New SHM-SACDs announced today...

[Bob Squires Jr]

Queen, Queen II and Sheer Heart Attack SHM-SACDs set for late November release.
Yes, they are stereo single layer.
But for those who want to know.

-B

[cupboy]

I like the December bunch better. News Of The World (imagine the bass on this!), Night At The Opera and one other one.

Can't find them to order on HMV Japan yet.

http://www.universal-music.co.jp/u-p...rock_pops.html

[Bob Squires Jr]

I'll probably get all except the Night At The Opera disc seeing as to how I have 2 different versions of it already.
and both in surround.
Like the T-Rex EW... I have the DVD-A, The SACD and the SHM-SACD with the latter being stereo only.
I only got it because I needed to use up my CDJapan points before they expired and couldn't think of anything else I wanted.

The other Queen albums I do want just for the sake of HiRes recordings even though they are stereo only.

-B

[cupboy]

Looks like Exile On Main Street is holding up my order. The others are "ready". Anyone get this one shipped yet?

[Bob Squires Jr]

The Queen discs were supposedly released Monday but no shipment yet.

[stormchaser]

I'm fairly excited for the Dire Straits releases supposedly in the February batch.

[Disclord]

I have to ask - and I'm not trying to start a fight or controversy, I just want to know what's the attraction to single layer stereo releases of albums on SACD? The CD format (with proper in-band noise shaping) is capable of the same performance and SACD's ultrasonic spectrum is just noise. And from reading the comments on some of the multi-channel DVD-Audio SACD re-issues, they don't even sound as good as a linear PCM source. If the albums were in surround, I could understand it, but plain stereo - I just don't "get it."

Are the stereo SACD releases completely brickwall normalized like most CD's are now? The 1-bit SACD format doesn't have exactly the same 'kind' of headroom as linear PCM, so any brickwalling might be a bit different (brickwalling sounds like something dirty from a John Waters film - like 'teabagging'), but are they limited or do they have the full dynamic range of the original recording?

Again, I want to state I'm not trying to pick a fight or anything, I just want to know why the interest in them?

[DKA]

I have to ask - and I'm not trying to start a fight or controversy, I just want to know what's the attraction to single layer stereo releases of albums on SACD? The CD format (with proper in-band noise shaping) is capable of the same performance and SACD's ultrasonic spectrum is just noise. And from reading the comments on some of the multi-channel DVD-Audio SACD re-issues, they don't even sound as good as a linear PCM source. If the albums were in surround, I could understand it, but plain stereo - I just don't "get it."

Are the stereo SACD releases completely brickwall normalized like most CD's are now? The 1-bit SACD format doesn't have exactly the same 'kind' of headroom as linear PCM, so any brickwalling might be a bit different (brickwalling sounds like something dirty from a John Waters film - like 'teabagging'), but are they limited or do they have the full dynamic range of the original recording?

Again, I want to state I'm not trying to pick a fight or anything, I just want to know why the interest in them?

Now you have me pondering how one person would "brickwall" another. The possibilities are scary.

Frankly, anything in SACD surprises me nowadays. I always saw the format as close to dead as can be. However, the combination of hi-rez and what is supposedly a superior disc technology in SHM makes me hopeful that, at least, some of these things sound better. Are they worth my money as imports? Hells no.

[cupboy]

The price may seem high to some people but they don't lose their value the way a CD will. They'll go up. CDs will go down.

[cupboy]

So what else is coming out in February. I'll be buying Brothers In Arms again even though I already have the standard SACD and the dvd-audio dualdisc.

[DKA]

The price may seem high to some people but they don't lose their value the way a CD will. They'll go up. CDs will go down.

Value of these things is what someone artificially ascribes to it. To me, no CD, DVD, etc., out there is truly worth more than what it initially cost. There have been obscure OOP albums, or things I had to have the actual release of because I'm a big fan of the artist, etc. but, other than that, I don't think I've ever paid more than official or sale price for any piece of music, ever. Some of the money I see being spent on this site makes me shake my head. In the end, though, it's not my money.

