Dr. AIX

Chris, with all due respect. I went to the MQA suite at the RMAF event and spoke at length with Jeff Dean, the MQA representative and a person that I've been friends with for many years. I do not believe he would lie to me about the number. I asked him a few questions. Among them, "How many MQA albums are available now?" He answered 250. These are the ones that audiophiles might enjoy but are not mainstream. I then asked him about the conversion of the WB "catalog". I have read the announcements that the "entire WB catalog would be made available in MQA". I wanted to know if they would be converting every album in the WB archive (which is certainly in the hundreds of thousands) or only those that have already been identified as worthy and digitized by the WB mastering facility (the head of that studio is also a long time friend of mine). Jeff indicated the number was 3500, those titles that have already been digitized into high-res bit buckets from the best available analog master (not remastered) and made available to the WB licensed partners (HD Tracks, HiResAudio etc). This number makes sense to me. The people at WB have publicly acknowledged that they've processed (digitized) about 3500 albums over the past 9 years at events like CE Week and CES. So I'm not sure who told you a different number, but I'm 100% certain of the information that I received from the MQA representative. I also know the person who worked on the software plug-in for MQA. He and I spoke about the current situation with the tools. They are in beta among limited number of mastering facilities. To believe that tens or even hundreds of thousands of WB recordings are available in MQA at this time seems unrealistic. I would love to believe that MQA solves a meaningful problem in high-end audio. I've heard it on multiple tracks on multiple occasions. It sounds great — but so did the original analog masters! I had hoped that MQA would process a number of my files in the format as Bob Stuart promised me back at the CES 2014 show. I sent them 12 files shortly thereafter and am still waiting to get them back and do my own comparison. I'm personally not convinced that the overblown praise spewed by the major publications and a variety websites is deserved. Music recorded with high fidelity in mind and released on vinyl LP, CDs, high-res physical media, file download, or streams can sound amazing without MQA. I know my own recordings eclipse the fidelity of just about everything I've ever heard. The unfortunate reality is that most music recorded and released by the major labels isn't recorded with fidelity in mind. Their sonic targets are bound up with the commercial realities of the music industry.

You might to ask her how she adds reverberation to her studio tracks...I believe it's PCM.

But a transfer of an analog tape to DSD isn't a "native" DSD project...it is limited by the fidelity/specs of the analog tape. Of the 8000 SACD/DSD recordings available only 15% were actually recorded using DSD through the entire production process.

I wrote to the Audio Salon on Monday and received a response on Tuesday from the owner that I he couldn't add me to the guest list...very curious. No reason was given. I was really looking forward to coming by to check out the place, the Pono and say hello...especially as this is only 5 minutes away from my studio.

Chris, I'm sorry that you didn't get a chance to sit in the center of the room...that might have made difference for you and the industry veteran you mentioned. The feedback that I've received was predominantly positive. In fact, I was absolutely thrilled that John Hamm (the CEO of Pono) had time to come by the room on Saturday morning. He did sit in the center of the room as I played John Gorka, Dave Mason and a melancholy track featuring a very well know female artist. He was absolutely blown away and as we chatted outside following the presentation, he insisted on taking a copy of John Gorka with him to share with Neil. The speakers were not my choice for the room...I mix and prefer direct radiators but I think most would agree with the person you quoted in the elevator. The room sounded amazing.

I would agree that specifications are only a part of the evaluation process...listening is the ultimate experience for whether you like something or not. That's why I've put a bunch of demonstration tracks on my FTP server for anyone to download and evaluate for yourself. Just visit the RealHD-Audio site, go to the FREE HD-Audio page and ask for the credentials and I will happily provide you with access. Take a listen and let me know. I will also share that when Andrew Quint, one of the senior reviewers at TAS, came to my studio and listened to several of my surround recordings, he wrote that the sound was, "...quite simply the most realistic and involving instance of recorded sound I can recall, from any source format." That was a very encouraging statement and review of our techniques and technology. If anyone lives in the Southern California area or is in town for a visit, I invite you to come by and experience what Andrew heard. I haven't had anyone walk away yet without being impressed. I agree with Barry Diament of Soundkeeper Recordings on this whole DSD vs. PCM issue. Like what you like...but for me I'm looking for pure and accurate reproduction of a music performance. And I get that from HD PCM. Can DSD at some multiple of 64 do a great job of capturing a music performance? Yes, but I hear PCM as superior. However, I differ from Barry in that I prefer to place many microphones in stereo pairs close to the instruments. This produces a more intimate sound and involving sound IMHO and gives me the ability to mix in a variety of ways.

