Arturia Moog Modular V - what Tomita says

> Just kidding, but honestly, the software doesn't include the
classic 12 stage
> phaser and no ring modulator, modules which Tomita used very much
on all his
> records.

Well..... ring modulators was never really a Moog thing in the first
place. So if this thing tries to emulate a Moog then maybe thats why
it isn´t included. ;-)

Keld

 

studio1dk wrote:
>
> > Just kidding, but honestly, the software doesn't include the
> classic 12 stage
> > phaser and no ring modulator, modules which Tomita used very much
> on all his
> > records.
>
> Well..... ring modulators was never really a Moog thing in the first
> place. So if this thing tries to emulate a Moog then maybe thats why
> it isn´t included. ;-)
>

Its like I always tell people, the most accurate areas of emulation are
usually the limitations on the original synths.

While the Polyphony and patch storage were great dereams of the original
owners, here you get trimmers on every pot (something Serge was into)
but polyphony aside one gets a less flexible and diverse system than an
owner of a similar sized moog would have.

Most serious owners had a Ring Mod sold by Bode as both companies
cooperated from early on. Competing synth brands nearly all had them
which were usually built by the brand themselves. And they ruled out a
lot of action one could have with a dedicated S&H module, or a second
sequencer, or those effects with flexible routing rather than being
fixed at the end of the chain plus they haven't fully exploited the
computer's potential with all parameters being modulatable, only the
ones on the hardware moog.

Though I do still say, it does sound better than the other simulated analogs.

 

studio1dk wrote:
>
> > Just kidding, but honestly, the software doesn't include the
> classic 12 stage
> > phaser and no ring modulator, modules which Tomita used very much
> on all his
> > records.
>
> Well..... ring modulators was never really a Moog thing in the first
> place. So if this thing tries to emulate a Moog then maybe thats why
> it isn´t included. ;-)
>

Its like I always tell people, the most accurate areas of emulation are
usually the limitations on the original synths.

While the Polyphony and patch storage were great dereams of the original
owners, here you get trimmers on every pot (something Serge was into)
but polyphony aside one gets a less flexible and diverse system than an
owner of a similar sized moog would have.

Most serious owners had a Ring Mod sold by Bode as both companies
cooperated from early on. Competing synth brands nearly all had them
which were usually built by the brand themselves. And they ruled out a
lot of action one could have with a dedicated S&H module, or a second
sequencer, or those effects with flexible routing rather than being
fixed at the end of the chain plus they haven't fully exploited the
computer's potential with all parameters being modulatable, only the
ones on the hardware moog.

Though I do still say, it does sound better than the other simulated analogs.

 

> Well..... ring modulators was never really a Moog thing in the first
> place. So if this thing tries to emulate a Moog then maybe thats why
> it isn´t included. ;-)

Yes. What I mean is that the "Tomita sound" doesn't necessarily rely
on the Moog modules. He patched it up with the Bode stuff and some Korg
gear as well, if I'm not completely mistaken (ms series?), and even
the Fairlight CMI.

M

 

Mikael Hillborg wrote:
>
> > Well..... ring modulators was never really a Moog thing in the first
> > place. So if this thing tries to emulate a Moog then maybe thats why
> > it isn´t included. ;-)
>
> Yes. What I mean is that the "Tomita sound" doesn't necessarily rely
> on the Moog modules. He patched it up with the Bode stuff and some Korg
> gear as well, if I'm not completely mistaken (ms series?), and even
> the Fairlight CMI.
>

Though I point out again the Bode was closely associated with Moog to
the point that some of his designs were being manufactured and branded
Moog and notably the ring modulator was considered a key option for
one's Moog system.

Yes, its true Tomita used other units by far the most notably a
Mellotron. And I guess just as Carlos cheated a little with an acoustic
tympani, Tomita has used a contact miked sitar for punctuation.

As for whats mentioned above, Tomita used Fairlight on his later digital
albums, not on the early ones where he became acclaimed or people
identify his sound.

Tomita has had a very long and often consulting relationship with Roland
(apparently there is even some prototype JP-8000 on "Bach Fantasy")
While he had some Korg gear, sorry to say to Ben ;-) but he's never been
very associated with Korg. (Contrasting for example Kitaro)

nick
http://www.artcontext.com/music/artskool/jem/

 

--- In isaotomita at yahoogroups.com, ndk <ndkent at o...> wrote:
> Mikael Hillborg wrote:
> >
> > > Well..... ring modulators was never really a Moog thing in the
first
> > > place. So if this thing tries to emulate a Moog then maybe
thats why
> > > it isn´t included. ;-)
> >
> > Yes. What I mean is that the "Tomita sound" doesn't necessarily
rely
> > on the Moog modules. He patched it up with the Bode stuff and
some Korg
> > gear as well, if I'm not completely mistaken (ms series?), and
even
> > the Fairlight CMI.
> >
>

> While he had some Korg gear, sorry to say to Ben ;-) but he's never
been
> very associated with Korg. (Contrasting for example Kitaro)
>
> nick