[0tto]

SHM-SACD (Super High Material SACD) is the ultimate Super Audio CD that utilizes the materials and technologies that were developed for the SHM-CD to further enhance the audio-resolution. Please note that SHM-SACDs are fully compatible with regular SACD players, but they do not play on standard CD players.

Disclord, as you can see from quote above, explanation of superiority of SHM over any other plastic
used for HiRes sound's archiving, is quite slippy and murky. at least hard to find thech. specs of
comparison as it can be done with CD vs. LP vs. DVDA vs. SACD vs. etc.
seems like market for this medium pretty scarce. other way it would be available from many retailers around the world.
from listening of those SHM-SACD i didn't found any advantage in the sound over traditional SACD.
at present those discs have been used for reissue of old masters with no remastering involved.
sort like first batch of CDs back in early 80th. i guess same can be done with use of DVD or BD mediums but main
disadvantage of DVD/BD - medium isn't exotic and for industry would be hard to justify high prices in retailing for
audio, when movies on same medium, being more expensive in production, still way more cheaper in retail.
as for those who's buying - well, we should be compassionate. anyway, everyone has their own phobia
and at the bottom line - no one is perfect.

[Bob Squires Jr]

So what else is coming out in February. I'll be buying Brothers In Arms again even though I already have the standard SACD and the dvd-audio dualdisc.

That is something I wouldn't do really...
If you have the MCH SACD, why buy the stereo? Especially since the MCH can be had for less than $30.00!
There IS a stereo track on it.

I did get the Queen albums but not ANATO as I already have the DVD-A.
I did buy the 2 Police discs as they are $50.00 yes, but the original non SHMs are going for silly money and
both are single layer stereo.
Why buy Clapton's 461 in single stereo when you can get the MCH for $20.00?
It's a matter of pick and choose.
As for SACD altogether... I prefer DVD-A or Blu but there are no Aerosmith or Billy Joel DVD-A's.
And for the Japanese SACD re-issues of the DVD-A discs...
If you don't HAVE the DVD-A and can't afford to pay $150.00 for Hotel California... $30.00 for the SACD
doesn't look bad.
6 of one - half dozen of the other.

(I would get "Making Movies" though and I did get "Love Over Gold".)

-Bob

[leevitalone1]

That is something I wouldn't do really...
If you have the MCH SACD, why buy the stereo? Especially since the MCH can be had for less than $30.00!
There IS a stereo track on it.

I did get the Queen albums but not ANATO as I already have the DVD-A.
I did buy the 2 Police discs as they are $50.00 yes, but the original non SHMs are going for silly money and
both are single layer stereo.
Why buy Clapton's 461 in single stereo when you can get the MCH for $20.00?
It's a matter of pick and choose.
As for SACD altogether... I prefer DVD-A or Blu but there are no Aerosmith or Billy Joel DVD-A's.
And for the Japanese SACD re-issues of the DVD-A discs...
If you don't HAVE the DVD-A and can't afford to pay $150.00 for Hotel California... $30.00 for the SACD
doesn't look bad.
6 of one - half dozen of the other.

(I would get "Making Movies" though and I did get "Love Over Gold".)

-Bob

The titles on sacd are a reason to buy them, although many (me included) like dvd audio over sacd. I am no eng. but I understand what I read and decriptions of sacd mention loss of info. and that is replaced by noise. I cannot grasp why audiophiles go for them and love them so much. Possibly equipment makes a diff.? ( like a $10.000 dacd player??) It seems that shm is another try to get fools like me to continue buying them. I do have several I like but out of all 2-3 ??

[cupboy]

They must have a SACD player at customs in Los Angeles since mine have been stuck there for 3 days now.

[leevitalone1]

The titles on sacd are a reason to buy them, although many (me included) like dvd audio over sacd. I am no eng. but I understand what I read and decriptions of sacd mention loss of info. and that is replaced by noise. I cannot grasp why audiophiles go for them and love them so much. Possibly equipment makes a diff.? ( like a $10.000 dacd player??) It seems that shm is another try to get fools like me to continue buying them. I do have several I like but out of all 2-3 ??

