Author Topic: SHM-CD  (Read 17353 times)

Offline prof

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
SHM-CD
« on: July 28, 2010, 12:30:29 PM »
I live in Japan and have been purchasing many of the reissues using the new material and called by different names by the various record labels.  DG calls them SHM-CD [super high mastered-CD].
I have read many of the negative comments here about the sound quality and expense of these reissues and some of it, quite frankly, is misguided. First, the sound using the new material is certainly better. If you can't here the difference it is most likely because your stereo rig is itself incapable of distinguishing the sound from the ordinary CD material. It puzzles me why anyone would consider paying the high price asked for the SHM-CDs if he doesn't have a comparably priced stereo system. My stereo is comparable priced: about $70,000 the last time I checked if I had to replace it. I'm not suggesting you need to spend this kind of money to hear the difference, but if you have a system that is under, let's say, $10,000, you might be wasting your money purchasing the new CDs.
What is the difference in the sound? Right away I noticed a qualitative leap in the sound. The difference is at least as great as going from regular encoded CD to a HYBRID SACD. First I thought there was just a jump in bass response, but I soon noticed that the sound across the entire audio spectrum is more easily present. There's a solidarity, ease and presence to the sound that I have never experienced with any regular CD, or for the matter with the Linn Lp turntable I used to have. It is, in short, a  VERY satisfying improvement in the sound that gives the listener the impression that he is in the room with the performers.
As for price, yes, the price is really high. I don't know how much this can be accounted for by the amount of research that went into developing the new material or how much the record companies are using the price to make up for loses they have experienced. Perhaps if there are enough people buying the new CDs the price will come down.
I do have one gripe and this is especially directed at DG. They are not remastering the sound using the latest possible bit/word length [24bit/192kHz] before stamping the material. Shame on them!!! It does make a huge difference. For example, I have a copy of of the DG Japanese 24bit mastered Bernstein Beethoven 9th. The sound is much more present than the regular CD. I also have the complete Beethoven Bernstein DG cycle in the new material. The sound, while much improved, does not have quite the clarity of the 24bit reissue. Other labels are using 24bit remastered material. Try the Brahms German Requiem with Klemperer [HQ and 24bit]and you will see what is truly possible when everything that is now technologically possible is being done, that is, of course, if your stereo system is of sufficient quality to take advantage of the new software. 
One last word for now. Don't be fooled by those who claim that high end audio is all a scam. I have been refining my audio system since before the days of stereo, always listening before purchasing and have found that everything, even cables and such, make a hugh difference. Since no combination of components renders a perfect copy of a live experience, careful attention must be paid to which components are synergetic. For example, there's a company called The Cable Company which will give you specific recommendations based on knowing the components in your system. My experiences with them during the last decade has been that they are spot on with their suggestions.

Offline waderice

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 649
Re: SHM-CD
« Reply #1 on: August 09, 2010, 09:08:18 PM »
Based on your comments about SHM-CD being a waste of money if we have to spend >$10,000 on stereo equipment to hear the difference in sound, I think that eliminates about 99% of us here at this forum, with the 1% minority being doctors and lawyers, who having the money, likely have little time to enjoy this hobby.  Not to mention those of us on a retirement pension.  So based on these supposed and quite possibly accurate percentages, I would figure the SHM-CD format to be doomed due to people unable to afford them, not to mention the necessary investment in equipment you claim is necessary to play them on to hear the difference.

I would rather spend money on listening to the regular CD format enjoying the differences in Mahler symphony recordings than declare bankruptcy.  Besides, I have more than enough to do transferring vintage recordings from LPs and open-reel tapes and am spending my limited funds on blank CD-R's to enable the transfers for my own future listening before selling the originals.

Thanks, but no thanks,

Wade
« Last Edit: August 11, 2010, 07:01:39 PM by waderice »

Offline sperlsco

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 579
Re: SHM-CD
« Reply #2 on: August 17, 2010, 03:03:40 PM »
I moved this topic to the main board and am bumping it.  
Scott

Offline barry guerrero

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3928
Re: SHM-CD
« Reply #3 on: August 17, 2010, 05:42:39 PM »
I've barely spent a thousand $ on audio equipment, and may still need to declare bankruptcy!  :o

Offline James Meckley

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 612
Re: SHM-CD
« Reply #4 on: August 17, 2010, 08:18:00 PM »
I was going to let this slide, but since you've moved the thread and bumped it, I'll put in my 2¢ worth.