In this shot, there is what appears to be the bottom of a Korg MS-50
right at the top of the shot:
http://www.isaotomita.net/tomita/images/photo/tomi08.jpg on top of a
silver rack of modular gear and a N.E.D Synclaivier monitor. But of
course high profile musicians like Tomita-san are given often
instruments, and for all kinds of reasons and so we have no evidence
that he actually used it

Ben

 

> In this shot, there is what appears to be the bottom of a Korg MS-50
> right at the top of the shot:
> http://www.isaotomita.net/tomita/images/photo/tomi08.jpg on top of a
> silver rack of modular gear and a N.E.D Synclaivier monitor. But of
> course high profile musicians like Tomita-san are given often
> instruments, and for all kinds of reasons and so we have no evidence
> that he actually used it

True of course, but its neither a staple of his sound or in specific a
particular instrument Korg heavily promoted.



> Personally, I do hope that the The Planets DVD-A is a) the
> original 'Moog' era recording and not a new recording, and b) that
> multichannel playback is compatible with my Dolby Digital 5.1 system,
> as I can't afford to invest in DVD-A just for one disc!

Anyone here hear the mid 90s "Planets" he had on the web from that pay
for music download company that went out of business? They had a mention
they were remixed or remastered or something

Thats a good general question being the original recordings probably
still belong to BMG.

As for DVD-A, I understand its a situation of including or not including
data for regular DVD playback that would determine playability. The last
line on the Denon page seems to say that.

As for my other question, am I correct that no one has a software player
for DVD-A? Is there anything besides 24bit/192 that would hamper
software decoding from a general purpose DVD mechanism in a computer.

nick

 

ndkent at optonline.net writes:

> As for my other question, am I correct that no one has a software player
> for DVD-A?


Hi Nick,
There was a writeup in Keyboard or one of the other synth magazines about
Minnetonka and other DVD Audio authoring software packages. Authoring
programs are probably overkill just for playback, but it's the only thing
I've heard of so far for computers. I think Minnetonka's Discwelder Steel is
their lower cost DVD-A software:

http://www.minnetonkaaudio.com/home_3.htm

Of couse, consumer DVD-A players can be had for less then $200 nowadays, and
most (all?) DVD-audio discs can be played in any run of the mill Dolby
Digital DVD-video player. You can only listen to the Dolby Digital tracks in
DVD video players, but it will be surround. The DD tracks that I've listened
to sound quite good really.

Andrew

 

ixqy at aol.com wrote:
>
> ndkent at optonline.net writes:
>
> > As for my other question, am I correct that no one has a software player
> > for DVD-A?
>
> Hi Nick,
> There was a writeup in Keyboard or one of the other synth magazines about
> Minnetonka and other DVD Audio authoring software packages. Authoring
> programs are probably overkill just for playback, but it's the only thing
> I've heard of so far for computers.

Yes, April '00 keyboard. Sonic Solutions has one also.

But the important thing is I see no evidence of ability to play back an
existing disc, after all, standard DVD authoring programs can do nothing
with an encoded disc as they only deal with assets. I'm not too sure the
DVD-A programs even go as far as a preview??

I think Minnetonka's Discwelder Steel is
> their lower cost DVD-A software:
>
> http://www.minnetonkaaudio.com/home_3.htm
>
> Of couse, consumer DVD-A players can be had for less then $200 nowadays, and
> most (all?)

So what do those things have, a stereo analog out and a digital stream?
Its going to cost you much more to get the surround out unless you
settle for the compressed Dolby compatibility material or listen to stereo.

Interesting why Tomita chose 4.1 and not 5.1, I assume the center TV
monitor needs no reinforcement since its not a video program

>DVD-audio discs can be played in any run of the mill Dolby
> Digital DVD-video player.

Tomita's disc says you can, AFAIK its an option in the way its
authored... like the $499 software you mention will author but it can't
make a regular DVD compatible without external re-encoding of assets
prior to making the DVD-A something the Keyboard article mentions.

I remember there was already an SACD contreversy in that Sony specified
the format then Sony Music Entertainment released many titles that did
not have the compatibility layer for regular CD players.

I also find it interesting that M-Audio's consumer aimed Revolution card
sports 7.1 with 24/192 decoders, at least has software dolby decoding
for Windows, but while it has bundled "Tony Hawk Pro Skater 3" software
it doesn't seem to have DVD-A playback.

nick

 

> From: ndk [mailto:ndkent at optonline.net]
>
> So what do those things have, a stereo analog out and a
> digital stream? Its going to cost you much more to get the
> surround out unless you settle for the compressed Dolby
> compatibility material or listen to stereo.

They have 6 analog outputs and a digital stream but you can
only use that with DD 5.1. If you want to use DVD-A you have
to use 6 analog outputs (and 6 analog input on your amplifier).
Thank god I have a Denon DVD1600, I will most definitely buy
the DVD-A of The Planets.

Very excited about The Planets release and hope others will
follow soon!

