King Crimson DVD-A Discussion

QuadraphonicQuad

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Neil, coming in to save the day like Mighty Mouse (or is it Mighty Cat??).
I am positive that you were the reason (along with the few of us who requested the MCH to be 96/24) why the next ones are going to be "como Dios manda" (the way God said it should be/mandates).
Thanks , man!!!

To be honest, I always thought that Neumanns and other high end mics, along with the signal chain in the consoles DID go up to 30 kHz (or higher).

I am aware of the fact that humans can not hear those frequencies above 22k -in a single tone test signal, but I perceive them as a "trickle down" harmonics that affect the signal in a way as to us perceiving the higher harmonics indirectly, adding to the coloration and timbre of the sound.

I like to compare it to Monet paintings that from far away look one way , but up close are made up of many colors that are indistinguishable from a distance.

Or maybe another simile would be night vision (for those of you who are into optics or flying. If you want to look for something you can't stare directly, but around the object so that you can locate it as with your "Peripheral vision". This one is a bit of a stretch, but it's just to point out stuff that we know it's there but we can't see(hear) directly.

My take is that all off those high frequencies affect the timbre of the sounds without us being able to tell them apart individually.

Will look into Bob Katz's book, cheers, man!
 
Bob Katz's book really is an eye opener in a lot of ways.
I've heard of the ultrasonic harmonics theory before, and to be honest I cannot make up my mind.
If there is any residua bounce down effect from this, then the reality is that it will be aliasing, or related, and nasty.
I've got a great screen dump here that can be recreated very easily, and it is an interesting experiment.
Anyone who has both Nuendo (or similar) and any surround edition with both SACD & DTS-DVD can do this.
Record from the analogue outputs of your player both the decoded DSD/SACD, as well as the DTS-DVD.
Make sure you do this to a 24/96 project of course.
When you have got a single track from each, right click any event from the SACD streams (or all of them) & get the spectrum plot from the "Audio" context menu, and the statistics report.
Repeat for the DTS-DVD stream.
 
...the reality is that it will be aliasing, or related, and nasty.
---
When you have got a single track from each, right click any event from the SACD streams (or all of them) & get the spectrum plot from the "Audio" context menu, and the statistics report.
Repeat for the DTS-DVD stream.
I think I've seen your plots, a lot of noise even below 20k for SACD, wasn't there?

I am also sceptical to claims of ultrasonics being needed for a complete musical experience.
 
Last edited:
:confused:
Hmmmm...very interesting, then...
So...
if basically most of the gear up until the 90's(?) did not go beyond 20K, then it's a real mystery to me. ( I always thought that even in the 50's microphones like the Neumanns could pick up sounds up to 30K at least,same with the mixing consoles, all the way to the studers or other hi end 2 tracks
What are we hearing then?
Let's see..
1960's -all recording equipment goes up to only 20K. How was it then that they were boistering that vinyl goes up to 45K; what were they recording? sine waves? , music playback at twice the speed?
Same goes for the 70's then...

If it IS a trickle down theory-which is very valid , where does it start?, the original sound recorded at a <20K that keeps the properties all the way to the recorded medium until it's played back??
If this were the case , then CDs would sound the same as LPs and DVDV-As, even if the CD goes all the way to 20K on playback, and DVD-As go all the way up to 48K...since, if this were the case , the CD still retains the trickle down harmonics.

I am slowly becoming aware that SACDs don't have any info above 22K (they still sound better than CDs)as Neil pointed out, it's mostly digital noise. I have also become aware that vinyl, on the other hand, ADDS harmonics (or HF noise or both), so now my world has been seriously rocked (that is cause I believe Neil when he speaks)....

MAJOR :mad:@::mad:@::mad:@:....
ahh but I guess it all must have a reasonable answer....42!!!
 
Hi Guys.
. . . 96 or 48 is a contentious thing at the best of times. It is certainly true that for some people 96k sounds better than 48k.
What we need to ask ourselves is why this is. It certainly has nothing to do with extended frequency response . . .

Hi Neil, I agree there is more to it than extended freq response and the more 'benign' brickwall filter characteristics that come with higher sample rates. I also reckon that another reason as to why a higher playback sample rate is better (eg 96kHz vs 48kHz), is that it enforces a 'tighter reign' on the overall timing accuracy between adjacent samples for any given DAC channel -- eg giving you less audible jitter.
Also, a high sample rate also helps to ensure that the samples playing from all the channels are more accurately in step with eachother (thus helping to improve the soundfield imagery).


cheers,
Martin.
 
