aloychan Posted May 27, 2002 Posted May 27, 2002 Have you guys heard of CHESKY Recording. Singer like ANA CARAM have her recording done by CHESKY. You could feel 3D Space from the CD recording. It is also very details. I think is better than HDCD. Becos it plays in normal CDP, if you have 24bit/96Khz DAC, it play even better. www.chesky.com Just my 2Cents.
eow Posted May 27, 2002 Posted May 27, 2002 Yes their recording is very good , especially the rebecca pidegon album 'raven'
Lord Hawke Posted May 27, 2002 Posted May 27, 2002 Hey aloychan, Hmm... so which one did you buy? Sunflower Time or Blue Bossa? Yes, I like her material on Chesky, very nice details as you said. Btw, Ana Caram also has some older material, the names of which I can't recall at the moment. TOOL, for the benefit of the uneducated can you explain what's the difference between an 'audiophile-sounding' and a (presumably) audiophile recording? Thanx.
aloychan Posted May 28, 2002 Author Posted May 28, 2002 Hey Hawke I loan Blue Bossa from a fren, I didn't realise until I read the back of the CD insert. Then do a check with their website. I did notice the solid recording when I heard 1st track. I thot it's a HDCD until I saw the word CHESKY. Anyway, just an update. I have sold my m73. I would be auditing the DYNAUDIO AUDIENCE 52 or EPOS M12. Just my 2Cents. Hey aloychan, Hmm... so which one did you buy? Sunflower Time or Blue Bossa? Yes, I like her material on Chesky, very nice details as you said. Btw, Ana Caram also has some older material, the names of which I can't recall at the moment. TOOL, for the benefit of the uneducated can you explain what's the difference between an 'audiophile-sounding' and a (presumably) audiophile recording? Thanx.
aloychan Posted May 28, 2002 Author Posted May 28, 2002 Yes GURU, explain ur theory on AUDIOPHILE-SOUNDING or AUDIOPHILE RECORDING. Just my 2Cents. for the benefit of the uneducated can you explain what's the difference between an 'audiophile-sounding' and a (presumably) audiophile recording? Thanx. Well, in general... What do audiophiles like to listen out for? ::)
hw Posted May 28, 2002 Posted May 28, 2002 The process of recording a singer, to the final pressing of the CD for sale, is complex and resource-intensive. Some recording companies use top-notch equipment,elaborate QC and of course, top recording engineers & producers. Whilst others don't, simply for business reasons or lack of budget. Good recordings require good equipment. You don't need a degree in engineering or music to know that. But would you be able to tell the difference between a good and a bad recording? Can your system reveal the difference? Good recording does not mean "good performance". You can send a group of novice musicians to a world-class recording studio. You're definitely guaranteed of a top-notch recording, but would you buy the CD? Similarly, you can have world-class musicians recording in a lousy studio. Would you buy the CD? So, it's about striking the balance of a good recording of a good performance. Companies like Chesky and Sheffield Lab have top notch recording facilities and techniques. And I'd say they have very good musicians. Whereas, big labels like Deustche Grammophone may have top orchestras playing for them, but the recording may not be as good (eg. early 80s DDD stuff). Have not heard any 90s/00s recording from DG, so can't comment much but magazine reviews have said DG's recording has improved.
doinkydoink Posted May 28, 2002 Posted May 28, 2002 A 24/96 dac will only work if u use a upsampler (or your CDP have a build in upsampler). Otherwise the format is still a 16/44 (all CDs are). thus whether it will sound better in using a 24/96 DAC and upsampler is not a definte yes IMHO. Have you guys heard of CHESKY Recording. Singer like ANA CARAM have her recording done by CHESKY. You could feel 3D Space from the CD recording. It is also very details. I think is better than HDCD. Becos it plays in normal CDP, if you have 24bit/96Khz DAC, it play even better. www.chesky.com Just my 2Cents.
Yilun Posted May 28, 2002 Posted May 28, 2002 Once again, a misconception... A 24/96 marked on the outside can mean 2 things - 1. It is mastered from a 24/96 track ( could be smoking you and me). 2. It is a 24/96 DAD(DVD-V) or a DVD-A. You will require a DVD-V or DVD-A player to play it back at 24/96. 3. Max for normal CDs is still - 16/44.1! HDCD - 20/44.1! The 24/96 and 24/192 on the cover is just to deceive the consumer, the results will have no difference at all.
Yilun Posted May 28, 2002 Posted May 28, 2002 So called CDs marked with 24/96 or 24/192 that is... :)
doinkydoink Posted May 28, 2002 Posted May 28, 2002 If the downsampling from the 24/96 or higher master tapes are not done probably, the end result will probably be the CD sound worse then those was done using 16/44 master tape. Note that I am not say Chesky CDs are no good. They def have the know how to do their downsampling vv well judging from the amount of quality CDs they produced.
