Music On Blu-ray

[jayne lee wilson]

As I've (too) often said, I find Qobuz/Audirvana sonically and technically superior to the web player, and I've largely given up on downloads for similar reasons to Sir V....

A-B though (using Jitterbugs, Uptone USB Regen and mains-isolated power supplies...) I still think natively-stored files can just edge it over Qobuz Studio streams, but the difference is less obvious now.
So if I get really attached to an album I tend to buy the CD - because the Krell CD-transport can often beat all my other sources for 3-dimensional tangibility, for that reach-out-and-touch thrill, presence and involvement...(and the Custom-Marantz/Marigo combo isn't far off that either...). There remains a distinctive pleasure in the original silver disc. (All via the same T&A DAC8 as usual..)
Ever heard a really good multibit player? Some recent high-end designs even go back to the classic Philips TDA-1541 etc, but it is all in the implementation, the whole DAC geometry really. ESS is just the latest (ubiquitous) fashion, and it aint what you do...

I do have a decent BDP, a Panasonic DMP-BD80 from a few years back, but I've never tried it in the big rig - I don't think the transport could take the scrutiny.
It's mainly used now for playing CDs when I'm in the kitchen adjacent to the TV-snug... morning-coffee barocco...

[Dave2002]

So if I get really attached to an album I tend to buy the CD - because the Krell CD-transport can often beat all my other sources for 3-dimensional tangibility, for that reach-out-and-touch thrill, presence and involvement...(and the Custom-Marantz/Marigo combo isn't far off that either...). There remains a distinctive pleasure in the original silver disc.

You'd buy a CD rather than an SACD or Blu-Ray - if those were available?

However, you seem to have a lot of kit, or have had, so if you can match the source material to your kit well I guess you can get close to the results you want. Sometimes (always?) life is just too short - and OK is good enough.

I often buy CDs because of price advantages, but if an SACD were available at a comparable price (i.e. not an arm and a leg more) I might buy that. I might also be tempted to Blu-Rays - but (a) I've not tried any yet, and (b) I wouldn't want to have to pay a fortune for one. For example, the Fricsay New World - lovely performance - which I've heard and known for years, even way back when a friend had it on LP - https://www.amazon.co.uk/DVORAK-Symp...=UTF8&qid=&sr= Does it really sound better on Blu-Ray - and is it worth £20 or so?

I don't know the answer to either of those questions - though if one wanted a recording it's one where I could perhaps justify the expenditure. I scoured foreign record and CD shops looking for a CD copy years ago, though it turned up in the Berlin PO box a few years ago. I'm amused by the amazon reviewer who mentioned that it was recorded "some decades ago" - like more than 50 years ago!

Ever heard a really good multibit player? Some recent high-end designs even go back to the legendary Philips TD-1541 etc, but it is all in the implementation, the whole DAC geometry really. ESS is just the latest (ubiquitous) fashion, and it aint what you do...

I can't quite decode this. Are there problems with ESS? http://www.esstech.com/index.php/en/...og-converters/ Are you just suggesting that the best multibit devices are still better than anything based on over sampling or other techniques? If so, you may very well be right, though the costs might be very high. I really don't know - you seem to be much more "up" on this stuff.

[richardfinegold]

I assume you're listening on the highest "Studio" quality 24 bit/192khz offering, but are you streaming via the Qobuz desktop app or the web player? Using the desktop app makes a significant difference in upping the quality of the sonics. Moreover, you also have to ensure that the player is also bypassing the computer's own soundcard either with Wasapi or, in my case, my DAC's ASIO driver. Otherwise, I would find it hard to conclude that Qobuz was behind the other mediums you mention. Certainly, I can detect no difference with my own high res downloads or the BDP. In fact, one reason I have given up on downloads is for this very reason. I do 90% of my serious listening at home and therefore having downloads as well as streaming makes no sense.

I primarily listen to Qobuz using the Bluesound app, bypassing the computer. I have also listened using my PC into the usb input of my DAC (Bryston DAC3), and additionally listened to the Mobile app from my LG Android Phone, connecting the phone directly to the preamp with a mini jack cable. I listen to Studio Quality.
I compared the High Rez downloads of the Nelsons/Boston Shostakovich series, sampling 4,5, 10 and 11. The downloads are simply the best recordings of an Orchestra that I know of. When switching back and forth in the Bluesound app between Qobuz and my NAS in the app, the difference is quite obvious. I according to the Bluesound app they both are outputting at 24/192, although regrettably the DAC does not have a feature that displays the sample rate. I borrowed a CD of the Tenth from our lending library and then compared. I played the CD on the Oppo transport (HDMI), Qobuz (usb from the PC), and the download from Bluesound (toslink). Qobuz sounded better than the CD but not as clear and open as the download.
I also compared a Jordi Savall SACD, (Oppo Transport DSD over HDMI into the DAC) and thought the Silver disc was superior to Qobuz via Bluesound.
There are many variables here, such as the quality of internet connectivity, the possibility of artifact being introduced by the app or computers. And the Qobuz certainly is a high quality sound, besting any other streaming service except Tidal by a wide margin. I am not ready to award it the palm and still prefer physical media.