Last edited:
:confused:
Hmmmm...very interesting, then...
So...
if basically most of the gear up until the 90's(?) did not go beyond 20K, then it's a real mystery to me. ( I always thought that even in the 50's microphones like the Neumanns could pick up sounds up to 30K at least,same with the mixing consoles, all the way to the studers or other hi end 2 tracks
What are we hearing then?
Let's see..
1960's -all recording equipment goes up to only 20K. How was it then that they were boistering that vinyl goes up to 45K; what were they recording? sine waves? , music playback at twice the speed?

Vinyl could never get anywhere near 45kHz! In the 60's, the top end was around 14.4kHz - the records even carried labels proudly stating "full frequency (something or other - cannot remember) and it was not until much later that vinyl made it to around 20kHz. CD-4 could never have worked if vinyl responded up to 45kHz either - the carrier is at 30k.


If it IS a trickle down theory-which is very valid , where does it start?, the original sound recorded at a <20K that keeps the properties all the way to the recorded medium until it's played back??
If this were the case , then CDs would sound the same as LPs and DVDV-As, even if the CD goes all the way to 20K on playback, and DVD-As go all the way up to 48K...since, if this were the case , the CD still retains the trickle down harmonics.

I am slowly becoming aware that SACDs don't have any info above 22K (they still sound better than CDs)as Neil pointed out, it's mostly digital noise. I have also become aware that vinyl, on the other hand, ADDS harmonics (or HF noise or both), so now my world has been seriously rocked (that is cause I believe Neil when he speaks)....

MAJOR :mad:@::mad:@::mad:@:....
ahh but I guess it all must have a reasonable answer....42!!!

It's also not a great idea to try & compare analogue systems to digital ones either - as I am slowly coming to realise, they are completely different systems with different foci.
Let me try to explain (and the following quotes are from a superb book called "mixing with your mind" - highly recommended, but specifically dealing with analogue in the main.

The author makes a comparison by comparing recording dynamics with photographing a skyscraper (bear with me here).
Because of the enormous height, it is very difficult to capture the entire building in perfect focus.
Analogue & digital vary by limiting our focus to different areas of the building. In analogue systems, it is as if the focus of the camera is adjusted to halfway up the skyscraper.
This puts the middle of the building in sharp focus. The areas of the building near street level (analogous to the noise floor) are blurred and indistinct, while the tip of the building (the tips of our transients) are also out of focus & somewhat fuzzy. This is acceptable because the lower floors only contain tape hiss, whilst the upper floors only contain fleeting transients.

The skyscraper is also analogous to the volume level of the sounds we are recording. Analogue captures the most important elements with pin sharp accuracy, whilst the less important elements (noise floor & fleeting transients) is also captured less sharply.

Our digital skyscraper is somewhat different. It's as though the focus of the camera has been set permanently on the top of the building, giving it the sharpest focus in the recording.
Then when the mix goes to mastering, what do they do? they surgically remove the best bits (pun unintentional) to make it louder!
Analogue also has headroom of between 20 to 30dB in good analogue consoles, whilst digital has no headroom at all! This took me a while to come to terms with, but it's true.
Digitals optimum level is 0dBFS. you can certainly generate false headroom by limiting your peaks to a lower figure, but you will be degrading the signal somewhat by not recording it at the optimum level - you will have fewer significant bits describing the most important part of the recording - the information below the peaks.

Let's now look at commonly used mics, and their responses.
Shure SM57/58 (moving coil dynamic) - 44 - 18,000Hz.
AKG D112 (moving coil dynamic) - 30 - 17,000Hz
Beyerdynamic M-160 (Ribbon dynamic) - 40 - 18,000Hz
Royer Labs R-121 (Ribbon mic, Electrodynamic pressure gradient type) - 30 - 15,000Hz
Neumann KM 180 series (condenser) - 20 - 20,000Hz
AKG C3000B (condenser) - 20 - 20,000Hz
I could go on, but suffice it to say I cannot find any commonly used mics that respond above 20kHz.
The same thing applies to most preamps, Equalizers & compressors in the analogue domain - they just are not designed to function in ultrasonic areas.
This is fair enough too, as nobody can hear this stuff anyway.

So - is CD "better" than vinyl? Probably not, but this does not make vinyl better than CD either.
The problem with CD is that they are badly made, and 16 bits is simply not sufficient to get all the subtleties of a good recording captured properly.
So CD can never sound the same as vinyl, and DVDA should not sound the same as CD - unless it was authored using 16/44.1 files, of course.
There is much more to this than frequency response.

