HDCD I looked it up and it says it some microboff crap

pitdogg2

Rough crowd huh Brock....
I still also have many of my first CD's I bought back in the 80's 99% still play the few that didn't more or less delaminated so to speak and then no longer play. Many of the first had no back cover art just table of contents if you hold those up to the sun you will see many tiny holes and yet they never ever got any worse. CD rot is bunk in my mind .....

My HDCD copies do sound better when played on HDCD players. Many of the player makers no longer support HDCD so anymore it's rare to see it.

heiney9

Afterburnt, do you have a player or dac that decodes HDCD? Like I said if you use a bit perfect ripping program the HDCD is still present in your rip.

If you are really interested somewhere on the interwebs someone put a list together of all the HDCD releases. They were only released for a short time, mostly by artists or producers that supported HDCD.

Adcom was an early adopter of HDCD with a couple their cdp's and the GDA-700 dac having the Pacific Micronics decoding chipset.

It certainly was a step forward, but in the end the differences were too subtle for it to really get a foothold.

H9

P.s. despite some misinformation HDCD doesn't sound any better than standard redbook without a unit that decodes the HDCD. In other words you can't won't get the benefits of HDCD without a unit that actually decodes it.

heiney9

honestaquarian wrote: »

The catch is that once you convert the format it usually strips away the HDCD encoding in the LSB.

If you use bit perfect ripping software it does NOT strip away the encoding.

afterburnt

I have an Oppo that is supposed to play it and I used EAC to rip them.dunno if it is bit perfect. I didn't change any of the default settings.

voltz

heiney9 wrote: »

Afterburnt, do you have a player or dac that decodes HDCD? Like I said if you use a bit perfect ripping program the HDCD is still present in your rip.

If you are really interested somewhere on the interwebs someone put a list together of all the HDCD releases. They were only released for a short time, mostly by artists or producers that supported HDCD.

Adcom was an early adopter of HDCD with a couple their cdp's and the GDA-700 dac having the Pacific Micronics decoding chipset.

It certainly was a step forward, but in the end the differences were too subtle for it to really get a foothold.

H9

P.s. despite some misinformation HDCD doesn't sound any better than standard redbook without a unit that decodes the HDCD. In other words you can't won't get the benefits of HDCD without a unit that actually decodes it.

makes sense, like hybrid SACD's can be played in normal CD players, but then its just likea normal redbook.

heres is a link to Acoustic sounds CD page, at the top you can click on any of the formats and it will show you what they carry.

http://store.acousticsounds.com/cat/7/CD

voltz

This thread has been a eye opener for me as i thought the Gold CD's were a extended range CD like SACD's and the other formats. but they look good and play good

heiney9

voltz wrote: »

This thread has been a eye opener for me as i thought the Gold CD's were a extended range CD like SACD's and the other formats. but they look good and play good

Nope, just a different (controversial) material to contain the same dashes and oh's. I say controversial because some people swear burning cdr's on gold sounds better. It's very, very subtle at best and the same as aluminum at worst. I never bought into it because I never heard a difference and blank gold cdr's were upto 5 times the price of good "silver" colored cdr's.

Companies like MSFL and even most SACD's use "gold" colored media. I'm sure part of it is to appear to make it worth the extra $$$ these disc's cost. MFSL cd's would sound just as good on "silver" colored media, I'm sure. It's more about the mastering and transfer than the media.

H9

honestaquarian

heiney9 wrote: »

voltz wrote: »

This thread has been a eye opener for me as i thought the Gold CD's were a extended range CD like SACD's and the other formats. but they look good and play good

Nope, just a different (controversial) material to contain the same dashes and oh's. I say controversial because some people swear burning cdr's on gold sounds better. It's very, very subtle at best and the same as aluminum at worst. I never bought into it because I never heard a difference and blank gold cdr's were upto 5 times the price of good "silver" colored cdr's.

