Creating DVD-A's

[JonUrban]

I am getting re-energized again with converting stuff. Even though my experience with discWelder Bronze was less than spectacular, the end result REALLY sounded good to me, and I now want to convert all of my reels (to start) to DVD-A and just forget about DTS.

However, to get gapless results, discWelder Steel is needed, I am told. Since this program is $500 (I spent that on SurCode) I want to be sure it is correct. Looking at the manual for both the Steel and the Bronze, they look the same except that Steel lets you do a menu.

Also, I have been reading about WaveLab 5.0, which looks REAL good, and seems to blow the doors off of Steel. I think that WaveLab will let you do the stuff that CD Architect does, as far as laying out the tracks. I found a place on the internet that will sell WaveLab 4.0 Competitive Upgrade (non-academic; must own CEP,SF or other programs) for $219. The upgrade to 5.0 is allegedly $99, making WaveLab 5 essentially $318!! Not bad!

Can anyone here lurking or posting let me know if any of this is correct, as far as the functionality of the programs?

THANKS

 

[neil wilkes]

AFAIK, there is supposed to be Gapless playback in all 3 of the discwelder range.
It definitely works in Chrome, as well as gapless MLP.
According to the Steel Vs Chrome section of the main website at www.discwelder.com both Steel & Bronze also have gapless LPCM playback as a possibility.

Best bet would be to email minnetonka audio, who usually reply within a day or two. But the website says you should be able to do this in Bronze.

The big disadvantage with Bronze is you only get a single group available to author, whereas WaveLab 5 & Steel give you all 9.

Creation of DVDA in WaveLab is not exactly as straightforward as the discWelder apps either. You MUST have a multichannel soundcard running under ASIO, and you will need to learn how the Audio Montage works as this is how DVDA is created. Each montage will become a single group, with presumably up to 99 tracks available per montage.

Only Chrome or Sonic's DVDA Creator support the importation of MLP files.

 

[JonUrban]

Thanks Neil. Is Wavelab5 out yet? I hope I can figure it out!!

FYI - I sent the DVD-A I made to Cai, and on his player, it did not play gaps, but he said that the track markers were all over the place, and pretty useless.

Could there be some player dependancies at work here?

 

[neil wilkes]

Interesting.
Could well be a player thing at work.
I've never seen a problem with Chrome & my Pioneer DV565, although I do admit I use MLP on most things.
I will make a disc with straight LPCM and gapless, try it in the pioneer & report back.

Waveab 5 is trickling out over the next couple of weeks. In the UK we are waiting for stock to arrive at the local toyshop. SteinbergUK still don't have any yet.

 

[JonUrban]

Neil,

I have a question. The way I understand it, I can create a DVD-A in stereo up to 24/192, but in multichannel, I can only do it up to 24/48, without using MLP because of space limitations.

If that is correct, why can't I create a "short" surround DVD-A at 24/96 without MLP. Is it a software restriction, or a FORMAT restriction?

Thanks again for your input!

:-jon

 

[winopener]

Neil,

I have a question. The way I understand it, I can create a DVD-A in stereo up to 24/192, but in multichannel, I can only do it up to 24/48, without using MLP because of space limitations.

If that is correct, why can't I create a "short" surround DVD-A at 24/96 without MLP. Is it a software restriction, or a FORMAT restriction?

Thanks again for your input!

:-jon

It's only a problem of bitrate. You can do, for example, 24/96 4 channel without MLP and still get a 60min running time.
I prefer the 88.2 sampling, make easier and less problematic to do both dvd-a and a dts cd, while still keeping all the advantages of high resolution.

 

[neil wilkes]

You can't use 24/88.2 or 24/96 surround without using MLP as the bitrate of the multiplexed file is over 13 Mb/sec.
The maximum for DVDA is 9.6 Mb/sec.
That is the only reason.

On paper, working out disc space, you could get a 24/96 surround at around 45 mins, but the discs bitrate is far too high. It will not work
That is why MLP was developed.

 

[winopener]

You can't use 24/88.2 or 24/96 surround without using MLP as the bitrate of the multiplexed file is over 13 Mb/sec.
The maximum for DVDA is 9.6 Mb/sec.
That is the only reason.

24/96/4 channel is possible. On restoring 4 channels recording make no sense to trash bitrate or resolution or depth trying to create fakes center or sub channel, while 24/96/4 is ok.
24/96/6 channel needs MLP. For 5.1 projects, that's ok. For our quaddie goal, we can live with 4 channels.

 

[neil wilkes]

True - in Quad you should be okay.

