I do because I want to make sure the musicians get paid for their effort.
6 Likes
I’m with you!
1 Like
Bless you
1 Like
I wouldn’t worry about the artists. Bear in mind most DSD are classical and jazz releases. The artist don’t expect to make money from royalties. They will likely get a recording fee. Typically it will take 2 or 3 days maximum to record an album. They are most likely recording current performance repertoire. They are far more likely to be making a living from an academic role (sometimes several), performance and teaching. A discography reinforces their reputation.
Larger classical groups usually require sponsorship to pay the musicians to produce a recording. They would be delighted to get sales of 2,000- 3,000 units.
If you want to support classical an jazz artists, pay to go and see their performances. Before I bought some expensive speakers, we spent more on tickets each year (95% classical, all from the box office) than the cost of my hifi system.
Where I mainly go (Wigmore Hall) they did a lot of free streaming in Covid and paid the artists the regular standard fee. They got a huge number of new subscribers and post-Covid they had much larger and younger audiences. So free streaming actually helped to secure performance fees.
I still buy PCM recordings from Linn and Hyperion. Their artists have a core listener base and can make it work without streaming. Many Hyperion artists regularly perform in London, they are known here and don’t need to stream.
1 Like
The scandal was personally beneficial to me.
For years, I was blindly buying Mofi SACDs and, in many cases, ignoring label remasters and other remaster/re-release houses such as Analogue Productions, etc.
Now, I’ve sort of reversed things.
Exactly what I expected. You are buying for the format, not for the music, if you won’t buy the music if it is only available in PCM or DSD64.
I’ve bought about 200 downloads in the last 5 years, only twice did I buy DSD64 because there was no PCM available (my system can only play DSD64, not higher). One album is now available on Qobuz. On only a few occasions was the album available on both PCM and DSD, mainly the Podger on Channel Classics. I bought them on PCM. They are now on Qobuz.
If record producers wanted to encourage people to use DSD, they should offer them at a lower price to PCM. I might then be tempted to buy and see if it sounded better. Unfortunately they think DSD is a premium product so they charge 50% or 100% more. It doesn’t seem to work.
1 Like
I was and probably still am a DSD snob. I would seek out DSD because back in 1999 when it first came out I was convinced this(SACD)has to be the best thing available. What I have learned like many is the quality of the recording is paramount. If the recording is mediocre or bad doesn’t matter if it’s DSD or PCM chances are it’s going to suck. I’ve recently discovered how great CD’s at 44.1 16bit sound fricken amazing! I have dual layer SACDs that I prefer the sound of the pcm layer over the DSD layer when played on the Ethos. Yes the Ethos is a very very expensive CD player but it proves when the gear is capable, Redbook CD can be superior to its SACD counterpart!
3 Likes
In case of remasterings or rereleases of older albums, t’s also not rarely a different mastering than the SACD layer, that needs to be considered.
But the usually the CD layer is a worse mastering…would be surprising if even those then sound better on the Ethos, but maybe.
You’re missing my point. I buy music that is mastered with care and in highest quality format, and for which I’m sure about the provenance. I don’t buy snake oil on Qobuz or some hdtracks or wherever that likely has been “mastered” from redbook quality onto 24/92 on to DSD or selling DSD 256 that’s been upsampled from 24/48 or DSD64. .
To my ears will-mastered and well-produced DSD 256 sound way better than some random album of Qobuz. So I’m buying for the listening experience. I just happen to find that music in pure DSD256 or recorded on DSD256 and carefully mastered in DXD is the best format I’ve found so far.
(Note that I listen exclusively to classical or jazz.)
Sorry, are you kidding me? As a violinist myself and with a professional classical violinist son, I feel strongly that it’s extremely important that we do whatever we can to support the business model that provides the most for the musicians. This idea that—after the advent of mp3 piracy in Napster and commoditization of a musician’s work—the musician doesn’t need to be rewarded for his efforts, I find utterly astonishing and to be honest reprehensible. I don’t mean to offend anyone personally, but this is a fundamental difference between those who are happy with the race to the bottom in the streaming music business reward model and me.
(I don’t want to fight a battle over this—this is extraneous to the is mofi good for DSD?—but I couldn’t let this go but with a rebuttal.)
And yes, I go to many live concerts. I have had season subscriptions to symphonies and operas, chamber Music festivals etc at every place I’ve lived. Buying music and going to concerts aren’t a zero sum game.
9 Likes
Well said!
2 Likes
Well said, @shankha. You and I are together on acquiring recordings that will reward the at home listening experience. Once upon a time in my vinyl days, this was seeking out the best masterings and pressings and then the better of the 45rpm reissues. The better 45rpm reissues consistently had greater transparency and resolution bringing me closer to the music.
Today, given appropriate attention to the quality of the recording process, I’ve also found that DSD256 is the best format for bringing me that greater transparency and resolution. And if I can get it in Pure DSD256, without an interim DXD/PCM post-processing step (which is not always possible), the sound is even better. (P.S., I don’t do any DSP processing for home listening – that would require a PCM source.)
Well made PCM recordings can certainly be enjoyed. Of course! My music library is filled with them. And the recordings from labels such as Linn and Hyperion, who remain mired in somewhat low resolution PCM, can be extraordinarily enjoyable. @stevensegal is clearly correct about this. But for the present discussion, I’m staying with @shankha to talk about the highest playback quality that is reasonably possible with today’s technology, and to my ears that is DXD and more preferably DSD256, and more preferably still Pure DSD256 (when practicable to do so). So, I’m rooting for more labels to turn in this direction as they capture the performances of such wonderful musicians as we enjoy today. Doing so will serve both current listeners and posterity.
