of the live performance situation. I would be happy to have the halfway compromise between these two situations that we had in days of old, when I could sit right through.

[cloughie]

I thought I might revive this thread.

I've just been listening to the 1966 VPO/Bernstein Decca recording of Mahler's Ds Lied von der Erde, ansd it has convinced me of something I have thought for many years.

Cylinders could produce a sound that was better than nothing, and we can be thankful for some of the recordings made.
Acoustically recorded shellac discs were an improvement and we have even more to be thankful for.
Electrically recorded shellac discs were a giant leap forward, and we had a BaL recommendation from this era very recently.
Mono vinyl LPs, dating from the late 1940s, were a revelation, with low surface noise and excellent frequency response.
Then in the late '50s came stereo LPs. WOW!

Since then? Dolby noise reduction, quadraphonic sound, digital sound, etc.

My point is that sound has improved very little since the late 1950s. I have opera recordings from that time which sound superb, and are more than equal to many recent recordings.

Radio 3 sound reached a high point in the late 70s, and has been a bit uneven ever since.

Alps, I think you've set out the scenario absolutely spot on. Maybe, however, younger listeners than me are seeking a different sound from their listening.

[Serial_Apologist]

Alps, I think you've set out the scenario absolutely spot on. Maybe, however, younger listeners than me are seeking a different sound from their listening.

It may indeed be a generational thing. By way of analogy I, for instance, hang on to my old 18" telly, as much for being able to see most of what I need by looking in front of me and not having to dart all over a wide screen (which can never quite replicate being in a cinema, and I wouldn't want it to) as what I hear about the short lifespan enjoyed by today's tellies.