|
Post by Shockmaster on Oct 30, 2011 9:12:40 GMT -5
I download the super audio from Jim's blog... Did anyone listen to it and get really wound up? I listened to Hello and the distant Liam vocals blast out louder than the normal ones... is this normal? I just skipped to the downmix after that.... Anyone know what it's that's all about??? (Not criticising Jim or the uploader)
|
|
|
Post by davidjay on Oct 30, 2011 9:28:08 GMT -5
I think these are the individual channels of Neil Dorfsman's multichannel remix, which would normally be heard together when played back on an SACD-based surround sound system; with Hello you're probably hearing what's normally sent to the rear speakers - i.e. a delayed version of Liam's lead vocals, but at a higher volume than normal. Not sure what might have caused that.
The stereo downmix of the surround sound version sounds great IMHO. The SACD itself also contains Owen Morris's original stereo mix, where it's mastered exactly the same as on the original Creation CD. Hope this helps.
|
|
|
Post by Shockmaster on Oct 30, 2011 10:10:42 GMT -5
I think these are the individual channels of Neil Dorfsman's multichannel remix, which would normally be heard together when played back on an SACD-based surround sound system; with Hello you're probably hearing what's normally sent to the rear speakers - i.e. a delayed version of Liam's lead vocals, but at a higher volume than normal. Not sure what might have caused that. The stereo downmix of the surround sound version sounds great IMHO. The SACD itself also contains Owen Morris's original stereo mix, where it's mastered exactly the same as on the original Creation CD. Hope this helps. Yeah, that helps, thanks! I do like the downmix, its nice and clear... With the regular version (loud delay one), would it sound the same if I converted it to play in iTunes? If so, I'll take it to the studio tomorrow to listen to it on the surroundsound (:
|
|
|
Post by schorman on Oct 30, 2011 11:28:03 GMT -5
Hey Tom, I mixed the down mix with these settings: -3db R/L -6db C/Rs/Ls -10db LFE It will sound much better on a stereo this way. If you play the 6 channel flacs, the surround and LFE channels will be too loud and you will hear clipping. If you play it on a surround setup, it should sound great.
|
|
|
Post by davidjay on Oct 30, 2011 11:30:10 GMT -5
I think these are the individual channels of Neil Dorfsman's multichannel remix, which would normally be heard together when played back on an SACD-based surround sound system; with Hello you're probably hearing what's normally sent to the rear speakers - i.e. a delayed version of Liam's lead vocals, but at a higher volume than normal. Not sure what might have caused that. The stereo downmix of the surround sound version sounds great IMHO. The SACD itself also contains Owen Morris's original stereo mix, where it's mastered exactly the same as on the original Creation CD. Hope this helps. Yeah, that helps, thanks! I do like the downmix, its nice and clear... With the regular version (loud delay one), would it sound the same if I converted it to play in iTunes? If so, I'll take it to the studio tomorrow to listen to it on the surroundsound (: I think it would sound the same tbh, although I can't be certain. My feeling is that if you want to hear the surround mix as intended you'll need the actual disc and the appropriate system. As regards the rip, I think it's possible that some information about the level at which the rear channels should play may be missing due to the way that the rip was done (no criticism of the original uploader is intended here...as what follows should make clear). For a long while it's not been possible to digitally rip an SACD due to the lack of computer-based SACD drives, the DSD format in which the audio is stored, and the format's copy protection scheme. This is a problem if you want to back up your SACDs to hard disk etc. I understand that recently the problem has been solved, but that a true digital rip is fiddly, requiring specialised equipment and software. The more practical way of backing up an SACD is to run the analogue outputs of an SACD player into an analogue-to-digital converter and capture it at as high a resolution as possible, in order to preserve the quality of the source material. Admittedly I've only glanced over the articles on this, but you might find this discussion on the subject over at the Steve Hoffman forums useful: www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showthread.php?t=204477
|
|
|
Post by Shockmaster on Oct 30, 2011 13:11:54 GMT -5