It's the titles that make us buy them not the format as long as it's mch but if it's on both I prefewr dvd-a money not point

[leevitalone1]

Disclord, as you can see from quote above, explanation of superiority of SHM over any other plastic
used for HiRes sound's archiving, is quite slippy and murky. at least hard to find thech. specs of
comparison as it can be done with CD vs. LP vs. DVDA vs. SACD vs. etc.
seems like market for this medium pretty scarce. other way it would be available from many retailers around the world.
from listening of those SHM-SACD i didn't found any advantage in the sound over traditional SACD.
at present those discs have been used for reissue of old masters with no remastering involved.
sort like first batch of CDs back in early 80th. i guess same can be done with use of DVD or BD mediums but main
disadvantage of DVD/BD - medium isn't exotic and for industry would be hard to justify high prices in retailing for
audio, when movies on same medium, being more expensive in production, still way more cheaper in retail.
as for those who's buying - well, we should be compassionate. anyway, everyone has their own phobia
and at the bottom line - no one is perfect.

and there is no acounting taste" to each his own"

[leevitalone1]

Value of these things is what someone artificially ascribes to it. To me, no CD, DVD, etc., out there is truly worth more than what it initially cost. There have been obscure OOP albums, or things I had to have the actual release of because I'm a big fan of the artist, etc. but, other than that, I don't think I've ever paid more than official or sale price for any piece of music, ever. Some of the money I see being spent on this site makes me shake my head. In the end, though, it's not my money.

I remember a qq shocker list from a few yrs ago, where BSS dvd audio sold on ebay for $300.00

[leevitalone1]

I have to ask - and I'm not trying to start a fight or controversy, I just want to know what's the attraction to single layer stereo releases of albums on SACD? The CD format (with proper in-band noise shaping) is capable of the same performance and SACD's ultrasonic spectrum is just noise. And from reading the comments on some of the multi-channel DVD-Audio SACD re-issues, they don't even sound as good as a linear PCM source. If the albums were in surround, I could understand it, but plain stereo - I just don't "get it."

Are the stereo SACD releases completely brickwall normalized like most CD's are now? The 1-bit SACD format doesn't have exactly the same 'kind' of headroom as linear PCM, so any brickwalling might be a bit different (brickwalling sounds like something dirty from a John Waters film - like 'teabagging'), but are they limited or do they have the full dynamic range of the original recording?

Again, I want to state I'm not trying to pick a fight or anything, I just want to know why the interest in them?

I see audiophiles getting carzy for these discs. I am very confused as to why. I have 2 titles that are the old single layer and do not want them. Bought them when sacd 1st came out and had no idea they would suk so much, (no lfe info),CC had a display and I picked up several that day, had no clue as to the stereo format and if anyone wants them--- "abraxis/and Tapestry" cheap!!

[0tto]

I see audiophiles getting carzy for these discs.

i think it's not as much about audiophilia but about having the piece of something which makes
ones to feel special. for same reason some people pay big bucks for used underwear of celebrities

[DKA]

i think it's not as much about audiophilia but about having the piece of something which makes
ones to feel special. for same reason some people pay big bucks for used underwear of celebrities

Looking forward to the Ebay Shocker post chronicalling Elliot Schiener's user boxers.

[cupboy]

I remember a qq shocker list from a few yrs ago, where BSS dvd audio sold on ebay for $300.00

I'd let me sealed one go for that.

[cupboy]

Holst Planets (Karajan, 1962) now has a release date of March 27, 2012. Delayed.

update: Nevermind. Now it's back to it's orig. date of Feb. 22.

[leevitalone1]

8 count em! eight versions of scad, sacd/hybrid mono/single layer/single layer stereo/hybrid stereo/single layer mc/hybrid mc/and now shm.8 versions.
This reminds me of quad days, how many versions were there? But with dvd audio it's pretty simple. as for me I will never understand why in hell to go nuts over this format, why stereo versions? CC had a web site where rthey had the "BlowxBlow" sacd, but they listed 2 seperate discs, and never once mentioned anything about the difference that was 1 was stereo and 1 was mc. stupid? waste of effort? these come to mind when I see a casd selling for $60.00! new!! Possibly it's me and everyone else is right.

[cupboy]

3 count 'em.

scad, casd, sacd... did I miss any?