 

[JonUrban]

Neil,

Are you saying that I can take a 4 channel reel, record it in 24/96, then use discWelder bronze (or Wavelab 5 when I get it) and make a 4 channel DVD-A?

If so, that would be great! (And the ultimate "quad" preservation)

:-jon

 

[winopener]

Neil,

Are you saying that I can take a 4 channel reel, record it in 24/96, then use discWelder bronze (or Wavelab 5 when I get it) and make a 4 channel DVD-A?
If so, that would be great! (And the ultimate "quad" preservation)
:-jon

Exactly. Why do you think i'm saving my 88.2 quad recording i'm doing now, other than downsample them at 44.1 for a dts encoding?


Have you tried Borboletta?

 

[neil wilkes]

Yep - you certainly should be able to do this.
I will try it out in Chrome later on today, just to see.
It is in the specs though, as DVDA is up to 6 channels.
My sums also say that 24/96 x 4 is within the bitrate limit, as would be 24/88.2.

I'm not sold on the "benefits" of 88.2 or 96KHz though, as it has never been properly proved there is anything up there we can hear. Every test I have ever seen you are listening to the filters, and nothing else.
There are also a lot of arguments saying SACD sounds better through a 20Khz Linear phase filter too.
48 KHz is good enough for me, as I can easily tell the difference between 16 or 24 bit, but not 48 & 96. And yes, my speakers do reproduce up to 50KHz apparently.

See various posts on the ProSound Web forums about this, by GM himself.
As for 192 - it is a marketing ploy. No more, no less.

 

[winopener]

Yep - you certainly should be able to do this.
I will try it out in Chrome later on today, just to see.
It is in the specs though, as DVDA is up to 6 channels.
My sums also say that 24/96 x 4 is within the bitrate limit, as would be 24/88.2.

it does works...

I'm not sold on the "benefits" of 88.2 or 96KHz though, as it has never been properly proved there is anything up there we can hear. Every test I have ever seen you are listening to the filters, and nothing else.
There are also a lot of arguments saying SACD sounds better through a 20Khz Linear phase filter too.
48 KHz is good enough for me, as I can easily tell the difference between 16 or 24 bit, but not 48 & 96. And yes, my speakers do reproduce up to 50KHz apparently.

the benefits of 88.2/96 tht i can hear are simple:
- noise reduction done at these high resolutions is more effective, especially on quiet passages; consider that i'm dealing with quadraphonic 8 tracks, which pushed at these limits can really sounds good;
- no need for resample from 88.2 to 44.1 and no lossy compression, thus presering every bit of quality i've been able to squeeze out of these carts.

See various posts on the ProSound Web forums about this, by GM himself.
As for 192 - it is a marketing ploy. No more, no less.

Never tried 192, i can't; about the forum, where it is, and who is GM? Don't know nothing about them.
Thanks.

 

[neil wilkes]

I know it does now - just tried it in Chrome, and with SurCode MLP.
The PSW forums are at http://recforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php and GM = George Massenberg, one of the most talented EQ designers alive.
At highwer sample rates, if you are hearing a difference, you are hearing the filters in your converters nothing more. This has been tested experimentally so many times now. There is no improvement in the Audio, as there is nothing up there that even a dog can hear above a maximum of 27KHz. Even the AES said a maximum samplerate of 60KHz would be sufficient to catch everything.
This is a fact, pure & simple. It is easy to make digita audio sound better at high samplerates as you do not have to design the linear phase low pass filters as well, and can get away with cheaper components. It is these that you are hearing when you tell me that 88.2 is better than 44.1 - BTW, what converters are you using?

Also, you tell me that it is better at 88.2 from old 8 track carts, that have an upper frequency response of what? 18KHz tops? Think about it for a minute, and stop letting the salesmen tell you things that are not true. The difference is in the wider word, not the samplerate. It's a marketing myth. Even SACD sounds better when played through a 20KHz linear phase filter, as it gets rid of all the ultrasonic garbage that is present. Sony cannot ever tell you this, as it would mean that they have been decieving people by telling them that there is something up there we can hear. There is not.

 

[winopener]

I know it does now - just tried it in Chrome, and with SurCode MLP.
The PSW forums are at http://recforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php and GM = George Massenberg, one of the most talented EQ designers alive.

Thanks, will check out soon.

At highwer sample rates, if you are hearing a difference, you are hearing the filters in your converters nothing more.

i totally agree with you.

This has been tested experimentally so many times now. There is no improvement in the Audio, as there is nothing up there that even a dog can hear above a maximum of 27KHz. Even the AES said a maximum samplerate of 60KHz would be sufficient to catch everything.

again, i agree.

