HiRez Poll Emerson Lake & Palmer - BRAIN SALAD SURGERY [SACD]

[ssully]

Nobody being defensive here. Kind of an odd thing to think imo.

"I've seen all the graphs but I just prefer the DVD-A. Must me me. "

IMO it would be kinda odd not to read your post that way. The 'graphs' (not all of them, just one) show they can sound different. They don't prove which one sounds better. All they can do is provide a plausible, audible reason why you might prefer one to the other.

If all the graphs showed no audible difference, there'd be no such reason. In that context your post would make more sense to me, since it's the sort of statement I've seen thousands of times on audio forums in response to measurements that contradict perceptions.

 

[shokhead]

"I've seen all the graphs but I just prefer the DVD-A. Must me me. "

IMO it would be kinda odd not to read your post that way. The 'graphs' (not all of them, just one) show they can sound different. They don't prove which one sounds better. All they can do is provide a plausible, audible reason why you might prefer one to the other.

If all the graphs showed no audible difference, there'd be no such reason. In that context your post would make more sense to me, since it's the sort of statement I've seen thousands of times on audio forums in response to measurements that contradict perceptions.

OK I guess.

 

[4-earredwonder]

Instead of dissecting BRAIN SALAD SURGERY ad nauseum, JUST ENJOY IT AND BE THANKFUL IT HAS BEEN RELEASED IN HI RES 5.1, warts and ALL!

I voted a 9

 

[shokhead]

Instead of dissecting BRAIN SALAD SURGERY ad nauseum, JUST ENJOY IT AND BE THANKFUL IT HAS BEEN RELEASED IN HI RES 5.1, warts and ALL!

It's a BSS thread. I enjoy my DVD-A every time I listen to it.

 

[edisonbaggins]

I shouldn't even bring up the possibility/probability that various systems potentially handle DVD-A and SACD differently!
So even the same mix and master can sound different...

 

[shokhead]

I shouldn't even bring up the possibility/probability that various systems potentially handle DVD-A and SACD differently!
So even the same mix and master can sound different...

That's very true. My system is very mid range but set up right.

 

[jimfisheye]

Yeah, if you are hearing something different when you shouldn't... that's a setup/calibration issue.
I AM aware that half of this forum is more interested in the artifacts and user experiences of older tech sometimes though.
For the other half of us, that's day 1 duties with new gear.
Just matching/calibrating levels can be really critical. Have something off by 0.5db and now you're gonna be saying all kinds of subjective crap about how the other one is (insert one of these: warmer, brighter, clearer, silkier, smoother, edgier, anemic, muffled, etc etc etc...). Nope! One of them was a smidge lower in volume.

 

[edisonbaggins]

There is not only miscalibration, but the difference in how systems process bass-management for PCM and tend not to for DSD. I'd bet this accounts for a fair share of the stated preferences, when a title has a DVD-A and an SACD.

 

[jimfisheye]

There is not only miscalibration, but the difference in how systems process bass-management for PCM and tend not to for DSD. I'd bet this accounts for a fair share of the stated preferences, when a title has a DVD-A and an SACD.

That would be a bug. (Programming error. Mistake.)

Speaker management is a can of worms too!
There's a really typical comedy of errors thing that goes on. People often misinterpret speaker management as an effect slathered on top of the music and are militant about leaving it off. Even though they might have an array with high/mid only mains and need speaker management to direct all the mains channels bass to their sub. And there they are... not hearing any of the bass in the mains channels and commenting about how the mix is bass light. Mention speaker management to them and... "I don't like altering the music with that!!!" Yeah um, you're lietening to it altered because you didn't set that! It probably doesn't halp to have it labeled "bass" management on some receivers like it is. Makes it sound like it's meant to be an effect. Speaker management is the more proper term.

All this stuff is techy enough to throw people. Some of the reviews you read you can actually tell exactly what settings someone has wrong on their system.

 

[edisonbaggins]

The differences in processing DSD and PCM are not "bugs," necessarily. It's just a fact.
You can set your system to convert DSD to PCM and you'll get your processing. Some people don't know that or are under the impression that such conversion is evil.

 

[shokhead]

Don't let facts get in the way! LOL In the end, it's just ok to like one over another.

 

[jimfisheye]

Mmmmm... I'm gonna say that if something is being altered when it isn't supposed to, it's a bug.
It's a fact that you have a piece of gear with a bug to workaround! That's not necessarily a show stopper either! I use gear and software with bugs... It's a bug though.

The operator error thing though. Your example there is another good one! Unnecessary conversions are of course to be avoided just because. But you don't want to be silly and end up with much worse left field stuff going on.
Between the complexity, subjectivity of sound in general, and the consumer receivers with the little buttons and lcd displays to poke through... yeah, good luck out there!

Sorry for the tech corner digression!
Maybe this helps poke someone into being able to enjoy some of their music a little more one day.

Myself, I want DSD to die. 24/96 PCM is a complete container for sound. Sony straight up was dishonest and used strawman comparisons to 16/44.1 copies with questionable mastering work to compare to as though 24/96 didn't exist. AD/DA converters are expensive. We don't need a different digital language that works just as well and forces people to buy different expensive converters. (Or more often, people listening to dodgy conversions!) Sony even threw in the towel. (Bluray is PCM). Let it die and get these titles on 24/96 multichannel FLAC downloads already!

 

[edisonbaggins]

Jim, it seems you're misunderstanding something. I've done the research here. Read a few manuals.
I'm describing a common limitation of the vast majority of systems.

