Which High-End CDs to pursue?

[The Hawk]

I'm thinking of purchasing "better sounding" CDs. I'm aware of new and used offerings from companies like DCC, Mobile Fidelity, Audio Fidelity, etc.

 

Do these tend to be as good or better (even though they are redbook) than hi-res from HD Tracks?

 

I'm seeing mixed reviews (on the internet) about audio fidelity releases.

 

I know this is a very general post, but which companies do the best job of reissuing great sounding CDs? This is in regard to pop and rock classics.

 

Dave

 

[bdiament]

Hi Dave,

 

In my experience, it varies from recording to recording.

 

All the labels you mention deal in recordings made by different production teams with different approaches. As I see it, the largest part of a recordings' sound has already been determined by the time the signals are leaving the microphones.

 

Best regards,

Barry

www.soundkeeperrecordings.com

www.barrydiamentaudio.com

 

 

[The Hawk]

I understand that there are variations. In some situations, things are remastered. For instance, I found comments online about the latest Audio Fidelity 24K issues done by Steve Hoffman, and comments to the effect that some purchasers were disappointed with the sound, feeling it was flat.

 

It seems a real crapshoot to spend $25 to $30 on a 24K CD. I suppose the only way to find out ahead of time is to canvass the various forums (like CA, and SH, etc.) and see what others are saying about a given recording.

 

While I have you, any opinions on using something like SeeDeClip to repair clipping issues on troublesome CDs? Or should I not mess with trying to repair recordings?

 

Dave

 

[Brian A]

Over this last month I have been ripping my CD collection to Apple Lossless and have observed that there is no rhyme or reason to “good” vs. “bad”. There are some original CD releases that sound great and there are other “remastered” releases that (still) sound bad.

 

I cannot speak with the authority of someone who has mastered or remastered the greats of the world like Mr. Diament has, but as a consumer, I can already tell that there are a surprising number of flawed recordings out there that no amount of sound room work will fix.

 

I’ve not dived that deeply into the hi-rez download pool, but have download the free 24 bit 96 kHz tracks from Blue Coast Records website, and they are consistently jaw-dropping good. (I also bought their “sampler” hybrid SACD on Sunday) (which is also awesome) (as a Redbook rip.) However, I expect my “flawed recording” comment stands regarding hi-rez as well.

 

 

[bdiament]

Hi Dave,

 

"...While I have you, any opinions on using something like SeeDeClip to repair clipping issues on troublesome CDs? Or should I not mess with trying to repair recordings?..."

 

I have not played with much clip repair software; not enough time to fix old recordings from others if I want to make new ones of my own.

 

As to whether you should do this, that is a personal call but I would keep a few things in mind:

 

If you are going to effectively "remaster" a CD, I would strongly recommend NOT working with a 16-bit source. The first thing I'd do is a "Save As" with a good audio application, to create a 24-bit version for processing. (Actually, some consumer apps will perform slightly better if the "Save As" is used to create a 32-bit float version for processing; this will depend on the software.)

 

The reason for this is that applying any process to a digital file is going to lengthen the digital word. If the "bucket" can only contain 16-bits, the added low order digits will simply be truncated and with them will go some low level information (detail, ambience and spatial cues, etc.).

 

Once you've applied the declip (or any other) process, if the goal is to burn a CD, you'll need a good dither (or dither/noise shaping) algorithm. Most of the ones I've tried tend to cloud the soundstage a bit and leave instrumental timbres slightly altered. However, I've had excellent results with iZotope's MBIT+ dither (which is available from iZotope or in one of the audio apps for which this is licenced, such as Wave Editor or Sample Manager). If you go this route, apply dither (or dither/noise shaping) only once and only as the very last step, after everything else is done.

 

If you really want to go to town and take it another step, I might also suggest following the "Save As" to a longer wordlength with a sample rate conversion of that longer wordlength file. I'd consider taking that 44.1k source to a 2x rate (88.2 or 96k) or a 4x rate (176.4 or 192k). What this will do is "spread out" any artifacts that result from the processing. Later, when converted back to 44.1k for CD (after all processing but before that last dither step), the result will be fewer of the artifacts in the final result. However, this requires a transparent SRC algorithm (in my experience, most aren't). Here again, iZotope's 64-bit SRC has, in my experience, produced converted files that sound closer to the unconverted originals than any SRC algorithm in my experience. It does not suffer from the brightening and hardening most do (to my ears). And here again, this is available from iZotope or from third parties who license the algorith, such as Audiofile Engineering's Wave Editor and Sample Manager apps.

 

***

Bottom line: this is really a personal call.

My feeling is that once you get rid of the clipping, you've got compression and bad EQ choices to deal with. And if you could get rid of those, you've got bad mic choices and bad mic placement to deal with.

 

I tend to accept recordings as they are (often wishing they were better, always wishing it occurred to the engineers to ask the right questions rather than using what others use, placing where others place and reaching for those knobs).

That's why I started a label of my own. ;-}

 

Hope this helps.

 

Best regards,

Barry

www.soundkeeperrecordings.com

www.barrydiamentaudio.com

 

[The Hawk]

I think that's probably good advice in terms of accepting recordings as they are, and just trying to find consensus on the quality of various recordings when I'm ready to buy. It sounds messy and complicated trying to clean up a recording, and I try to avoid equalizers or tone controls of any kind, and just listening to recordings as is.

 

I'm pretty excited to be getting back into vinyl. I've tried a lot of different hi-res, with up and down results. I'd like to purchase a disc from your site sometime, I hear lots of great things about your mastering.

 

Sincerely,

 

Dave

 

[The Hawk]

Some CDs still sound amazing, it's just scary dropping $25 on 24K recordings.

 

I'm about to jump back into vinyl, and I need to be careful with my money, so spending 'double' on the cost of a CD is a lot. Looking forward to vinyl a lot, probably going with a Rega (higher than a P3).

 

I remember having Original Master vinyl recordings, and people saying they were too 'hi-fi', and the advice was to stick to conventional recordings on vinyl. Although I thought they sounded great, and so did the Sheffield Lab recordings.

 

A friend mentioned SeeDeClip, and I started to check some of my recordings using Audacity, which show "clipping" at a few minor points in the waveform display, and yet these are recordings that sound fine to me, so my feeling is I shouldn't be fixing things that aren't broken. They sound fine, but they don't 'display' well visually, so I have to rely on the fact they sound fine.

 

It's kind of weird, here we are in 2011, more choices than ever. Hi-res is gaining some momentum, CD sales are decreasing, and Vinyl is going strong. In fact, I read in the newspaper today about a group of guys whose business is booming—they purchased used equipment to manufacture cardboard record sleeves, and they can barely keep up.

 

Dave

 

[bdiament]

Hi Dave,

 

Congrats on the vinyl!

 

With an unsuspended turntable like the Rega, I would recommend experimenting with vibration control. A plywood "platform" and $1.99 child's bicycle inner tube (mininally inflated) can work wonders.

 

See this.

 

Best regards,

Barry

www.soundkeeperrecordings.com

www.barrydiamentaudio.com

 

 

[The Hawk]

I've owned Naim products for years, and have been into 'isolation' for a long time. I think Naim and many others did a lot of research on things like feedback and microphony. I think some of it is about draining energy and vibration out of the equipment into the stand, and some of it is about keeping energy and vibration from reaching the equipment. I think their Fraim stands accomplish a lot through their ball bearings and shelves, and other manufacturers have their methods as well.

 

I'm a dinosaur, in that I still use a custom made Mana stand, originally five shelves, cut down to four. I bought it from my stereo dealer/friend, who had some of the shelves separated by a great deal of space, to keep a preamp further away from an amp, etc. Some will say that the Mana doesn't help with 'musicality' or 'prat', but I've had a Rega and an LP12 on the top shelf and the sound was always stunning. I've played around a bit with things like Vibrapods, bearings, etc, but haven't heard much improvement. The Mana on it's own still sounds great, spiked through the carpet into the wood floor, glass shelves floating nicely.

 

I've spent the last six months fine-tuning my room (living room with cathedral ceiling) and my CDX2 is atop the Mana and the sound is stunning. The CDX2 is a strange animal in that it has 'metal' feet, and sounds great on this stand. Apparently there are better sounding stands out there, but I set limits these days. The Naim Fraim is really expensive, it may sound better than the Mana, but the extra money, for me, is better spent on more music, and my next 'hobby'—vinyl! I reach the point of diminishing returns quite early these days being disabled with OCD at present and having limited finances. I ended up buying a Rega dac, I was frustrated with the prospect of Naim's Dac priced near $4000. Many suggested their UniQute but I don't want to get too deep into computer audio just yet, and the built in amp is less amp than what I have now. The Rega sounds very, very good through a V-Link.

 

The point is, even though I have OCD, I'm less 'obsessed' with having the best equipment these days. My CDX2 is not a CDS3, but damn it's good. I still have very decent equipment, and I'm still just trying to enjoy the music. Case in point: I heard Beck's Sea Change (hi-res) for the first time two days ago. I'd never listened to his music before, except the one song 'loser'. At this point, I can't stop listening to it. Both due to the material, and the fact that it sounds amazing. And that's through a MacBook, PureMusic, the Rega, my sister's Technics multichannel AV receiver, into Naim Intro's. The Intro's still aren't spiked through the carpet (they sway to and fro!), and the equipment is spread along a bookshelf and a glass TV stand. And all I can hear is the music, and I have no idea if there are better recordings of Sea Change, but I do know the sound is very satisfying as is. Can't wait to hear it on the CDX2 though. And how would it sound on vinyl.....

 

Dave