Incidentally, both Islands & ITWOP will have 24/96 MLP across the board (except for extras which are at varying depths).
Islands has the DTS at 24/96, but ITWOP retains the 48k master as we think it sounds different to the 96k one, so gave you all both.
Enjoy!!
 
Possibly old news, but got the announcement from amazon today for preorder for both Islands & ITWOP .
$22.99 each CD+DVD-A

vinylguy4
 
Last edited:
So - is CD "better" than vinyl? Probably not, but this does not make vinyl better than CD either.
The problem with CD is that they are badly made, and 16 bits is simply not sufficient to get all the subtleties of a good recording captured properly.

Lipshitz & Vanderkooy's series of papers on dither for digital audio in the latter part of the 1980s rendered that argument against Redbook as a delivery format obsolete. Since then, recordings intended for CD are kept at high-bit formats until final dithering down to 16bits -- thus keeping all the low-level subtleties.

e.g.

http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=5482


So CD can never sound the same as vinyl, and DVDA should not sound the same as CD - unless it was authored using 16/44.1 files, of course.
That doesn't follow. 16 bits can capture the entire dynamic range of even the quietest LP -- and with dither and noise shaping, well beyond that. And while an LP *can* carry frequencies >20kHz, consider what the level of the musical signal is at those frequencies, as well as the level of distortion. And that's just what's scribed onto the vinyl, not counting the responses and noise of the tt/cart and phono preamp. It stands to reason that one could rather easily capture the usable and audible output of a vinyl playback fully at Redbook rates -- though if one needs to do declicking or other digital processing, recording at 24 bits and then dithering down later to 16 bits provides peace of mind.
 
Just pre-ordered thru Burning Shed as I have will all previous releases. It is my belief that they get a larger take this way.

These are priced in the $16 range, with shipping it was $45 all told.
 
Just pre-ordered thru Burning Shed as I have will all previous releases. It is my belief that they get a larger take this way.

These are priced in the $16 range, with shipping it was $45 all told.

I completely agree with you on this - two other important points if I may;

1. Burning Shed's service and delivery are consistently excellent and their pricing is competitive - even with overseas shipping factored in. I have ordered every PT and KC release so far with them without a single issue.
2. IIRC, there was alot of negative noise about Amazon's ability to deliver ITCOKC - while those that had ordered via Burning Shed were already basking in the glow of Epitaph in surround!

For what it's worth, Burning Shed is really the way to go.
 
Just pre-ordered thru Burning Shed as I have will all previous releases. It is my belief that they get a larger take this way.

These are priced in the $16 range, with shipping it was $45 all told.

I made a mistake and didn't order the KC right away from BS with preorders.
That mistake not made this time as I have made the preorder as others here have as well.
I think BS got there orders filled first and thats why the Amazon's etc had to wait as they had wait for next order of disk's from the cd plants, at least thats what I remember and there was quite a delay for people waiting for orders from Amazon and other retailers.
Only another month to go.

peter
 
Can any KC aficionados educate us on how these albums compare musically with the three already released? I confess to not being too familiar with the group.

Thanks!
 
Well looks like its not to long to wait to hear the next batch as just got confirmation for one of my orders from Burning Shed so looks like they will be shipping to all preorders now.

The following items have been sent:

1 x King Crimson - Islands - 40th Anniversary Edition (CD/DVDA preorder)
 
Can any KC aficionados educate us on how these albums compare musically with the three already released? I confess to not being too familiar with the group.

Thanks!
Poseidon is very much Court part II (even mr Fripp himself has said so). Islands I cannot say much about since I have only listened to it once, and not liked.
 
Can any KC aficionados educate us on how these albums compare musically with the three already released? I confess to not being too familiar with the group.

Thanks!

KC is always a bit difficult to describe musically - Islands is a definite departure from the ITCOTKC and ITHWOP, less so than Lizard which was had more elements of "free jazz." Islands has it moments but can be a difficult listen at times (this of course is something that draws me to KC in the first place). The challenging listen brings reward in this case. Starker production certainly but astounding musicianship nonetheless. A serviceable description and review (along with sound samples) can be found here;

http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=10:w9fpxq95ldte
 
Well looks like its not to long to wait to hear the next batch as just got confirmation for one of my orders from Burning Shed so looks like they will be shipping to all preorders now.

The following items have been sent:

1 x King Crimson - Islands - 40th Anniversary Edition (CD/DVDA preorder)

Same here. What happened to "Wake"?
 
Back
Top