I believe, and will continue to believe until presented with scientific evidence to the contrary, that SHM–CD and Blu–Spec CD are nothing more that marketing gimmicks introduced by the recording industry to justify charging twice as much for previously-released material. Of course some of these new releases will sound better than—or at least different from—the earlier CD incarnations, but that's not because of "improved polycarbonate resin" or "more precisely formed pits." It's because the original recording has been remastered! The data on the disc—the bitstream itself—is different. It's been tweaked to sound better. They may or may not declare this on the packaging; you can imagine why they may choose not to.

What do I mean by scientific evidence? Print exactly the same data stream onto an SHM–CD and a standard CD. Play the two discs back to a listening panel under rigorous double-blind testing conditions. If a difference is detected in a statistically-significant number of trials, then there is a difference. If, as I suspect, no difference is detected, then it's just B.S.

James
"We cannot see how any of his music can long survive him."
Henry Krehbiel, New York Tribune obituary of Gustav Mahler

Offline Leo K

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1368
  • You're the best Angie
Re: SHM-CD
« Reply #5 on: August 17, 2010, 08:32:07 PM »
Well, I like what I've heard from the SHM-CD set of Bernstein's DG cycle, but it must be the mastering I was hearing, since I was listening to a copy on CDR's!

I like the HQ CD I have of Rattle's M9, and this is not a copy. The improvement in sound is obvious.  I'm no expert on why, but I hear the difference  :D  You don't need a $10.000 to hear the difference either. A good set of headphones does the trick just fine.

--Todd

Offline James Meckley

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 612
Re: SHM-CD
« Reply #6 on: August 17, 2010, 09:19:34 PM »
Well, I like what I've heard from the SHM-CD set of Bernstein's DG cycle, but it must be the mastering I was hearing, since I was listening to a copy on CDR's!


Fascinating! Thanks, Todd, I hadn't considered this approach. If I take an SHM-CD or Blu-Spec CD that sounds really good, and copy it to a standard CD-R, that will eliminate all of the improved manufacturing techniques. The lowly CD-R doesn't have the latest polycarbonate resin or a silver-alloy reflective layer, and it wasn't burned with a blue laser. If it still sounds really good (i.e. the same), I've pretty much proved my case, albeit not scientifically.

James
"We cannot see how any of his music can long survive him."
Henry Krehbiel, New York Tribune obituary of Gustav Mahler

Offline Leo K

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1368
  • You're the best Angie
Re: SHM-CD
« Reply #7 on: August 17, 2010, 10:09:14 PM »
Well, I like what I've heard from the SHM-CD set of Bernstein's DG cycle, but it must be the mastering I was hearing, since I was listening to a copy on CDR's!


Fascinating! Thanks, Todd, I hadn't considered this approach. If I take an SHM-CD or Blu-Spec CD that sounds really good, and copy it to a standard CD-R, that will eliminate all of the improved manufacturing techniques. The lowly CD-R doesn't have the latest polycarbonate resin or a silver-alloy reflective layer, and it wasn't burned with a blue laser. If it still sounds really good (i.e. the same), I've pretty much proved my case, albeit not scientifically.

James

Yes, and on top of this, before I burned the set on CDR's, it was only a Flac file! So, yes, it makes you wonder!

--Todd


Offline waderice

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 649
Re: SHM-CD
« Reply #8 on: August 17, 2010, 10:57:04 PM »
What I'm gathering so far from the posts subsequent to my earlier one, is that the difference is in the material used to make the CD, right?  If I were to copy one of the SHM-CDs onto a regular mass market CD blank, I would be able to tell a difference in the same recording that was originally mastered onto an SHM-CD as a regularly-mastered CD, right?  And these SHM-CDs are playable on any standard CD player, right?

Wade

P.S. - If all the answers to my questions are "yes", then we don't need to spend >$10,000 on stereo equipment and take out a second mortgage, right? ;D

Offline James Meckley

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 612
Re: SHM-CD
« Reply #9 on: August 17, 2010, 11:37:06 PM »
What I'm gathering so far from the posts subsequent to my earlier one, is that the difference is in the material used to make the CD, right?  If I were to copy one of the SHM-CDs onto a regular mass market CD blank, I would be able to tell a difference in the same recording that was originally mastered onto an SHM-CD as a regularly-mastered CD, right?  And these SHM-CDs are playable on any standard CD player, right?

Wade

P.S. - If all the answers to my questions are "yes", then we don't need to spend >$10,000 on stereo equipment and take out a second mortgage, right? ;D

Wade,

1) Yes; the manufacturer's only claim here is that superior materials and methods were used in the manufacturing process, and that this somehow results in a more "accurate" reproduction of the data stream when the disc is played in your CD player.