Also, you tell me that it is better at 88.2 from old 8 track carts, that have an upper frequency response of what? 18KHz tops?

more or less, yes.

Think about it for a minute, and stop letting the salesmen tell you things that are not true. The difference is in the wider word, not the samplerate. It's a marketing myth. Even SACD sounds better when played through a 20KHz linear phase filter, as it gets rid of all the ultrasonic garbage that is present. Sony cannot ever tell you this, as it would mean that they have been decieving people by telling them that there is something up there we can hear. There is not.

The benefits that i have heard by myself are not in the frequency response field, but in the noise reduction process. That's where i found a decent improvement going from 44.1/24 to 88.2/24. That's why i want to keep the material at these values, avoiding dithering and lossy compression. I'm not pretending i can squeeze out a 0/30KHz frequency response from a 8 track cart, but what i can extract at my best i want to keep it in the best form i can. As for today, the only way to save a digital audio multichannel file on a playable medium without going lossy or dithered is 88.2 24 bit dvd-audio.
As for salesman... don't worry, i can't afford what is called audiophile high-end stuff and so on; i'm just a friar that try to use what i was able to afford little by little at the best that i can. I'm sure many, if not most, people here have better equipments than I, but i do what i can and sometimes i'm quite pleased with the results.
Of course a SACD/DVDA release of quad masters will be better; since isn't going to happen anytime soon, i'll do it by myself.

 

[neil wilkes]

I still think that you are hearing the converters rather than the samplerate.
What converters are you using?
I ask as there is nothing on the 8 track at that frequency, so there cannot be any musical information there, and if the cleanup is done correctly there will be no noise.
Honestly, I do this myself on a very regular basis as like you, I've found that a lot of the stuff I like to listen to has not been - and probably won't ever be - reissued in high res at 24 bit.

What noise reduction process are you using - I'm now very curious???

 

[winopener]

The PSW forums are at http://recforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php and GM = George Massenberg, one of the most talented EQ designers alive.

Due to bricklayer works on the office nearby i got some free time and went there for some reading. Really thank for the link. Very useful.
I've found also that someone else (Carlos Bedoya) noticed the same thing i've noted, applied to a different process: on 88.2 some process could work differently than 44.1 using the same software. Probably there are expensive ways to achieve the same result at 44.1 as the one that i'm getting at 88.2 with the small gear i have, but since i'm not doing remastering for living i can accept a longer processing of the audio files if this yeld a more accurate result.
As always, the real issue is time vs money. I'm lacking on the second, for the first i have a dedicated machine that can do his stuff when i'm doing other things. The important thing to me is to get a good sounding result (and not, i'm NOT using compression - i HATE it!) keeping all the dynamics and getting rid of the noise the most that i can without destroying the music.

 

[winopener]

Probably we posted in the same minutes, your last reply wan't here when i was writing mine...

I still think that you are hearing the converters rather than the samplerate.
What converters are you using?

Aardvark.

I ask as there is nothing on the 8 track at that frequency, so there cannot be any musical information there, and if the cleanup is done correctly there will be no noise.

The problem is the cleanup process: i think it's nothing new that tying to suppress all the noise from a commercial tape is going to kill some dynamics and to produce bad artifacts (blurbing and so on). Consider that i'm not dealing wth studio master tapes as you, but with high-speed duplicated commercial carts almost 30 years old or more and without dolby - a 40/45dB of S/N ratio is what you can get straight from these tapes.

Honestly, I do this myself on a very regular basis as like you, I've found that a lot of the stuff I like to listen to has not been - and probably won't ever be - reissued in high res at 24 bit.
What noise reduction process are you using - I'm now very curious???

I'm using tweaked hardware and software, so it's not easy to describe fully in another language (i'm italian). For the software part, it's ordinary stuff. What makes it work right for me are the settings, and they may vary from tape to tape - for example, settings for Columbia carts are slightly different from Capitol carts.
It all depends by my ears.

 

[neil wilkes]

I agree that the problem probably lies in the cleanup process - it is so easy to overdo this & add artifacts.
Maybe try doing several passes at lower settings rather than a single one at more aggressive settings? Probably already done that though....
Also, it is perfectly natural for different carts to sound different, especially in relation to background noise.
We do not only deal with studio tapes - we do a lot of stuff for folks whi have old recordings and want them digitized. Currently we work to CD/DVDA/DVDV/Surround CD in both DTS & Dolby Digital. Getting some excellent results too.

Good luck with your reworks. There is a lot of music out there that is only on tape or vinyll, and once it is gone, it's gone forever. There really should be a big effort to preserve this heritage for all to enjoy.
Glad that you are doing your "bit" (hehe)