Norah Jones Come Away With Me SACD: Stereo track sourced from 16/44.1 PCM!

As reported by John Marks in the November issue of Stereophile (pp. 51 and 53):

Comments?

 

What a shame. Makes me glad I opted for the vinyl. The SACD was on my wishlist though... hopefully Blue Note will correct this problem and re-release the SACD.

 

A shame, indeed. I never gave the SACD an extended listen because my copy developed spindle cracks within a few days. I returned it and never bothered to try another copy. At least I have the CD.

 

If true then this is shocking - it's fraud isn't it?

My god - is it any wonder SACD hasn't taken the world by storm?

 

I'd like to hear it from an official industry person before believing it. Saying "multiple sources" doesn't cut it with me.

 

I still think the MC tracks sound great to me, whatever resolution they may be -and I'm glad they made it and I bought it. I have never played the stereo tracks, and probably never will.

 

What about the vinyl? Is that from the same 16 bit digital source? Makes one wonder, eh?

 

I swear the SACD sounds better in any event. It is more detailed and wider staging on my system. One wonders why they did not use the analog tape. I think Hobson at Classic Records used an analog tape. Why not analog to DSD for the SACD?

I guess the LP is the only true hirez recording of this album.

 

Here's another issue:

Did you look at the Red Book vs. SACD players used?

An Esoteric for Red Book and a lowly Denon 2900 for SACD. How does John Marks know the SACD does not sound better? He should have used a better SACD player.

In addition, the Esoteric upconverted the Red Book.

...things that make you go hmmmm.

 

I already mentioned in another thread that this record's 5.1 mix is lousy and has errors (instruments that jump from the front stage to the surrounds not intentionally, but out of an incorrectly done surround mix). Now I read this and can see that the 'mistakes' are pervade this album. What a shame. Blue Note should do us, who bought the SA-CD, and their artist justice by fixing this problem and proceeding along the lines of what John Marks suggest they do.

 

All I can say is... OUCH!

 

I know what you were trying to say, but I would never refer to the Denon DVD-2900 as "lowly." As John Marks said in Stereophile, the Esoteric combo costs 14 times what the '2900 goes for, but the '2900 is still a respectable component. I've had one since February, and I love it. It's a great all-around player.

 

Comon Lee,

The 2900 is a THOUSAND DOLLAR PLAYER!! If this unit is not good enough for someone to play an SACD, then THAT is a major problem of the format (in your opinion)

I owned a 2900, as well as 2 Sony SACD machines that retailed for LESS than the Denon, and they ALL sounded great to me, the Denon performed quite well.

"Lowly"???

 

I agree. This is sloppy reporting at best. If Stereophile wants to publish something like this, at least they can name the sources. Otherwise all we have is rumors that very well could have come from someone who had nothing to do with the project in question.

If it is true, though, it is disappointing.

I generally listen to the multichannel mix (which presumably was mixed to DSD from the analog multitracks). I enjoy the music and the mix and have never noticed what I would call "errors" in the mix.

 

I hope to goodness NO ONE on this forum, believes a sonic evaluation between a $14,000 & a $1000 unit, is fair. Let alone relevant. Does anyone really want to base their SA-CD vs. Red Book, results on this (the sources, not the 16/44.1 news) review?

Lee, I would never have guessed THAT!!!;-)
Really though, how do you have SA-CD playback hooked up in your system, compared to your Red Book playback?
Thanks.

Sorry guys, the Denon is "lowly" at a grand, compared to the well named Esoteric.

 

I wouldn't consider the 2900 "lowly," but I think that someone who regularly listens to cd-only playback equipment that costs 14 times as much would have to fairly call a $1,000 player that plays dvd-videos, dvd-audio, cd, and SACD lowly in comparison.

 

I thought the whole point of hi-rez is that it's supposed to sound better than the best cd playback? The equipment used isn't much of the issue. Many of the first "digitally mastered" cd's released were sourced from copies of copies of tape. If the SACD doesn't sound better on a $120 Sony player they shouldn't bother.

 

Nope, the vinyl was from the two track analog master tapes. Bernie Grundman assembled them for the vinyl.

 

My main issue with the Stereophile article wasn't the hardware used for the comparison, though I think they were sloppy in drawing any conclusions in this way. My main issue was the idea that the stereo track on the Come Away With Me SACD was sourced from 16/44.1 PCM. That should never happen.

 

Agreed. At the very least, the SACD should be technically capable of superior sound to the redbook. If surround is all they are interested we already have that version. It's the ProLogicII button on the old avr.

 

My point is that you are comparing a mid-level or slightly lower SACD player to a top of the line $14K Red Book player. Truly an apples and oranges comparison.

In any event, on my system the SACD is better than the Red Book. Maybe the upconversion is doing something that Marks likes.

Sony SCD-777ES with Cardas Golden Reference power cord and interconnects. CD playback at various time by Audio Research CD3 and SCD-777ES feeding a Benchmark DAC-1.

 

Couldn't they have compared the redbook layer on the Denon vs. the stereo SACD layer and reported any sonic differences? Isn't that the true measure? As long as the SACD layer sounded better, you'd mark that as a win for SACD.

I still think it would be a shame if the information is true. I never got the hi-rez version, only the redbook.

 

I have only listened to this in surround. Will probably never listen to the stereo track. If I do it will be while I am doing something else at the same time and I would not hear a difference anyway.

PAT

 

First the upconversion Marks talks about is marketing speak for oversampling. All that's happening is the sampling of the cd is increased 8 or 16 times, depending on which mode - as discussed elsewhere this makes it possible to use a gentler filter.


Second, if you read carefully, Marks says the sacd layer didn't sound very different than the cd layer on the 2900 and sounded slightly better on the esoteric.

 

never mind!