2) That's the question I raised above. If the CD-R copy sounds exactly the same as the SHM-CD original, it clearly gives lie to the claims of the manufacturer.

3) Yes; SHM-CDs and Blu-Spec CDs are standard 16/44.1 redbook CDs, playable in any standard CD player.

And no, you do not need $10,000.00 worth of audio gear to appreciate these differences—as Todd said, a really good pair of headphones and a well-designed CD player are sufficient, although you might be amazed at how musically satisfying a well-chosen set of components in the $10,000.00 range can be.

I know I'll never give up my $3,000.00 pair of Stax Lambda Signature electrostatic headphones. They reveal all!

James
"We cannot see how any of his music can long survive him."
Henry Krehbiel, New York Tribune obituary of Gustav Mahler

Offline John Kim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2624
Re: SHM-CD
« Reply #10 on: August 17, 2010, 11:40:17 PM »
I've heard CDRs copied from SHM-CDs and found that they sound BETTER than regular CD version of the same recordings.

I wouldn't know, however, if the sonic improvement is due to superior remastering that went into the SHM-CDs, or because SHM-CDs get transferred better to CDRs. It's hard to tell.

hey, why bother? ???

Improvement is improvement ;).

John,

Offline James Meckley

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 612
Re: SHM-CD
« Reply #11 on: August 18, 2010, 12:26:21 AM »

Improvement is improvement ;).


Improvement is good.

Balderdash is bad.

James
"We cannot see how any of his music can long survive him."
Henry Krehbiel, New York Tribune obituary of Gustav Mahler

Offline vvrinc

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 68
Re: SHM-CD
« Reply #12 on: August 19, 2010, 08:46:49 AM »
Prof,

I happen to be one of the members here who owned and criticized the sound quality of SHM-CD.

In order to respond to your various points you made concerning, sound, mastering and SHM-CD, could you please consider listing your hi-fi gear (also ICs, power cables, electrical set-up, etc.), and the size and acoustic treatment of your listening space (perhaps the most important component for good sound reproduction). Listing a value $70K means nothing, as you know, when speaking of high-end equipment. It can mean one of two things: you were a wise shopper, or you were robbed.

I tell you what: if you list yours, I'll list mine for your consideration when reading my response to your conclusions above.

Thank you.
« Last Edit: August 19, 2010, 08:59:01 AM by vvrinc »

Offline Russell

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 214
Re: SHM-CD
« Reply #13 on: August 22, 2010, 06:51:21 PM »
I don't mean to stir up the pot here, but I have a small handful of SHM-CDs, and the differences I hear between the regular editions and the SHM ones are pretty small at best (when I've had a chance to directly compare them), and usually in favor of the SHM-CDs. Is it all in my head? Maybe. However, I'm not entirely convinced that it's all a marketing ploy. Assuming that the bits on both discs (SHM vs regular) are identical, any audible differences could be attributable to things like the CD player's ability to handle jitter, error-correction, and interpolation. Supposedly a player would have an easier time of reading the bits off of an SHM-CD (since the data would be cleaner), and therefore would have less work to do when converting the digital stream to analog audio. This might explain how a CD-R copy of an SHM-CD would still retain the latter's improved sound quality, since the copy would have had a better source (cleaner, more accurate bits) to copy from.

Russell

Offline waderice

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 649
Re: SHM-CD
« Reply #14 on: August 22, 2010, 07:23:59 PM »
I don't mean to stir up the pot here, but I have a small handful of SHM-CDs, and the differences I hear between the regular editions and the SHM ones are pretty small at best (when I've had a chance to directly compare them), and usually in favor of the SHM-CDs. Is it all in my head? Maybe. However, I'm not entirely convinced that it's all a marketing ploy. Assuming that the bits on both discs (SHM vs regular) are identical, any audible differences could be attributable to things like the CD player's ability to handle jitter, error-correction, and interpolation. Supposedly a player would have an easier time of reading the bits off of an SHM-CD (since the data would be cleaner), and therefore would have less work to do when converting the digital stream to analog audio. This might explain how a CD-R copy of an SHM-CD would still retain the latter's improved sound quality, since the copy would have had a better source (cleaner, more accurate bits) to copy from.

Russell

Since first reading about these disks, and the input from forum members, I might add that additional things, such as modest investments in things like high-quality system audio cables and possible treatment of discs, such as use of L'Art du Son, can make a difference in playback of any CD format.  Some very early CDs in my collection have benefited sonically, with minimization of shrill sonics on those discs with treatment by L'Art du Son.  All of which goes to show that you don't need to spend $10,000 on stereo equipment.

Wade

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk