DSD vs MQA

Ccs56084342

MDLP 發表於 2016-8-1 01:36
另外80尾到90頭
有咗DAT之後又未有CD-R前
本地多數唱片公司

失晒真！唔怪得比第一代差得多啦！

Ccs56084342

Ccs56084342 發表於 2016-8-1 01:46
失晒真！唔怪得比第一代差得多啦！

咁，其實講到底都唔關用咩制式事，系關乎制作時决定是否好聲嘅！

MDLP

Ccs56084342 發表於 2016-8-1 02:01
咁，其實講到底都唔關用咩制式事，系關乎制作時决定是否好聲嘅！

任何制式都有好與不好作品
無得話一面倒PCM/DSD
而中間制作過程亦有好多
人為或商業考慮變數

單從所謂制式考慮音樂好與壞
會局限自己聽音樂視同野領域

vm8833

MDLP 發表於 2016-8-1 01:26
無相同曲目無得比較
LD條digital聲軌是16/44但多數無人聲
有人聲嗰條係analog伴唱用

SACD都仲要分
原裝DSD一條龍
定係analog母帶轉
或是PCM轉DSD

I think that native DSD(The current record), analogue to DSD(Assume the master tape is good) will be fit in SACD.

The PCM is the most tricky thing. Plenty of the CD are record in 16/44.1 since mid 80 to now. Some of the SACD use the 16/44.1 master tape as source. I believe that this kind of SACD is fake one since it never restore the frequency over 22KHz. If the master record us 24/96 PCM, then it's another story. The audio of 24/96 PCM is similar to DSD. When the sound output go to full frequency(It can only attain 26KHz on my system), the audio of DSD, 24/96(or more) is quite similar.

In short, the DSD can refine most of the source. As the technology advance, the noise issue for DSD may not be a problem as the other people mentioned. For example, many Esoteric SACD is a public recognized high end product. The power of DSD may not be obvious in POP music. When go to classic, the performance of a true SACD will be quite obvious.

Ccs56084342

MDLP 發表於 2016-8-1 09:17
任何制式都有好與不好作品
無得話一面倒PCM/DSD
而中間制作過程亦有好多

不如又估下，音樂界個商業模式會點轉變呀？

MDLP

Ccs56084342 發表於 2016-8-2 12:13
不如又估下，音樂界個商業模式會點轉變呀？

小弟禺見覺得無轉過
祇不過有市場
咪出多個version
做多幾個mixing或載體
畀大家消費
唱片公司又可以搵吓錢

Ccs56084342

MDLP 發表於 2016-8-2 12:41
小弟禺見覺得無轉過
祇不過有市場
咪出多個version

又啱喎，幾十年都系嗰套ＰＣＭ。

Ccs56084342

MDLP 發表於 2016-8-2 12:41
小弟禺見覺得無轉過
祇不過有市場
咪出多個version

投票結果就以ＤＳＤ包裝式商品最受歡迎。

MDLP

Ccs56084342 發表於 2016-8-2 14:44
投票結果就以ＤＳＤ包裝式商品最受歡迎。

唔係有個MQA生菓盤係喥
我都會投DSD

Ccs56084342

MDLP 發表於 2016-8-2 16:06
唔係有個MQA生菓盤係喥
我都會投DSD

我會投ＭＱＡ，感覺實際Ｄ，飛走Ｄ雜訊只保留有用嘅音樂訊號似乎更有道理。