Companies like MSFL and even most SACD's use "gold" colored media. I'm sure part of it is to appear to make it worth the extra $$$ these disc's cost. MFSL cd's would sound just as good on "silver" colored media, I'm sure. It's more about the mastering and transfer than the media.

H9

Does anyone remember the green ink that you would paint onto the edges of the CD to make them sound better? It cought on for a minute back in the early nineties. So much so that some high end marques put green LED's inside the CD tray to similate the effect!
I actually had someone paint the edges of one of my CD's once and I swear I could hear a SUBTLE difference on SOME systems.

cfrizz

Thanks to this thread, I spent some money on Amazon buying 3 SACD's and one CD.

And I can tell you that HDCD does sound better than regular CDs. I'm playing my Charo and Guitar cd in both my Rotel CD player which decodes the layer vs my Pioneer Universal player which doesn't, and there is a clear, distinct difference.

There is much more detail in the Rotel, whereas in the Pioneer it sounds like there is a something muffling the sound.

This is the first time I compared the two machines on a HDCD disc, I really wasn't expecting to hear such a difference.

As for what I got on Amazon:

heiney9

Except Cathy you are using two completely different cdp's, so I don't know how you can compare the two cd's. The differences you are hearing could between the two players and has nothing to do with HDCD encoding, or maybe not. There is no way to know for sure.

H9

heiney9

Also SACD and HDCD are two different animals. I am sure you mis-typed one or the other, but it is confusing.

H9

cfrizz

heiney9 wrote: »

Except Cathy you are using two completely different cdp's, so I don't know how you can compare the two cd's. The differences you are hearing could between the two players and has nothing to do with HDCD encoding, or maybe not. There is no way to know for sure.H9

"P.s. despite some misinformation HDCD doesn't sound any better than standard redbook without a unit that decodes the HDCD. In other words you can't won't get the benefits of HDCD without a unit that actually decodes it." H9

I only have the one CD which is HDCD which I played in two different machines. One of them decodes the HDCD layer and the other machine doesn't. I hear a clear and distinct difference in the playback of the CD in the machines. So obviously having a machine that can actually decode the layer gives me the actual benefit of the HDCD layer, that I would be missing if I just had the one machine that doesn't.

cfrizz

heiney9 wrote: »

Also SACD and HDCD are two different animals. I am sure you mis-typed one or the other, but it is confusing.

H9

I am well aware of the two different formats, nor did I mistype anything. The first statement that I made was in it's own paragraph, and I made it simply because this thread encouraged me to invest a bit more money in the higher resolution of SACD. Which is what I consider some of this thread to be about, the benefits of the higher resolution formats.

While my other comments were directly related to HDCD. I was encouraged to do a rare bout of critical listening/comparison based on this thread. Sorry if you got confused.

heiney9

Again, using two different cdp's won't give you valid results. Apples and oranges. The way to properly tell is to use the same cdp (which has hdcd capability) but compare a standard version and an hdcd version of the same music. Otherwise the differences could simply be in the players, not the media or a bit of both. No way to conclusively say for sure.

H9

P.s. Of course none of this will make sense if you think all cdp's sound the same. If you are of that mindset, then I'm hitting my head against a brick wall.

cfrizz

Well for me your statement is just condescending BS since my ears clearly heard a difference. For me it is a waste of money to own multiple copies of the same cd. Once I have the best version to my ears, the other copy gets sold or given away.

Everyone's ears are different, as is everyone's systems and their level of obsessiveness. My level, and mindset is simply different from yours as is everyone else is. That does not mean my mindset or likes are wrong.

Those who are interested can make their own comparisons, conclusions and statements as to what they heard and what they like the best. It won't make them wrong anymore than me, it just means they heard something different.

I simply encourage everyone to sit back and enjoy the tunes.

heiney9

Not trying to be condescending at all, just pointing out a logical argument.