[jayne lee wilson]

I don’t run an SACD player, but most of the discs are hybrids anyway so the problem of choice barely arises. (In trialling comparisons, I always preferred the 24/96 pcm files to the SACD so I never bought a player).
For me Blu-Ray always had less appeal as a music-only carrier because it was conceived as a high-capacity multi-channel AudioVisual medium, I'm no fan of redundancy in any hifi context, the costs of the discs for stereo replay often seemed unattractive, and the catalogue was never going to be extensive or especially adventurous.
CD does have a wonderful back-cat! (And much of it is streamable/dowloadable now...)...

It’s been some journey from CD to HDCD, through Toshiba remasters, HQCD, Blu-Spec and SHM, hi-res downloads and now hi-res streaming. Somewhere along the way I "found my level" - so pursuing say, blu-ray reissues of favourite recordings had little appeal as I was already very pleased with the SQ I had from various media. Including CD of course, for which I’ve made some efforts to optimise replay. A vintage Krell transport can do wonderful things… (Even if it’s fussy about playing past track 20 sometimes!)

(Intriguing too, that something of the character of the standalone CD player seems to be retained when used only as a transport...).

Like many audiophiles I hit a peak or a plateau every so often, when I don’t want to change anything, the music takes over again and the system has its best role as a transparent window onto that. When the T&A DAC8 arrived, the results from CD and computer sources were so good I knew I’d really hit the spot. For me, it was always about presence, insight, ultimate detail etc.
Qobuz/Audirvana streaming works for me because it’s very stable, offers instant access to New Releases and a vast library, but crucially as I implement it (USB ASynch) the SQ itself, while distinctive, is very close to CD in my system. That was my system-tuning aim with downloads too - to ensure that the quality level (though different in character) wouldn’t disappoint compared to high-end CD replay.

***
So it goes with DACs - above a certainly chipset quality it is about the design; the DAC8 has a dual mono design - 8 32bit/384khz Burr-Brown Dacs, 4 per channel, and offers 4 filter settings to allow the listener to match a balance to a given recording, room, ears etc. Useful and fun! (ESS is put into so many things now, I always look to see how bespoke the whole design is).

As for multi-bit, remember the PRAT factor? Done well the best players (20x8, say) had a real grip about them - pace rhythm and timing, which was always very persuasive to me as I particularly love a crisp and clean attack in music-making, and many of my favourite composers have a strongly rhythmical side to them. Bitstream (and DSD later on) was often smoother & more open, but could lack that kick or grip to some extent, which was one reason why some early Esoteric SACD machines converted the DSD to 24/96……
Design is always holistic (power supplies can be very influential on SQ) things-digital keep improving, and as the DAC8 shows (delta-sigma but with those filters), to some extent these characteristics have evened up recently. But it’s interesting that some designers still feel multibit has something special to offer.

(Bit of a Ramble On here, sorry….)

[Dave2002]

I don’t run an SACD player, but most of the discs are hybrids anyway so the problem of choice barely arises. (In trialling comparisons, I always preferred the 24/96 pcm files to the SACD so I never bought a player).

Fair enough for stereo, though perhaps not everyone will agree. I think a lot will depend on what kit one has, and the particular discs etc.

Are you not interested in surround systems at all? Richard has suggested that they can give good results, at least in a mid priced system. Others have pointed out possible difficulties (are they real?) of adding in additional speakers and amps. For example putting an extra speaker in the middle of the front wall if there is to be matching quality between the different components has cost implications, and if each channel doesn’t match, then quality might go down. Ignoring Ambisonics or Periphonics for a second, perhaps having 8 comparable quality speaker drivers in a circle round a listener might work well, and one can imagine that it would then be possible to rotate the sound field to give comparable results for each configuration. If money and space are no object one could also put more speakers above the listener. I believe experiments have done this kind of thing, but they don’t translate too well to a domestic living environment. Before stereo there was only mono - and some people didn’t understand the point of stereo - “what’s the point of splitting the sound up into different directions if the composer wanted a blended mix of sound?” - but now stereo is the accepted norm for domestic listening and for recordings for a mass consumer market.

Stereo doesn’t work well for the music of some composers - Think Gabrielli and St Mark’s. I have been to concerts where the spatial element was very striking - for example by the Dunedin Consort. Reducing all the spatial and movement effects to stereo does really lose a lot.

People have gradually become used to cinema style surround sound, and quite a number have adopted home cinema systems. These probably don’t work too well for classical music, because of compromises and non-linear processing used for effects which work just about well enough when watching a film. Sometimes cinema surround sound doesn’t work well for films either, with over exaggerated bass, loud effects (explosions etc.) and unintelligible speech, but some people don’t seem to mind. However is it not possible that music friendly surround systems can now be made and sold which will deliver better results for those who have them than 2-channel stereo systems, and that these might be a way “forward” in the future?

