Indeed, a lot of the bad press CDs get isn’t because of the format, it’s how the recordings were screwed up. Of course, that can be done to vinyl, too. The format is absolutely adequate for what it was intended.
Did Sony and Philips make the right call with the cd format being 44.1/16?
- Thread starter KG10
- Start date
Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:
Spot on.
jimfisheye
2K Club - QQ Super Nova
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2010
- Messages
- 3,412
And there are even bluray discs with volume war compressed program put to them too sometimes. Talk about bait and switch, right?
Novelty masters abound. Put your collector's hat on and find the good copies! Sometimes they appear in CD format after all.
Novelty masters abound. Put your collector's hat on and find the good copies! Sometimes they appear in CD format after all.
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2002
- Messages
- 4,236
The Quad option was present since the start but never used. The only time i had the possibility to know something about it was when i was testing cd-r software and asked for it to someone in the company which had the red book. IIRC it was 32KHz 12 bit 4 channel, which is 1536 kb, slightly more than the 44,1 16 bit 2 channel, which does 1411. As playback time it was similar to regular cd (remember that at the beginning of the cd era there was nothing above 60 min +- 1) because the cd speed was still at nominal level (1x) and increased many years later.
KG10
Well-known Member
Huh interesting mini dv has that 4 channel recording mode as well and it has the same bit rate as 48k as well.
I may have mentioned this a little too often...however...IIRC, the Philips CD brochure I picked up at the 1981 SCES in Chicago had a sentence or two that stated that the CD could contain discrete quad sound but would have 1/2 the playing time of the stereo CD (reasonable conclusion - 4 16bit/44.1kHz channels).
(more info about the audible result of the 16bit/44.1kHz CD parameters):
https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/forums/threads/cd-sound-quality-accuracy-a-b-x-testing.34992/
Kirk Bayne
(more info about the audible result of the 16bit/44.1kHz CD parameters):
https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/forums/threads/cd-sound-quality-accuracy-a-b-x-testing.34992/
Kirk Bayne
I've said often that the discrete CD was a missed opportunity. It could have revived surround sound before the less dedicated quadies totally gave up and returned to plain old stereo. It could have sparked a surround revival based on music rather than movies.
Ideally the industry should have hung in there until the discrete CD became a reality.
Ideally the industry should have hung in there until the discrete CD became a reality.
KG10
Well-known Member
In this universe I could see SW also creating a quad mix as part of his workflow.
AFAIK, the last USA CD-4 QuadraDisc LP (1978/79) to CD (1982), just 3 to 4 short years.
Maybe there could have been 2 quad configuration options for a discrete quad CD - sum and difference so that stereo CD players could play the combined LF+LB & RF+RB and a true discrete quad option.
Kirk Bayne
Maybe there could have been 2 quad configuration options for a discrete quad CD - sum and difference so that stereo CD players could play the combined LF+LB & RF+RB and a true discrete quad option.
Kirk Bayne
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2013
- Messages
- 25,335
Are you forgetting DTS Entertainment which, IMO, revolutionized 5.1 sound from a CD as an alternative to Dolby Digital 5.1 which was the codec at the time for DVD flicks [which later added DTS}
Problem is you needed a decoder which eventually become pretty standard in CD players at the time!
I still credit DTS Entertainment for the launch of higher res SACD/DVD~A audio in the early 00's!
They did get the ball rolling FIRST!
In 1974 I purchased a Kenwood 9940 receiver that had built in CD-4 demod and was playing the discs then. With a Phillips 212 TT and an AT14 cart.
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2013
- Messages
- 25,335
And in your opinion, SW, how did it sound?
I had a no name brand but tank like receiver which also had a built in CD~4 demodulator and it sounded like SHIT!
Which is why I switched to QUAD Open Reel ..... the selection wasn't great but at least I had the ability to enjoy true four channel quad without the pervasive anomalies of poorly pressed discs and the wretched decoding abilities of those finicky CD~4 demodulators!
In short... Yes!
I'd say long term impression was it sounded medium good. I've never had all the problems others bemoan about CD-4. Select the right components and do a good set up and it just should play. It always did for me. But being very subjective I never heard the deep bass, dynamic punch or crisp clean highs on a CD-4 like I did on stereo labels like American Gramophone or Sheffield Direct to Disc.
Mainly I lost interest in CD-4 because the mixes of music I liked was always disappointing. Tull & Zappa comes to mind. These could have been aggressive show cases of surround sound but they were just too tame.
I must agree with your comment about DTS Coherent Acoustics. What a great concept use an existing standard, the CD, to carry a new method of surround sound. I purchased a Marantz AC-3 decoder with a DTS add on board from a company called MSB. This was back when a LD player used an special RF output AC-3. Mean while DTS just used good 'ol SPDIF. I have all the Moody Blues R2R quad tapes & I built my first PC so I could copy them to digital & burn DTS Cd's.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2013
- Messages
- 25,335
So, lackluster bass and lack of dynamic punch from those early decoded CD~4 discs, huh, SW? Not akin to what we're hearing today from Rhino's renewed Quadio program with 192/24 BD~As? IMO, those early decoders were WRETCHED! Set up was extremely finicky [still IS] and unless your turntable/tone arm/cartridge were perfectly aligned .... getting that CD~4 signal to light up was a CRAP SHOOT! Not to mention the poor pressings!
And totally agree, those American Gramophone and Sheffield Lab discs sounded outstanding.
I have almost all of the American Gramophone MLP DVD~A 5.1 discs and they're sonically SUPERB!
I've heard a number of excuses about why early CDs did not sound 'good.' I even heard a claim that labels were using LP masters during the early years of CDs in order to bring a large amount of product to market. I find this difficult to believe because of the RIAA equalization recording curve is quite extreme (-20 dB at 20 Hz; +20 dB at 20 kHz.)
My experience with going from an early Sony CD player in 1985 to a Nakamichi in 1989 is that, as others have noted, the Sony's playback DACs weren't up to snuff. Subsequently, going from the Nak to a Marantz in 2006 was yet again another improvement in playback quality, though not as drastic as between the Sony and the Nak.
So no, I don't think that the 44.1/16 format or its timing was a mistake. Besides, if I had a $1 for every time the release of technology should have been delayed by a year or two, I'd have enough wealth to make Musk seem like a pauper. LOL
My experience with going from an early Sony CD player in 1985 to a Nakamichi in 1989 is that, as others have noted, the Sony's playback DACs weren't up to snuff. Subsequently, going from the Nak to a Marantz in 2006 was yet again another improvement in playback quality, though not as drastic as between the Sony and the Nak.
So no, I don't think that the 44.1/16 format or its timing was a mistake. Besides, if I had a $1 for every time the release of technology should have been delayed by a year or two, I'd have enough wealth to make Musk seem like a pauper. LOL
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2013
- Messages
- 25,335
IMO, a greatly under appreciated American Gramophone MLP DVD~A 5.1 [96/24] disc!
And I disagree that 16 bit/44.1 kHz is adequate in this day and age! Unless they're ALL mastered by JVC's superb XRCD technology ......
I recently purchased a few Blue Note XRCD24 AUDIO WAVE CDs mastered by Alan Yoshida and IMO, they give Analogue Productions Stereo SACDs a run for their money and definitely blow out of the water all those Rudy Van Gelder Blue Note CD remasters of only a scant few years ago, Actually, the BEST I've heard in a digital format from the Blue Note master tapes!
And I disagree that 16 bit/44.1 kHz is adequate in this day and age! Unless they're ALL mastered by JVC's superb XRCD technology ......
I recently purchased a few Blue Note XRCD24 AUDIO WAVE CDs mastered by Alan Yoshida and IMO, they give Analogue Productions Stereo SACDs a run for their money and definitely blow out of the water all those Rudy Van Gelder Blue Note CD remasters of only a scant few years ago, Actually, the BEST I've heard in a digital format from the Blue Note master tapes!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Bit_Mapping
(SBM doesn't need decoding in the CD player, works on any CD player)
IIRC, Sound & Vision mag had an article about SBM, one classical music CD did have lower noise in the midrange (played on a standard CD player), I may go through my S&V mags and see if I can find (and scan and post) the article.
I mostly listen to popular music, so the benefit of SBM is less likely to be audible.
Kirk Bayne
(SBM doesn't need decoding in the CD player, works on any CD player)
IIRC, Sound & Vision mag had an article about SBM, one classical music CD did have lower noise in the midrange (played on a standard CD player), I may go through my S&V mags and see if I can find (and scan and post) the article.
I mostly listen to popular music, so the benefit of SBM is less likely to be audible.
Kirk Bayne
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2013
- Messages
- 25,335
HDCD did promise 20 bit resolution from a CD provided your player incorporated an HDCD decoder. And unlike DTS CDs and even MQA, HDCD was incorporated into over 5000 discs!
The ones I do own do sound significantly better than their non HDCD counterparts but like all these technologies fell by the wayside! Again, because they needed a decoder to be effective!
Up until OPPO introduced their swan song 203/205 players, almost all of their players did incorporate HDCD....And quite a few Audio Fidelity 24k Gold CDs also offered HDCD technology .....
SBM was trying to get round the limitations of some of the earlier ADCs by noise shaping. A different form of noise shaping is what allows DSD to function, as its a single bit conversion.