 

[ssully]

I shouldn't even bring up the possibility/probability that various systems potentially handle DVD-A and SACD differently!
So even the same mix and master can sound different...

How so? One significance difference I can imagine is in how LFE (.1) might be handled. AC3/DTS/PCM 'sub channel' expects a 10 dB boost ...DSD Sub may or may not 'expect' that, depending on what spec the mix/mastering engineer followed...and then the system needs to handle the DSD LFE correctly.

See for example this 8-year-old thread about DSD bass in various hardware configurations
https://www.avsforum.com/forum/90-r...t-when-listening-sacds-using-dsd-setting.html
And if you enjoy the sensation of your head spinning, read this post by Bob Pariseau: ;>

https://www.avsforum.com/forum/91-a...-interconnects-explained-27.html#post57871624

Bob Pariseau also summarized the issue on his blog thus (emphasis mine):

"But the subwoofer issue was a quandary. Sony's solution was to define the ".1" channel as a "Subwoofer" channel rather than as the Low Frequency Effects (LFE) channel which had already been defined for use with DD 5.1 and DTS 5.1 movie tracks for SD-DVDs. What's the difference? In the movie tracks, each speaker channel carries its own bass, and the ".1" channel carries additional LOUD bass -- the Low Frequency Effects. If you want to do Crossover processing to steer bass from the main speakers to the subwoofer, that has to be mixed into the LFE bass -- and level matched accordingly. This gets into the basic issue of Subwoofer Boost which I've mentioned in previous posts. I.e., dealing with the headroom built into the LFE channel so that it can safely carry LOUD bass. LFE is recorded -10dB down from the regular speaker channels and that has to be corrected on playback so that the LFE content is matched in level with those other speakers. And if you are steering bass from the main speakers into that LFE output, that steered bass has to be REDUCED in volume to match the LFE content, which then gets BOOSTED after output as part of playback.

But in Sony's view, the ".1" channel on a 5.1 SACD disc would be a PRE-MIXED Subwoofer channel -- already carrying the bass which would otherwise be in the regular speaker channels. And so it would be recorded at the same level as those regular speaker channels!

This has caused no end of confusion ever since, as people tried to accommodate BOTH ways of handling the ".1" content channels in just ONE audio system setup! It got so bad some studios producing licensed SACD disc simply ignored Sony and recorded their ".1" channel -10dB down just as if it was a movie LFE channel. (That REALLY caused confusion!)

Other studios simply ignored the ".1" channel altogether when making SACD discs. That is, the 5.1 track on their SACD discs is actually 5.0 content. ALL of the bass is in the regular speaker channels and the ".1" channel is silent! Of course this REALLY puts the burden on the user to have full range speakers, or to address how to do Crossover processing with this SACD / DSD content!"

 

[ssully]

The differences in processing DSD and PCM are not "bugs," necessarily. It's just a fact.
You can set your system to convert DSD to PCM and you'll get your processing. Some people don't know that or are under the impression that such conversion is evil.

If you're referring to the fact that you can't apply DSP on DSD unless you convert it to PCM, it's not the SACD and the DVDA themselves that 'sound different' in that case. It's a difference in processing that *you apply to them*. DVDA+DSP vs. SACD 'pure direct' is not an apples-to-apples comparison.


By contrast, the difference I reported here is actually baked into the two masterings. It's not an artifact of processing differences for output.

 

[edisonbaggins]

If you're referring to the fact that you can't apply DSP on DSD unless you convert it to PCM, it's not the SACD and the DVDA themselves that 'sound different' in that case. It's a difference in processing that *you apply to them*. DVDA+DSP vs. SACD 'pure direct' is not an apples-to-apples comparison.


By contrast, the difference I reported here is actually baked into the two masterings. It's not an artifact of processing differences for output.

That's right and it's no different that what I've been saying.
It doesn't matter if the discs sound different. They don't sound like anything without a system. Listeners have to play them back somehow. If that somehow makes them sound different, and that creates preferences, and especially if it creates an unenjoyable experience, that's sad and should be mitigated with some education.

 

[LuvMyQuad]

Jim, it seems you're misunderstanding something. I've done the research here. Read a few manuals.
I'm describing a common limitation of the vast majority of systems.

Does any gear perform bass management on DSD?

 

[ssully]

That's right and it's no different that what I've been saying.
It doesn't matter if the discs sound different. They don't sound like anything without a system. Listeners have to play them back somehow. If that somehow makes them sound different, and that creates preferences, and especially if it creates an unenjoyable experience, that's sad and should be mitigated with some education.

Agreed! And then it's easy for listeners to ascribe the effect to the wrong cause: the mix, or the format, when the real cause is their system.

(But what I've shown here is a cause that really is 'in the mix'. Add that on top of whatever processing is or isn't applied to the PCM vs DSD -- e.g. room eq/dynamic range/bass management DSP on one but not the other; LFE/'Sub channel" level adjustment on one but not the other -- and the situation becomes pretty complex. )

 

[edisonbaggins]

Does any gear perform bass management on DSD?

Not that I know for sure, but there is at least one QQer who claims his system does (though I think if we dig down in to the details we'll find the AVR is converting to PCM).
There is some special hardware you can insert in the signal chain, that will perform bass-management analog-style, I think. A Maverick or something?

 

[PK]

So this discussion leaves me wondering: with all the variables that affect what someone hears, how is it that some recordings are almost universally liked and other have such mixed reviews...