[Bryn]

I have to say that I find the rejection of Blu-ray to place in question anyone's claim to audiophilia. As a distribution format for high definition audio it is still fairly young but some, such as LSO Live, are exploiting it with considerable imagination. The Blu-ray in their fairly recent boxed set of Rattle's PeM, for instance, not only holds 2-channel stereo and surround recordings playable directly from the disc, but copyable high definition FLACs, plus mp3s, etc. Accompanying the Blu-ray disc are 3 hybrid SACDs, so plenty of opportunities for audio fidelity comparison. The performance is not too bad, either.

[Keraulophone]

Rattle's PeM, for instance, not only holds 2-channel stereo and surround recordings playable directly from the disc, but copyable high definition FLACs, plus mp3s, etc. Accompanying the Blu-ray disc are 3 hybrid SACDs, so plenty of opportunities for audio fidelity comparison. The performance is not too bad, either.

Thanks Bryn, I’ve just ordered this. Pretty good value for 1 B-RA + 3 SACD @ £16 of a fine performance in, hopefully, state-of-the-art-the-art (surround and stereo) sound quality. The only thing missing is video, but sometimes this kind of work can be better appreciated with one’s eyes shut, akin to listening to a radio play which leaves the imagination to provide the scenery.

[Dave2002]

I might take a punt on that PeM collection. One reason I haven’t so far is that I may not be too fond of the music. I once went to see it at the ROH and wasn’t enjoying it too much, then the lighting broke down so the performance was abandoned. I didn’t bother to go back for the later performance which was offered to compensate. Perhaps now is time to have another go.

[Bryn]

Blu-ray can also offer good value for money in some high definition remasters of old analogue sets, such as the Kubelik Mahler Symphonies, though the Haitink Mahler, from the same parent company, is rather more pricey, but still worth getting.

[jayne lee wilson]

Dk2k and Bryn.... it really comes back to the personal....to do multichannel at the same quality-level as my current stereo set-up is beyond me financially (I recall reading Kal Rubinson's multi-ch pieces in Stereophile and thinking "if only..." he had a roomful of large B&W Monitors and reviewed inter alia the 3-channel Mercury reissues...), but in any case I don't often find either the LSO/Barbican or the Berlin/Rattle catalogues attractive for both musical (interpretative) and technical (acoustic) reasons....

And I'd rather try something out I don't know (Polish Contemporary Concertos, ha!), rather than ever-better resolved versions of the familiar classical rep... as I said above etc...
(As my recent, belated obsession with post-Cooke Mahler 10ths has revealed to me once again...)

But age, health, loss and life-changes take their toll as well... I feel differently about almost all my listening now...maybe I just ain't got the energy to system-rebuild all over again, just now....or start a blu-ray physical disc collection to cram in somewhere with all the CDs....

HiFi System building can be fun, but gave me much heartache too, when it didn't work out....it is nice now that the music repro is high-enough quality to keep me happy most of the time, without wondering whether another change might improve it, rewarding though that has often been....

Right now, the only possible purchase might be those superb little KEF LS actives to give me better sound (than the trusty Denon soundbar) from music in the TV system... and I still dream of another encounter with ATC Active 50 monitors here in this room, again..(never heard anything better, but the ears couldn't cope...) .. or perhaps a Harbeth M40...but - all in stereo of course..(how many people have heard Stereo done really, tangibly, 3D reach-out-and-touch well?).

(Hifi...?...In fact I made a useful upgrade a few weeks ago... moved my listening chair nearer to the Harbeth C7 speakers....more 3D, present and realistic...all thanks to the Cat who likes to spend the night on The Official Stereo Chair sometimes, making me sit on the floor in front of it...hence the revelation...)

[Keraulophone]

I might take a punt on that PeM collection [...] Perhaps now is time to have another go.

Don’t waste a moment! It’s a out-and-out masterpiece in a soundworld uniquely of its own. According to Sir Simon “Pelléas et Mélisande is one of the saddest and most upsetting operas ever written. If you love the opera as I do, then you love it to pieces, obsessively.”

https://www.theguardian.com/music/2016/jan/07/simon-rattle-peter-sellars-interview-pelleas-et-melisande-gerhaher-kozena

[Dave2002]

Don’t waste a moment! It’s a out-and-out masterpiece in a soundworld uniquely of its own. According to Sir Simon “Pelléas et Mélisande is one of the saddest and most upsetting operas ever written. If you love the opera as I do, then you love it to pieces, obsessively.”

https://www.theguardian.com/music/20...erhaher-kozena

You’re really selling it to me!

[Keraulophone]

You’re really selling it to me!

...and the four discs cost just a few pence more than a 4-pint jug of Skinners’ Porthleven ale!

[Dave2002]

...and the four discs cost just a few pence more than a 4-pint jug of Skinners’ Porthleven ale!

Don't know that one - https://www.skinnersbrewery.com/our-beers/porthleven/

I'm almost certainly going to go for the PeM anyway. I might order it next time I want to have an add-on item, which might be in a day or two.

[Keraulophone]

Don't know that one - https://www.skinnersbrewery.com/our-beers/porthleven/

BBM does.

Brewed just across the Truro River from my house, in this small but almost perfectly formed city.

It’s the favoured brew of the Lay Vicars of the cathedral choir, resampled after (almost) every evening service.