HDCD Vs DDD

DDD, AAD, ADD,

DDD : Digital Digiatl Digital.. master recording to Cd recording

AAD : Analog Analog digital ... master record in analog to digital cd recording

and ADD is same just run your imagination.... IMHO ofcourse.. experts can add some.

SUB_BOSS schrieb:

DDD, AAD, ADD, DDD : Digital Digiatl Digital.. master recording to Cd recording AAD : Analog Analog digital ... master record in analog to digital cd recording and ADD is same just run your imagination.... IMHO ofcourse.. experts can add some. :D

Hmmm..thats what I thought...but it looks like you cant use them to evaluate the quality of contents inside the CD...or can you ?
I am just curious if there is anything we can infer from these Jargons apart from their full forms ?

a=analogue, d=digital
in XXX (as in AAD,DDD)
first alphabet stands: for recording format
second alphabet: for mixing format
third alphabet: mastering format.

incidentally the most enjoyable record i have found are (not a rule) are AAD.

HDCD is a kind of encoding done to get better resolution..it needs a deifferen decoder chip as some additional information in an "extra bit" over the usual 20 bits.

HDCDs played on a regular cdp sounds a s a regular cd

On a slightly different topic.....

I have generally found compilations to sound worse than the original score...

is it from a "musical experience" perspective or from a recording perspective. ? when an album is put together there is a continuity in the mood/theme which may not be there in a compilations as different tracks are just put together.

or maybe since the compilation is done with a new master, maybe the flaw is all there in creating the master ..

or maybe since the compilation is done with a new master, maybe the flaw is all there in creating the master ..

I couldnt get this....are you saying, just to put together songs from different albums, you have to re-create a new master ???
Cant the exsisting master be used ?

On a slightly different topic..... I have generally found compilations to sound worse than the original score...

Amp_Nut, though what you say is a common notion, but the reason for such a thing to happen is a bit fuzzy to me.
Is it because the CD pressing quality while making a compilation is compromised ??
I cant think of any other reason.

a=analogue, d=digital in XXX (as in AAD,DDD) first alphabet stands: for recording format second alphabet: for mixing format third alphabet: mastering format.

Better put...

abhi.pani schrieb:

I couldnt get this....are you saying, just to put together songs from different albums, you have to re-create a new master ??? Cant the exsisting master be used ?

not very sure of this... thought i read it that a master is created.. maybe it is not and the "father" image is created from multiple masters.

I too am not sure of this.

However I speculate that compling songs from different Master tapes, is done on another 'master' tape containing the new compilation.

Ofcourse then a new CD Making Master has to be created for the compilation CD.

I know I am going out on a limb ... maybe going tooo far when I admit that I feel that complitions are sometimes so poor that they have probably just been copied off CDs rather than even bothering to take it off the master tapes...

My particular CD pressing of Dire Straits LOVE OVER GOLD ( My FAV Dire Straits) seems to have a sound VERY similar to a cassette hub grinding against the cassette shell, during one of the quite passages.... HORROR ! Perish The Thought... CD 'Mastered' off a cassette ??


And its not even a compilation.

Arj schrieb:

incidentally the most enjoyable record i have found are (not a rule) are AAD.

Same here, I have more often than not enjoyed AAD's

Dear amp_Nut,
Even CDs copied from CDs (using a CD writer) sound almost as good as the original....

Good Point abhi.pani.... and I suspect that some recording engineers, who make compliations even believe that WITHOUT the word almost included...

The Key word is 'ALMOST'

And not all 'almosts' are equal !

abhi.pani schrieb:

Even CDs copied from CDs (using a CD writer) sound almost as good as the original....

Sir,

Almost as good, is not good enough.
How I wish it was, what a money saver it would be. The most expensive part of my audio hobby is the soft ware - if I could get that on a CDR - boy I would have been a slightly richer person !!!! 3K CD's and stopped counting....

The sad part is that, CDR's just do not sound the same. Forget CDR's even the same CD pressed in different countries and different plants sound so different. Getting the right pressing is such a difficult task, I cannot even begin to explain to you............

My Reference CD of Mary Black on Grapewine is on the verge of giving up on me & the other pressings I have are on DARA Records & they are no way close to the ones done by Grapewine.

The sad part is that, CDR's just do not sound the same. Forget CDR's even the same CD pressed in different countries and different plants sound so different. Getting the right pressing is such a difficult task, I cannot even begin to explain to you............

Talking about burning CD's I always felt CDRW's are always more fuller in lower spectrum than CDR's.. yes I have done an A/B. For sake of minimising diffrences both were SONY Cd's and new.. Did anyone feel the diffrences??

Sir, Almost as good, is not good enough.

It's like almost buying a Rolls Royce and buying one..

The Key word is 'ALMOST' And not all 'almosts' are equal !

Almost as good, is not good enough.

Guys,
I understand what you say but the difference you get between a original CD and CDR is not as big as you get between a compilation and the original album. Infact the difference between the compilation and the Original is so huge that it aint worth listening on many occasions. IMO the problem could be a huge compromise in pressing the CDs. I am not sure though. But I am sure that the difference between CD and its corresponding CDR is relatively much smaller. Hence I suppose its not about just copying, its a bigger compromise somewhere...

I too am not sure of this. However I speculate that compling songs from different Master tapes, is done on another 'master' tape containing the new compilation. Ofcourse then a new CD Making Master has to be created for the compilation CD.

In the whole processing of cutting a commercial cd, there is one father copy and 4 mother image for it. very rarely a 5th mother cd as for that a new Father image has to be cut from the master.

hence i would presume that an new master is made

Arj

Are you referring to the Glass Stamping 'mothers ' ?

Abhi.pani said

I understand what you say but the difference you get between a original CD and CDR is not as big as you get between a compilation and the original album. Infact the difference between the compilation and the Original is so huge that it aint worth listening on many occasions.

I argee with you whole heartedly...

Amp_Nut schrieb:

Arj Are you referring to the Glass Stamping 'mothers ' ?

am a bit rusty but i think it is the master which is glass and the father and mother are usually metal which is created via electrolysis..

will checkup on this

short and sweet description here

http://www.discinc.com/electronic_master_Disc.htm

interestingly, the stampers which are made from the mothers are called sons

Amp-Nut and Arj,

I think we are mixing up the master, son and stamper with the final mixed down master tape .

For creating a Glass master for CD production or cutting LP we need a MASTER (it can be digital stored on optical disc or analogue tape). This master will have all the songs needed for that particular disc that has been subjected to all the post recording processing. This mastering stage is what gives the final sound to that particular disc.

You can lift tracks from many such MASTERs and make a compilation album. The problem will be that each and every song will be having the charesteristic sound of the respective master. This is very irritating, you can hear that in most of the compilations released by EMI India as produced by BIG WIZ.

Most of the recent compilations are remastered from original mixed down tracks and some eg. PF DSOTM SACD/VINYL were from the orginal track mixed down to 5.1 and stereo. Along with this the marketing hype of so called involvment of original artists and engineers who were involved in the making of the original is also pulblished.

I hope this will shed some light on the reason why the compilations sound different from the original. The difference in using different master glass stampers are noticed by those who listens very criticaly on suitable equipments.

Anil