DVD-A in 48/24 Whasssup??

[petermwilson]

Hi,
Recently Ive noticed a couple of dvd-a discs that don't take advantage of the formats "outer limits". Most notably is the rerelease of Mike Oldfields Tubular Bells in both mlti and 2ch which is only 48/24.

The review I read also mentions a gimmicky surround effort.
Should I stick with my HDCD from 2000 which I upsample to 88.2/24 and play using DPL II or is it worth the plunge?

For future reference however, why would this be done?

Peter m.

 

[JonUrban]

Maybe it matches the master tape.

If the reviewer mentions "gimmicky", then it HAS to be good! It's probably the original CD-4 mix.

 

[petermwilson]

Hi Jon,
The review is at highfidelityreview.com and has just been posted in the last couple of days. Its quite detailed so any of our members comtemplating picking up this disc might want to give the review a gander.

Peter m.

 

[Bob Romano]

Maybe it matches the master tape.

If the reviewer mentions "gimmicky", then it HAS to be good! It's probably the original CD-4 mix.

Jon...
This is actually TB2003- The note for note re-recording. I love this new recording. I can't wait to get my copy of the DVD-A. I think the points that were taken off for recording clarity (in the review) are due to the reduced resolution, not that it sounds bad, because it actually sounds great on the cd. I can't wait to hear all the extras that come with the disc as well. I really think that it's the extras that make DVD-A a much more consumer friendly format. You can get way more bang for your buck it seems.

 

[Cai Campbell]

I think the problem with "reduced resolution" is the fact that many recording studio invested heavily in 24/48 digital recording gear when it was the latest and greatest (which was what, yesterday?) This technology is evolving very quickly!

Anyway, they're not about to scrap their investment just to please a few fanatics. I would rather see a straight digital transfer at the intrinsic resolution of the digital master tape than see them up-sample the data just to fudge the numbers. However, if an analog master tape is available, I think they should take the time to transfer to higher resolutions. If they're avoiding transfer to higher resolution just to avoid having to do it again, then that's just being lazy.

 

[High Fidelity Review]

Peter,

3,000+ words and you still failed to spot that the DVD-Audio disc is ‘Tubular Bells 2003’, not a re-release of the original? How did that happen?

The disc also contains a new surround mix; it’s not a re-working of the quad or the SACD. Full review at the URL below:

http://www.highfidelityreview.com/reviews/review.asp?reviewnumber=14485140

The 48kHz sample rate is a puzzle. My guess – and it is only a guess because the folks at Abbey Road aren’t sharing any of this information – is that the source is 48kHz digital and no analogue tapes exist. The album was put together on a Mac with Emagic Logic Audio Platinum 5.3.0 and ProTools 5.3.1, both of which can support sample rates higher than 48kHz (up to 192kHz in fact).