H9

afterburnt

I found a few more HDCD's in my collection. They are not necessarily labeled as suck but the Oppo says that the are. It seems that it is not uncommon for a CD to have no indication that it is in fact an HDCD recording.

afterburnt

heiney9 wrote: »

honestaquarian wrote: »

The catch is that once you convert the format it usually strips away the HDCD encoding in the LSB.

If you use bit perfect ripping software it does NOT strip away the encoding.

How can I tell or what do I need to do this?

afterburnt

How can I tell if my rips are "bit perfect"?

txcoastal1

In settings
what software are you using

afterburnt

Just running it from a portable HD to the Oppo USB

txcoastal1

What software did you use to rip to your hard drive


LOL

afterburnt

duh, EAC

Emlyn

Regarding some earlier comments about decoding an "HDCD" layer, there is only one data layer on a music CD whether it is encoded as an HDCD or a regular CD. The HDCD function is just an encoding/decoding algorithm. The digital to analog conversion in a DAC chip that is compatible with the HDCD protocol unpacks the sonic equivalent of up to 20 bits of data from the 16 bit CD layer when playing back an HDCD encoded CD. This can present higher dynamic range than usually available from a 16 bit CD and so will sound better to most people. If a CD player doesn't have an HDCD capable DAC the digital to analog conversion with an HDCD encoded CD is limited slightly below 16 bit resolution, although that may have no audible effect. There is no way to get around that potential limitation without an HDCD capable DAC to do the digital to analog conversion, whether with a CD player, a DVD player, or a computer's sound card. 24 bit digital audio made HDCD technology obsolete rather than Microsoft doing something unusual with it after the company bought the rights.

Hybrid SACDs do have more than one layer because the SACD layer and CD layers are at different depths in the hybrid discs.

Nightfall

Thanks, @Emlyn

heiney9

Many HDCD cd's aren't marked as such. This is that list I was talking about.

http://www.goodwinshighend.com/music/hdcd/hdcd_recordings.htm

H9

honestaquarian

I remember a story that Stereophile magazine did years ago about trying to get an HDCD recorded and manufactured. They were shocked at the process that most mass market CD's go through and how easy it was for that process to strip away the HDCD encoding contained in the Least Significant Bit.
I would rescectfully suggest to anyone ripping their HDCD's to stream them to their Oppo and see if the HDCD light comes on. Also to contact Oppo Digital and ask if the player will decode HDCD's that are being streamed over a network or via a USB drive.
I am willing to bet they will be surprised at the answers/outcome.

FTGV

Emlyn wrote: »

Regarding some earlier comments about decoding an "HDCD" layer, there is only one data layer on a music CD whether it is encoded as an HDCD or a regular CD. The HDCD function is just an encoding/decoding algorithm. The digital to analog conversion in a DAC chip that is compatible with the HDCD protocol unpacks the sonic equivalent of up to 20 bits of data from the 16 bit CD layer when playing back an HDCD encoded CD. This can present higher dynamic range than usually available from a 16 bit CD and so will sound better to most people. If a CD player doesn't have an HDCD capable DAC the digital to analog conversion with an HDCD encoded CD is limited slightly below 16 bit resolution, although that may have no audible effect. There is no way to get around that potential limitation without an HDCD capable DAC to do the digital to analog conversion, whether with a CD player, a DVD player, or a computer's sound card. 24 bit digital audio made HDCD technology obsolete rather than Microsoft doing something unusual with it after the company bought the rights.

Hybrid SACDs do have more than one layer because the SACD layer and CD layers are at different depths in the hybrid discs.

Great post.Another factor that played into HDCD's demise was that Delta Sigma D-A convertor chips starting to become ever more popular in CDP's and outboard DAC's.These IC's having their own integral digital filters were not compatible with Pacific Micro's separate digital filter /HDCD decoder IC's.

afterburnt

Ton of The Dead and Joni in this format.

afterburnt

These play better than my rips and they do sound better. So far