Yeah, that helps, thanks! I do like the downmix, its nice and clear... With the regular version (loud delay one), would it sound the same if I converted it to play in iTunes? If so, I'll take it to the studio tomorrow to listen to it on the surroundsound (: I think it would sound the same tbh, although I can't be certain. My feeling is that if you want to hear the surround mix as intended you'll need the actual disc and the appropriate system. As regards the rip, I think it's possible that some information about the level at which the rear channels should play may be missing due to the way that the rip was done (no criticism of the original uploader is intended here...as what follows should make clear). For a long while it's not been possible to digitally rip an SACD due to the lack of computer-based SACD drives, the DSD format in which the audio is stored, and the format's copy protection scheme. This is a problem if you want to back up your SACDs to hard disk etc. I understand that recently the problem has been solved, but that a true digital rip is fiddly, requiring specialised equipment and software. The more practical way of backing up an SACD is to run the analogue outputs of an SACD player into an analogue-to-digital converter and capture it at as high a resolution as possible, in order to preserve the quality of the source material. Admittedly I've only glanced over the articles on this, but you might find this discussion on the subject over at the Steve Hoffman forums useful: www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showthread.php?t=204477Okay, I think I get what you mean, I'll give it a go and take it in tomorrow and see what happens
|
|
|
Post by schorman on Oct 30, 2011 13:51:58 GMT -5
Here's the recording info:
SACD>>Pioneer Elite DV-45A>>E-MU 1616m>>Adobe Audition 3.01(Recorded at 192kHz/32bits float, 6x mono wav>>Downsampled to 96 kHz>>Tracks Split>>Dithered to 24bits)>>WavWizard 0.54(Interleave to 6 channel wav)>>x32.exe (Edit and correct ChannelMask in RIFF tag using hex editor)>>flac
The SACD player was set to output the channels at their native volume. No volume manipulations were made. Until I get a ps3 with the right firmware, that's about as well as this can be recorded.
|
|
|
Post by davidjay on Oct 30, 2011 15:11:48 GMT -5
Here's the recording info: SACD>>Pioneer Elite DV-45A>>E-MU 1616m>>Adobe Audition 3.01(Recorded at 192kHz/32bits float, 6x mono wav>>Downsampled to 96 kHz>>Tracks Split>>Dithered to 24bits)>>WavWizard 0.54(Interleave to 6 channel wav)>>x32.exe (Edit and correct ChannelMask in RIFF tag using hex editor)>>flac The SACD player was set to output the channels at their native volume. No volume manipulations were made. Until I get a ps3 with the right firmware, that's about as good as this can be recorded. I stand corrected. Many thanks for the information and for your contribution, schorman. I would agree that the above method would be the best possible approach, save for the digital PS3 method you mentioned K+
|
|
pheel
Oasis Roadie
You and I are gonna live forever
Posts: 345
|
Post by pheel on Oct 30, 2011 16:30:50 GMT -5
In regards to why some sounds are louder than others. This has nothing to do with the rip quality or technique. The SACD was intended to be heard in surround, with speakers all around the room, the mix was done so certain sounds are heard in certain directions. This means that not every sound is going to be heard from ever speaker at a equal level or intensity. This is how surround sound works, if every sound came from every direction, you wouldn't be able to have directional sound, it would just be the same thing coming from directions.
|
|
|
Post by Rattleduser on Oct 31, 2011 11:28:10 GMT -5
thanks for the stereo mix, I amplified the volume without clipping as there was a little room from looking at the waveforms
|
|
|
Post by gagan on Mar 17, 2012 17:03:17 GMT -5
Hi guys,
I have Schorman's mix that is apparently 3-4 years old. I saw that on rkid's site he uploaded an "improved" downmix, which by his accounts, sounds much better. I tried getting the links for the mix but they're down because they were hosted on multiupload.
Is anyone nice enough to provide me those links (via PM) or point me in the right direction to acquire this mix? I really want to hear it. I love Schorman's mix, but I do think there are some spots where the regular CD sounds better. I would be very appreciative if anyone could share the rip that rkid released on oct 30th 2011
thx
|
|
|
Post by gagan on Mar 19, 2012 22:06:12 GMT -5
Bump
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 19, 2012 23:19:45 GMT -5
I have the SACD and its Amazing. sounds great through my home theater
|
|
|
Post by gagan on Mar 21, 2012 14:42:47 GMT -5
You liked it? I thought the mix was terrible, but the channels themselves give you a lot to work with when making your own downmix. I was hopeful someone had Pheel's downmix
|
|
|
Post by vango1 on May 5, 2012 9:34:58 GMT -5
did you have any luck tracking down pheel's downmix? I loved the clarity in schorman's stereo mp3 mix, but my hard drive took a dump and now its stranded on my ipod. Id love to get it again.
|
|