Film Score Monthly
FSM HOME MESSAGE BOARD FSM CDs FSM ONLINE RESOURCES FUN STUFF ABOUT US  SEARCH FSM   
Search Terms: 
Search Within:   search tips 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
 Posted:   Jun 11, 2021 - 5:24 PM   
 By:   Yavar Moradi   (Member)

Yeah, that’s really odd unless the score was originally only recorded in 16 bit, which seems possible still for the late 90s. But if it’s CD quality but still 5.1 surround instead of stereo (which seems the case), could still be worth getting the SACD to have lossless surround.

Yavar

 
 Posted:   Jun 11, 2021 - 5:24 PM   
 By:   Totoro   (Member)

Well, Switch is a character in the movie...

Yavar


Yeah, not a very important one.

Tell me what "Switch Woks Her Boar" means when what part of the movie it refers, please!

 
 
 Posted:   Jun 11, 2021 - 5:45 PM   
 By:   Jurassic T. Park   (Member)

Yeah, that’s really odd unless the score was originally only recorded in 16 bit, which seems possible still for the late 90s. But if it’s CD quality but still 5.1 surround instead of stereo (which seems the case), could still be worth getting the SACD to have lossless surround.

Yavar


Well this is confusing though - it says "upsampled from 48 thousand samples per second 24bit PCM audio" - so it seems like the original source is 48kHz 24bit?

However, the concern is that the upsampling process might result in degradation that makes the audio worse than if it had just been in straight 48kHz 24bit.

This is kind of what I was mentioning in a different thread about high-def releases - without standardization it's too unreliable for a consumer to feel confident they know what they're getting in their purchase.

I was initially leaning towards the SACD but now I'm inclined to buy the CD because it's cheaper (and the artwork is pretty ridiculous) and I can reasonably assume it will be in proper, standardized, 44kHz, 16 bit audio quality.

Like, I can assume that I'll get a competent CD-quality rip from the SACD, but the mystery box of higher definition for an additional $15 seems too unreliable for the price.

And I know we're ripping into the packaging a bit, but packaging is all about consumer confidence. The SACD option kind of came out of nowhere, and given the artwork, it raises questions about quality.

I understand the phone booth concept stemmed from the trim-fold for the vinyl, but A: that concept was kind of a weird concept, and B: it's just been cropped for the CD release.

So when I'm looking for confidence that the upsampling process was done correctly, I don't have a lot to go on other than the fact that Chas Ferry is a highly experienced audio engineer.

Save us Chas!

 
 Posted:   Jun 11, 2021 - 6:07 PM   
 By:   EdG   (Member)

[from Facebook comments on these releases]

“ To answer all your SACD questions:

The Complete Edition Matrix soundtrack comes on two Hybrid SA-CDs (Super Audio CDs). These Hybrid SA-CD’s contain a CD layer that can be played on any CD player, and a hi-resolution SA-CD layer that contains DSD audio in stereo and surround versions. The audio on the SA-CD layer has been upsampled from 48 thousand samples per second 24bit PCM audio to 2.8 million samples per second 1 bit DSD audio. When these disks are inserted into an SA-CD player or a Blu-Ray player that can play SA-CD’s, you will hear up-converted hi-resolution DSD audio in stereo or surround and realize the sonic enhancement that comes from the up-conversion.”

So this is an UPCONVERSION, which is a bummer! I was thinking of getting the SACD, but now I’m not sure it’s worth it.


I'm not sure what the issue is. The master was 48KHz/24bit PCM which is better than cd quality. Arguably.
CD resolution is 44.1KHz/16bit so the SACD is giving you more data than the CD which is downconverted by necessity. 16bit recordings have a dynamic range of 96db. 20bit have a range of 120db so the masters should be better than CD. Nothing recorded digitally in 1999 is going to have anything close to full SACD or current HD audio sampling rates.

Now we haven't heard either mix and the real advantage of the SACD is the multichannel more than anything else but the sampling rates shouldn't scare anyone away.

 
 Posted:   Jun 11, 2021 - 6:59 PM   
 By:   NSBulk   (Member)

Well this is confusing though - it says "upsampled from 48 thousand samples per second 24bit PCM audio" - so it seems like the original source is 48kHz 24bit?

However, the concern is that the upsampling process might result in degradation that makes the audio worse than if it had just been in straight 48kHz 24bit.

This is kind of what I was mentioning in a different thread about high-def releases - without standardization it's too unreliable for a consumer to feel confident they know what they're getting in their purchase.


How is Varese's statement unreliable? They told you exactly what's going on with the data. And please remember, any PCM recording released on SA-CD is going to be converted to DSD because that's the format used by SA-CD. Keeping this in mind, this leads me to your next statement...

I was initially leaning towards the SACD but now I'm inclined to buy the CD because it's cheaper (and the artwork is pretty ridiculous) and I can reasonably assume it will be in proper, standardized, 44kHz, 16 bit audio quality. Like, I can assume that I'll get a competent CD-quality rip from the SACD, but the mystery box of higher definition for an additional $15 seems too unreliable for the price.

The CD layer on a hybrid SA-CD (such as The Matrix) will be identical to the CD only release. You'll be able to rip that to your computer without issue. However, if the original files were 48/24 there will have been a conversion down to 44.1/16. That's how these things work.

In the end 48/24 converted to DSD is by its very nature higher resolution than 44.1/16. And as mentioned, the ability to hear this score in 5.1 is exciting, too. I'm sure my neighbors will love it!

 
 Posted:   Jun 11, 2021 - 7:38 PM   
 By:   EdG   (Member)

Here's an official piece of artwork that's a bit better.

 
 
 Posted:   Jun 11, 2021 - 9:31 PM   
 By:   Jurassic T. Park   (Member)

How is Varese's statement unreliable? They told you exactly what's going on with the data. And please remember, any PCM recording released on SA-CD is going to be converted to DSD because that's the format used by SA-CD. Keeping this in mind, this leads me to your next statement...

All of your info is helpful, thanks for the context.

The information from Varese is definitely reliable, it's more the up-conversion that I was wondering about if it introduced any degradation.

It honestly might just be consumer ignorance which is part of the challenge with high-def releases sometimes being 48kHz 24bit, or in this case the less-common (to my experience) SACD.

We're having this discussion elsewhere but the Rio Conchos remaster has a CD release AND will be getting a high-def digital release in the future. Assuming The Matrix doesn't get a digital release, that's just another difference in how high-def is delivered to the consumer.

Since a lot of this is unintuitive I think it's just a matter of the industry educating or communicating the standard shift, which right now still favors CD-quality releases.

To your point, it's definitely understandable once someone does the research but it's a lot to research - for this release for example, I had to do research to see if there would even be a playable CD-layer or not.

Again, we have the info to research - but it's not yet quick to understand or rely on information to determine which is the best quality version to get.

 
 Posted:   Jun 11, 2021 - 10:24 PM   
 By:   NSBulk   (Member)

The information from Varese is definitely reliable, it's more the up-conversion that I was wondering about if it introduced any degradation.

I don't understand why that would be a concern when CDs are locked at 44.1/16 and virtually every modern recording surpasses that standard, so they have to be down converted.

 
 
 Posted:   Jun 11, 2021 - 11:20 PM   
 By:   BryonDavis   (Member)

How is Varese's statement unreliable? They told you exactly what's going on with the data. And please remember, any PCM recording released on SA-CD is going to be converted to DSD because that's the format used by SA-CD. Keeping this in mind, this leads me to your next statement...

All of your info is helpful, thanks for the context.

The information from Varese is definitely reliable, it's more the up-conversion that I was wondering about if it introduced any degradation.

It honestly might just be consumer ignorance which is part of the challenge with high-def releases sometimes being 48kHz 24bit, or in this case the less-common (to my experience) SACD.

We're having this discussion elsewhere but the Rio Conchos remaster has a CD release AND will be getting a high-def digital release in the future. Assuming The Matrix doesn't get a digital release, that's just another difference in how high-def is delivered to the consumer.

Since a lot of this is unintuitive I think it's just a matter of the industry educating or communicating the standard shift, which right now still favors CD-quality releases.

To your point, it's definitely understandable once someone does the research but it's a lot to research - for this release for example, I had to do research to see if there would even be a playable CD-layer or not.

Again, we have the info to research - but it's not yet quick to understand or rely on information to determine which is the best quality version to get.


As somebody who worked on this project here is a fact: The files we got from Don Davis' studio were 24 bit, 5.1 mix.

The whole conversion thing you are reading has to do with how a WAV file to DSD. Nothing is degraded, nothing is changed. To hire an engineer to mix and convert to DSD is not a cheap option and why you won't see a lot of SACDs outside of the big name pop or rock release or the bigger classical title. So hope this helps.

Some info about DSD:

DSD – DSD is the true audiophile digital format, created by Philips and Sony for use in SACDs. The DSD format benefits listeners because the sampling rates go up to an incredible 2.8MHz or 5.6MHz and 11.2Mhz, which is 64 or 128 and 256 times greater than the rate of a standard audio CD, respectively. However, it does so at 1-bit depth, rather than the up-to-24-bit rate you’ll get in some of the other formats listed below. So every time it captures audio data, it captures less, but it does so with astonishing regularity. We offer all formats: single DSD 64, 128, and 256.?? DSD64: 2.8 MHz sampling rate & DSD128: 5.6MHz sampling rate - Direct Stream Digital (DSD) has been around for a while, but it has been so married to a physical medium, SACD, that it has yet to receive the attention from audiophiles that it deserves. It is only recently with the growing interest in downloading high-resolution audio via the Internet that DSD surged to the surface of news coverage. The compelling reasons that existed over ten years ago to use this encoding scheme for SACD have now become convenient truths for the new era of high-resolution Internet audio. The DSD64 and DSD128 formats are only playable on compatible hardware and software.

 
 
 Posted:   Jun 12, 2021 - 12:54 AM   
 By:   Jurassic T. Park   (Member)

As somebody who worked on this project here is a fact: The files we got from Don Davis' studio were 24 bit, 5.1 mix.

The whole conversion thing you are reading has to do with how a WAV file to DSD. Nothing is degraded, nothing is changed. To hire an engineer to mix and convert to DSD is not a cheap option and why you won't see a lot of SACDs outside of the big name pop or rock release or the bigger classical title. So hope this helps.

Some info about DSD...


Thank you both Neil and Bryon.

For the degradation, I was referring to the upsampling to higher res, not downsampling for CD - I think Bryon you answered that question here by basically saying there is no degradation/change in the upsampling process.

From the DSD description you provide, I do agree that the SACD physical medium does make it confusing - and it sounds like DSD could potentially develop into more of standard in the coming years.

I appreciate both of your responses - I'm a smart person and technologically aware, but even then I think I have the basic human decision-making response of "I don't completely understand this, it seems complicated, this is creating doubt, how do I know I'm getting the correct quality" so then I'm inclined to go with what is familiar, aka the CD.

Once Varese, LLL and Intrada begin to go down a route of high-res releases / digital downloads and that becomes more commonplace (if ever), then I'm sure this will all seem like no big deal at that point.

Thanks again!

 
 
 Posted:   Jun 12, 2021 - 5:15 AM   
 By:   TerraEpon   (Member)

To hire an engineer to mix and convert to DSD is not a cheap option and why you won't see a lot of SACDs outside of the big name pop or rock release or the bigger classical title.


Hahahah what? For the past 15 years or so, it's pretty much been ONLY independent classical labels that have released SACDs.

 
 
 Posted:   Jun 12, 2021 - 5:25 AM   
 By:   leagolfer   (Member)



HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!.... Then I died...

WTF is going on here?


They should have had you do the cover art, steffromuk. I've seen some outstanding stuff from you.


Ladies - ladies - ladies, if your that thunderstruck with the cover then slip it into your cd players! smile

Have mentioned a cover once before, but I had outside issues it weren't that bad, just be happy with the new material, VARESE saved fans a packet who missed the last DL, I'm pleased too get this & add Davis too my very-small collection if him!

Pay-Check sounds COOL I will now check the movie & possibly add another composer that I don't know of!

 
 Posted:   Jun 12, 2021 - 11:18 AM   
 By:   Replicant006   (Member)

Yeah, that cover art is something else, but thankfully it's not an important component. And we've got some really talented folks in our Custom Cover thread who will put something magnificent together (if they haven't already).

As for the SACD option, I knew so little about the technical aspects of it until reading these comments. I went from doubtful that I would purchase this more expensive version to most likely getting it, although I'm pretty sure I don't have the equipment (at the moment) to play that audio. Still, I want to support that hi res audio option if it opens up other possible releases getting the same treatment.

Having said all of that, I, admittedly, don't have a clue how much of a difference I would hear between the standard CD audio layer and that higher resolution audio. Is it that significant of a difference?

 
 Posted:   Jun 12, 2021 - 11:24 AM   
 By:   Totoro   (Member)

THE MATRIX covers









 
 
 Posted:   Jun 12, 2021 - 11:55 AM   
 By:   BryonDavis   (Member)

To hire an engineer to mix and convert to DSD is not a cheap option and why you won't see a lot of SACDs outside of the big name pop or rock release or the bigger classical title.


Hahahah what? For the past 15 years or so, it's pretty much been ONLY independent classical labels that have released SACDs.


Not true.

Japan releases all kinds of things on SACD. Mobile Fidelity and 3 other labels reissue rock and jazz releases.

 
 
 Posted:   Jun 12, 2021 - 3:19 PM   
 By:   Nono   (Member)

Nice to have the SACD format.

But I'll wait a few years for the 24-bit download.

I may buy the CD in the meantime, though.

 
 Posted:   Jun 12, 2021 - 4:16 PM   
 By:   EdG   (Member)

Having said all of that, I, admittedly, don't have a clue how much of a difference I would hear between the standard CD audio layer and that higher resolution audio. Is it that significant of a difference?

I don't think the improved sampling resolution will make a huge difference. You'd need excellent ears and really transparent (i.e. expensive) equipment to notice it. The biggest improvement will be the spacial enhancement of 5.1 multichannel.

Someone asked about why SACD and not Blu-ray Audio. Unfortunately the Blu-ray spec doesn't allow for a second standard CD layer. Varese probably figured SACD would gave listeners more playback flexibility.

All you need is a Sony-made Blu-ray or DVD player (most support SACD) or a player by another brand that has licensed the SACD chipset and a 5.1 or better AV Receiver. A straightforward HDMI cable to link the two is all the connection you'll need.

 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
© 2021 Film Score Monthly. All Rights Reserved...