As a sidenote, in another week I’ll have some samples to share from three different DSD256 recordings post processed via DXD versus post processed as Pure DSD with no PCM. All three are from released classical albums. I hear a very apparent and consistent difference in overall transparency, air and resolution. Folks will be able to download them and evaluate for themselves on their own systems.
2 Likes
Agree. I have many PCM recordings from BIS, Linn, and other small specialist labels that take care about their recordings. However, now that my system is very discriminating when it comes to vinyl and DSD, I’m not spending much on PCM unless it’s an artist I love or an interesting piece that’s not available in any well mastered DSD format.
The big labels certainly don’t give a rat’s ass about any of this.
1 Like
BTW, good DSD recordings sound almost indistinguishable high quality analog recordings from AP or MoFi on my—I’d say—very good analog system of ClearAudio TT and Modwright phono.
That’s what I love most about DSD256. It’s the closest I’ve ever heard to the organic analog sound. I can‘t quite describe in words the quality of digital, but when I hear DSD256 it just sounds warm and luscious and the presence is stunning.
(Again, when I say DSD256, I don’t mean the upsampled snake oil stuff…)
Anyway…
Ok back to the original question. I get what done are saying about the MoFi thing not making a difference to DSD etc, but…
Don’t you think it raises the visibility DSD256 among the do or die analog purists since clearly the implication is that DSD256 is as Paul says “as close to analog tape as you can get.” And this was one takeaway I took away from the excellent and rational Audio Analyst video.
Yes, I’d concur in this assessment. This is not what I hear in DSD64 or even DSD128, but that next step to DSD256 clearly delivers an excellence in reproduction. But, this is only with original DSD256 recordings. Modulating from a lower DSD resolution up to DSD256 is not the same outcome. Modulating DSD is NOT upsampling as in PCM – it’s a totally different process. But still, you only have the information you start with.
Yep. Agreed
What makes you believe Qobuz upsample? Any evidence?
I listen to mainly classical and jazz and have used Qobuz for most of my listening for about 8 years. Initially it could only stream 16/44 files because of internet speeds and licensing agreements, but the subscription was based around buying HD downloads usually at 30% to 50% discount. The result was that most users spent 3 to 5 times their streaming subscription because they were buying a lot of downloads. Their focus was on ensuring quality files, high revenue per customer, limited expansion and ultimately making a profit, which was helped by HD streaming from 2016. Hence they did not launch in the USA until 2019, by which time they had already be operating in Europe for 12 years. They are a small privately own company that needs to make a profit, not some streaming giant with shareholder money to burn. Their focus was always on classical and jazz and a lot of their success was based on working with the main traditional music press, like Gramophone.
I’m not aware that listening to classical and jazz is ever a matter of streaming random albums. I have always relied on two publications and primarily base my listening on those. I also listen to new recordings by performers I know from live shows.
The fact is that the established classical labels know how to produce extremely high quality content. They have the same engineers for decades, the engineers have worked with the same artists for many years and they have access to the best and most appropriate recording venues. The listeners can hear if a performer changes venue, as with the last item I posted on the Classical thread.
The irony is that some of the DSD stuff @Rushton posts is not very good. Sometimes the venues are not very well suited, the balance is wrong, the programming is confused. The latest one the tracks were in the wrong order and mislabelled, which they blamed on their distributor. I suspect some of these DSD labels are not very experienced and are learning as they go, like Octave Records.
Quite a few of these DSD labels seem to be labels created by studio owners. Of course little classical music is studio recorded. Nor are they likely to have known the artists for that long, which compromises the vital relationship between the performer and the engineer during the recording session to get the sound right.
The success of independent labels like Channel Classics and Linn rests largely on having the same chief recording engineer for over 40 years. You can add smaller ones like Coro and Gimell, both also 40+ years.
Qobuz does not upsample. They post what the label distributors send to them. After a bit of research, I am happily convinced that Qobuz is a class act delivering good reliable product to the best of their ability. And, I’ve seen reports of them very quickly acting to rectify any errors when discovered. I should have posted this comment sooner and apologize that I missed doing so.
I’m not kidding you at all.
How many? Perhaps less than 1% of classical recording artists (think of all the orchestra players working as professional musicians), and that is probably way too high an estimate, could ever make a living off royalties.
They get paid a fee for making recordings. That how the world works. When actors and actresses make films, in principle they could earn royalties, but they know that most films never make enough money to pay royalties (they call them residuals), so when they sign their SAG or PACT agreements they take a little extra money to waive any rights to residuals.
I know a few professional violinists and they laugh when it comes round to royalties. One of them won Gramophone’s Concerto Album of the Year last year or the year before. That would have added to her already stellar reputation, she can pick and choose where she performs, the last concerto performance I heard her play was with the LSO under Bernard Haitink. Another one, my niece, just chases the next performance fee.
I’m sure you are well aware that being a professional musician is a portfolio career, and some things pay better than others, and some things they do for free. Should lawyers be paid for their efforts? I know some who do 50% of their work pro bono? If you want a clock card and to be paid by the hour, I suggest a musical career is not for you.
Personally, I have as much or more sympathy with people who run choirs, orchestras and the like. They have to fight for funding, sponsorship, take financial risk on recordings and ultimately they provide the employment for musicians.