zenmastering

Sure, send me a link. The project files would have been the best source of info but I can probably glean some thing from the image itself. Graemme

I do SACD mastering and authoring professionally. I'd be happy to take a look at one of your ISOs and/or the SuperAuthor project files to see what's happening and hopefully suggest how you can correct the problem. Cheers, Graemme info-AT-zenmastering-DOT-net

Practically speaking, how do you use either of those scenarios?

How do you plan to use it as a MCh DAC? It's a 2in/4-out system... There is some old promo material that claims six-channel ability but that was corrected a couple of years ago (I was interested in it for the same reason.) Graemme

I disagree...The InfiniteWave tests have all the usual suspects used in mastering/SRC and I can assure you that PT is not the most commonly used *mastering* tool where SRC would be used. *Maybe* WaveLab fits that criteria but I'd wager that it's a toss up between Pyramix / Sequoia / Sadie / Saracon / WaveLab / Sonic and other IzoTope-based products. Otherwise, I agree (and appreciate your many informative posts here.) Graemme

Well said... As a full-time mastering engineer, I have this irrational desire to eat and shelter myself...crazy, I know and it leads to doing things to masters that I'd rather not do (on many of them). However, some music is very intentionally loud, distorted or otherwise sonically idiosyncratic..that's the artist's choice and I support that, too. That's called living in the paradox of life, not being an asshole that doesn't care about music (far from it...) and just crushing everything because I can. My job is to help artists realize their vision. Regarding the loudness war: It's been going on for many, many, years and 'blossomed' when the necessary tools became *widely* available. If those tools were available in the 1950's they would have been used as much then as they are now. It affects all kinds of musical genres, including classical. It is not directly related to the need to reduce the dynamic range of music to fit in either a specific medium (vinyl, tape) or in a specific playback environment (automobile, iPod, etc.). It is related to a human 'failing' that louder = better. At least that was the radio station programme director's point of view across the world...the louder record would win the coveted place in the radio station's playlist and money would be made...pretty simple. I suppose the other human 'failing' is the competitive nature of business...the idea that my recording/magazine/product/whatever must be louder/more saturated than the next in order that it stand out and be chosen (so I can eat/survive and all that.) Yes, of course, it's now totally out of hand...I'd love to see way less of this, myself, but guess what? Now it's part of the artistic presentation by the artists themselves and since I get to do this work because they exist, I'm not going to tell them how to make their art. Clipping is seen as a valid method of raising the level of masters and again, it's in service of the artist's / producer's request. Masters can sound better when this method is used, as it doesn't have some of the limiter artifacts that might otherwise be on a master. So, the clipping master may sound better than the alternative you'll never hear outside of the mastering studio, even if it measures worse. I use other methods to achieve the required RMS levels but I'm no angel if need be. 'Mastered for iTunes' offers some sensible hope because of Apple's requirements that there be no clipped samples in the AAC file. This is not the same as the clipping mentioned above, rather it's about the clipping that can occur during a conversion to a lossy format. At least there are some guidelines here and given a good-sounding source, the 'MFiT' versions are a serious improvement over lossy formats where no such care is taken. The trouble with the MFiT approach is that it will only really work if 'SoundCheck' is turned on by default in iTunes...that little switch will level the playing field (sorry about the pun) and provide a clearer picture of the differences between very crushed and even moderately-limited mixes and masters. Many decisions and compromises to be made but as others have already said, I'll take dirty art over pristine muzak, any day...stick to your guns but do come over once in a while and listen to something new... In case you wanted to know: The world I live in spans from Ray Kimber's IsoMike SA-CDs to heavy bands like City of Fire and a recent fav: The excellent (and dirty...) 'Nine O'Clock Gun' album by the Dave Philips Band. Sorry for the long post...I got a little fed up with the finger-pointing ;-> Graemme

DXD = 32bit, floating point, 352k8 s/r. Can also be stored as 24 bit integer, but there's no real reason to do that when the 24 bit file has to live in a 32-bit computer file container, anyway. Pyramix has two modes for DXD/DSD editing. One of them behaves as you state; the other only converts the source DSD audio to 'DXD' for the duration of the edit (crossfade/fade) itself. This latter mode is especially useful for so-called 'purist' DSD' titles because the source DSD audio is merely copied into the output file, intact, until an edit or level change occurs. After this edit is processed in DXD and remodulated to DSD, the rendering process continues to copy the DSD into the output file until the next edit. This latter DSD-editing mode is non-real time, i.e., you have to render the edits into a new output file. You use the DXD mode to monitor the editing process in real time, then render the result. Sorry for the off topic comment but I see this misconception all over the place and wanted to correct it. Graemme

You'd need three cables to make this work: 2 for SDIF data and 1 for the wordclock that will be the sync source you want to select, not SDIF. At least that's the theory and how the SDIF connections work in my studio. Graemme

Hi Ted, Please send me a copy of the software and your guide for ripping SACDs on the PS3. Thanks! Graemme p.s. - I'd also love to learn about how to configure the PS3 as a network daemon, if Pacwin or anyone else wants to chime in with instructions :->

Yes, I wish! It will show up eventually, as it's now on the radar as we document the new features of 8.1. I want cutting master / ISO playback, too...

'Scuse the tangential correction: There's a bit more to the .dsf file than that; A DSF file is structured like a WAV/RIFF chunk file as well as having the the metadata enhancements that you mention. If there is a license to use DSF at all, it's free and open, at least according to the documents I received from Sony. Happy July Holidays, North Americans... Graemme

You're welcome. I still think that people are misinterpreting the liner notes and well, the definitive statement from RR has been quoted directly from their web site. Over and out, Graemme

How do you get to "I hope that RR isn't bullshitting us...?" RR are quite upfront about how they so things: {already quoted in this thread and from their web site) "Currently we record at 176.4 kHz/ 24 bits, with HDCD. RR’s master recordings are made using PCM, not the DSD which is the native format for SACD. For a long time, we weren’t satisfied with the sonic results of the conversion of PCM to DSD and so we did not make SACDs. New technological improvements now make that conversion much less of an issue. We’re excited to be making SACDs for fans of the format." The liner notes have been misinterpreted, that's all...no big deal. The HRx version of 'Exotic Dances' and the SACD version were two different transfers, made months or years apart, of the analogue recording. Both transfers were made to 176K4 PCM. Whether or not the same analogue deck was used, etc., are all factors in how the final output sounds. Just details beyond that... I've often found that I like the DSD playback of PCM-sourced audio as much or more than the original...to me, it has more to do with the DAC than anything else. The EMM Labs converters that I use (and love) have always converted PCM to DSD before the analogue conversion; perhaps I'm just used to that or who knows what ;-> Respectfully, Graemme

Exotic Dances transfer... You are misinterpreting the liner notes (or perhaps Roch is...) I know for a fact, since I did the transfer... Graemme

"Yes, currently, they do all recording in 24/176.4 PCM. But the title I referenced, Exotic Dances From The Opera, is an older RR title, which was originally recorded in analog. That this title's origin is analog, and the two digital transfers were made from the analog master, is why I recommended it for the comparison." Unfortunately, this comparison will not satisfy your requirements: The SACD was made from a 176K4 PCM transfer of the analogue master. It wasn't even the same transfer as the HRx title. Regards, Graemme