lksey Posted May 28, 2002 Posted May 28, 2002 See this cute little book for more info. it's about slightly bigger than your palm, and less than 1 inch thick. Can easily finish in one day. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/stores/detail/-/books/1860742890/reader/1/002-0285490-6396848#reader-link hw, DG had certainly improved on their recordings but still no match for Harmonia Mundi, Chandos, Hyperion etc. What's more scary is, these labels are getting hold of pretty competent performers. Yilun, How does 24/96 or 24/192 on the cover deceive the consumer? If i may, on your question to Yilun: I wld think that what Yilun was trying to say was that the 24/96 or 24/192 was a marketing gimmick, if the label is on a CD cover (not DVD-A or DAD), since CDs cld only output 16/44.1 max. Consumers may not notice that the higher rez refer to the source of the recording, and may think that the CDs really contain 24/96 or 24/192 material.
aloychan Posted May 28, 2002 Author Posted May 28, 2002 If that's the case, why they have to deceive us consumers. If not, then how can we benefit from this recording. Just my 2Cents.
hw Posted May 28, 2002 Posted May 28, 2002 something about recording technology is printed on every Chesky cd cover, and also given a brief mention in the cover booklet. let me go home to take a look... if chesky is indeed deceiving the consumers, i don't think they can last this long, esp in see-u-in-court America.
doinkydoink Posted May 28, 2002 Posted May 28, 2002 [1.] Chesky did not deceive us consumer (I hope not!). What you see on the cover regarding 24/96 means the music is mastered in 24/96. The final product (CD which you are buying) is still 16/44. The problem is many consumer assume beacuse they see 24/96 that these CD is actually 24/96. Not the fault of recordings companies like Chesky since they ar not required to explain that. Anyway they never claim that the CD is in 24/96 format. They only state that they are original recordings are done in 24/96. This of course boils down to comsumer awareness. I too used to think that CDs label 24/96 are 24/96 too.. [2.] Everyone benefits from orignal 24/96 recordings if it is done well. You dont need special hardware to make full use of them. I hope I explain clearly enough..pardon me if I failed. If that's the case, why they have to deceive us consumers. If not, then how can we benefit from this recording. Just my 2Cents.
aloychan Posted May 28, 2002 Author Posted May 28, 2002 Ooops, so they are honest ??? Just my 2Cents. something about recording technology is printed on every Chesky cd cover, and also given a brief mention in the cover booklet. let me go home to take a look... if chesky is indeed deceiving the consumers, i don't think they can last this long, esp in see-u-in-court America.
hw Posted May 28, 2002 Posted May 28, 2002 more explanation: http://www.chesky.com/about/body_about.cfm and.. http://www.chesky.com/Articles/body_library.cfm
hw Posted May 28, 2002 Posted May 28, 2002 the bottomline is.. theorectically, higher sampling rate gives you a sound closer to the originals. but whether there's an audible difference (to you) is a separate issue. And whether there's an IMPROVEMENT is also another separate issue. And whether you're willing to pay extra for this "improvement" is again, another separate issue :)
Yilun Posted May 28, 2002 Posted May 28, 2002 [1.] Chesky did not deceive us consumer (I hope not!). What you see on the cover regarding 24/96 means the music is mastered in 24/96. The final product (CD which you are buying) is still 16/44. The problem is many consumer assume beacuse they see 24/96 that these CD is actually 24/96. Not the fault of recordings companies like Chesky since they ar not required to explain that. Yes, but you look at Aloychan's first posting and you'll realise that he thought that the Chesky 24/96 CDs contain real 24/96 content! Unlike Chesky, there are many out there who put 24/96 or 24/192 without adding the words mastering/process. I used to have a 24/96 DAD player (Muse Model 8/ Model Two/96). The difference between Chesky's DADs (real 24/96) and the Chesky's CDs (24/96 masters) is the same difference as Classic's DADs and normal CDs. (Meaning nothing special about Chesky's CDs, other than being an excellent CD recording.) Same thing as upsampling, how can information not there in the first place (i.e. in the 16/44.1 CD) be reproduced from nowhere? Yes, subjectively, upsampling sounds better, but IMHO it is just a question of different digital filters, that's all. By the way, my CDP is an upsampler, so no flaming please! ;D
key Posted May 28, 2002 Posted May 28, 2002 The Mar & Apr copies of Hi-FiNews discussed abt Up-Sampling. Though a bit difficult to digest.
maxpower1624705738 Posted May 28, 2002 Posted May 28, 2002 As compared to Chesky 24/96Khz , what about those expensive XRCDs' with the JVC 20bit K2 coding.
Chowbotak Posted May 28, 2002 Posted May 28, 2002 wot about super bit mapping, 24 bit dcs processing etc.. ???
key Posted May 28, 2002 Posted May 28, 2002 oh yes, would appreciate any info (e.g. reference books) on over-sampling, upsampling etc... really know nothing abt them... Also there was an article in Stereophile that discussed the diff between over-sampling (the Wadia camp) Vs Upsampling (the DCS camp). If I remember correctly, Wadia claimed that upsampling is nothing new...basically very similar to oversampling. The end results of the two techniques are mathematically the same.
Yilun Posted May 29, 2002 Posted May 29, 2002 IMO Upsampling and oversampling IS the same thing. However to genuinely claim to have upsampling, the CDP/DAC must have an interpolation chip inside to "guess what is not there in the first place". SO if you like parts of your music "guessed" by a chip, upsampling is for you... ;D
Recommended Posts