Jud, there are as many ways to record and produce a selection of music than there are types of music. The aesthetics, market, artist's intent, production choices as well as the technology applied during the production all shape the ultimate sound. For most commercial recordings, being accurate to the sound of the original instruments is not critical. Pet Sounds is a studio multitrack "pop" recording done in the 60s...that's a different animal than something recorded in a live auditorium without any processing of any kind. Both have merit but are radically different. For what it's worth, upsampling or converting from one format to another is never a good idea or IMHO an improvement. The fidelity of a particular recording is "locked" in at the time of the original source recording. I have advanced a definition of HD-Audio as a recording that meets or exceeds the ability of human hearing...put into specifications, that means at least 96 kHz/24-bits. This rules out analog tape, vinyl and compact discs...as wonderful as they can be (within the market segments that they occupy). Analog tape cannot achieve this standard and most vinyl was made from analog masters. As a former mastering engineer, dynamic range and accurate frequency response ARE NOT major concerns for a commercial release. You really should visit my site and request information to the FTP site that will allow you to download some of my tracks. There is one that won the "2002 Demmy Award" from the CEA. It's called Mosaic from Laurence Juber. It has become a standard guitar recording for many. I think you might agree with some of our customers and reviewers that feel that they have some of the best sonics available.

Selarom, I agree with you completely. As I wrote in my piece, I enjoyed the DSD playback and accept that it is one of the flavors available to producers and consumers. I also believe it's important for people to understand the processes that underlie the formats. It's not all about what you hear. Being accurate to the actual sound of the instruments and singers matters as well. The RealHD-Audio.com site is brand new having launched less than a week ago. That's the reason there are not a lot of posts. I hope people will come by and be willing to share. I'm offering free downloadable HD-Audio tracks for review.

I thought I posted this earlier but it didn't seem to go through. A few have suggested that I experience DSD with an open mind. I have. At the end of March I participated in an invitation only event at a state-of-the-art studio in Montana. I mean this guy has a beautiful room and all of the gear money can by...including a Studer A827, Sonoma 24 tracks DSD recorder using Meitner conversion and a HD ProTools system with Mytek converters. He runs everything through a new SSL 9000 Series K console into Wilson Sasha or Alexandria XLF speakers using VTL amplifiers and Transparent Cables. Not too shabby. A group of us, listened to CDs, vinyl, SA-CDs, DSD and PCM at a variety of specifications. The most interesting event was a recording session with Wayne Horvitz and his trio. We captured the entire event on analog 2" tape, Sonoma and ProTools. The playback session was very interesting. I posted an article on the 11th with the results. The short story is everyone (including me) liked the DSD playback...but I felt the PCM at 96/24 was as good if not slightly better. And it didn't suffer from any HF noise. And all we did was playback the recorders without any modifications.

Hiro, my statement is an explanation for my actions...not an excuse. As I said, if you have expertise in this area and wish to contribute to the discussion, you are welcome.

Thanks Richard...perhaps I misunderstood. I simply didn't want anyone here to think that I removed the trackback comments on my RealHD-Audio site for the wrong reasons. I simply would rather the discussion regarding the merits of John's points not be focused outside of the site. Thanks for your response. Mark

REShaman...please read the comment below. And no, I have never been banned from Steve's forum or any other.

Hiro, I'm the administrator at RealHD-Audio.com and for obvious reasons prefer that any comments or discussion remain at the source of the article. To quote large portions of the post on another site and then make comments detracts from my efforts. If you or others wish to comment on the merits of John's statements, then you're certainly welcome. In fact, I encourage knowledgeable people to comment. John is a very well respected engineer with decades of experience working in analog and digital and has designed and created a DAC with great native DSD conversion. I do believe he is knowledgeable about this field. But if you have conflicting viewpoints, then please make them at Real HD-Audio | Information about the world of high quality audio Regards, Mark

Not sure why you're having problems downloading from the iTrax.com server. We serve hundreds of customers everyday and haven't had too many reports of difficulties. Remember these are very large files. As for the FLAC fully tagged versions, we have them and are in the process of revamping the site to include them. In the meantime, just write to me at the site and we'll set up an FTP transfer so that you can get the FLAC files. There have been some articles that question the lossless nature of FLAC. I personally prefer to playback HD PCM...but it's really a toss up.