Marcel
http://home.wanadoo.nl/mengels
mengels at wanadoo.nl

 

In a message dated 3/24/03 12:36:24 PM Central Standard Time,
ndkent at optonline.net writes:

> Yes, April '00 keyboard. Sonic Solutions has one also.
>
> But the important thing is I see no evidence of ability to play back an
> existing disc, after all, standard DVD authoring programs can do nothing
> with an encoded disc as they only deal with assets. I'm not too sure the
> DVD-A programs even go as far as a preview??

I've never seen one in use, so I'm really not sure. I just have it in the
back of my head to get one of these types of programs someday for my own
music. I would have figured these programs would let you play back DVD-audio
discs as well as make them. Kind of like CDR recording programs. Maybe it's
worth an email. Of course, even it the program/s were DVD-A playback
friendly, a proper multichannel sound card would be needed as well.



> > Of couse, consumer DVD-A players can be had for less then $200
nowadays,
>
> So what do those things have, a stereo analog out and a digital stream?
> Its going to cost you much more to get the surround out unless you
> settle for the compressed Dolby compatibility material or listen to stereo.

I paid $169 for my JVC DVD-A player a year or two ago. It has a coax and
TOSLINK optical output (for ext. Dolby Digtal decoding in a receiver, or
etc.), as well as the analog outputs for all six channels (4 surrounds, sub,
and center).


> Interesting why Tomita chose 4.1 and not 5.1, I assume the center TV
> monitor needs no reinforcement since its not a video program

I was wondering about that too.

I really hope this DVD-A is the 70's Planets version. Does the info on the
Denon webpage that Ben sent give any details about what version it may be? I
wonder if we will be able to order this title from amazon.com or other online
sources in the US. I'm ready to place my order now.

Andrew

 

The sad part is there was no provisions for a digital output of a SACD or DVD-Audio
signal. DTS and AC3 are good but use a compressed format. Why didn't they just use
an ADAT lightpipe compatible output format to start with when they designedthe standards?
I would love to just plug in an ADAT to my reciever and hit play...I have bought some DVD-audio disks, and just
listen to the Dolby digital soundtrack for now, until I find an adequate player - that's my solution.

I went and bought an El-Cheapo Sherwood reciever for $129 that has 6 discrete
analog ins but I haven't decided to buy a DVD-Audio player that is also an SACD player.
Waiting for the price to drop, and I am not paying $500 for something that will depreciate and
cost 79 dollars in a few months. Exaggeration...? Maybe, but I have lost over $10,000 -
$20,000 in depreciation of studio equipment alone in the past 3 years. I think I will wait till
it's nearly free then buy one. (Just one Example - Mackie HD recorder was $2000, just
dropped to $1300) among other stuff...that's $700 in six months.

I am going to email ATI Toronto again and ask them about incorporating the S/w into the multimedia player....


----- Original Message -----
From: ixqy at aol.com
To: isaotomita at yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2003 2:00 PM
Subject: Re: [isaotomita] Re: Arturia Moog Modular V - what Tomita says


In a message dated 3/24/03 12:36:24 PM Central Standard Time,
ndkent at optonline.net writes:

> Yes, April '00 keyboard. Sonic Solutions has one also.
>
> But the important thing is I see no evidence of ability to play back an
> existing disc, after all, standard DVD authoring programs can do nothing
> with an encoded disc as they only deal with assets. I'm not too sure the
> DVD-A programs even go as far as a preview??

I've never seen one in use, so I'm really not sure. I just have it in the
back of my head to get one of these types of programs someday for my own
music. I would have figured these programs would let you play back DVD-audio
discs as well as make them. Kind of like CDR recording programs. Maybe it's
worth an email. Of course, even it the program/s were DVD-A playback
friendly, a proper multichannel sound card would be needed as well.



> > Of couse, consumer DVD-A players can be had for less then $200
nowadays,
>
> So what do those things have, a stereo analog out and a digital stream?
> Its going to cost you much more to get the surround out unless you
> settle for the compressed Dolby compatibility material or listen to stereo.

I paid $169 for my JVC DVD-A player a year or two ago. It has a coax and
TOSLINK optical output (for ext. Dolby Digtal decoding in a receiver, or
etc.), as well as the analog outputs for all six channels (4 surrounds, sub,
and center).


> Interesting why Tomita chose 4.1 and not 5.1, I assume the center TV
> monitor needs no reinforcement since its not a video program

I was wondering about that too.

I really hope this DVD-A is the 70's Planets version. Does the info on the
Denon webpage that Ben sent give any details about what version it may be? I
wonder if we will be able to order this title from amazon.com or other online
sources in the US. I'm ready to place my order now.

Andrew

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT




To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
isaotomita-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

 

In a message dated 3/24/03 1:34:18 PM Central Standard Time,
andy_despres at hotmail.com writes:

> I went and bought an El-Cheapo Sherwood reciever for $129 that has 6
discrete
>
> analog ins but I haven't decided to buy a DVD-Audio player that is also an
> SACD player.
> Waiting for the price to drop, and I am not paying $500 for something that
> will depreciate and
> cost 79 dollars in a few months.


I bought an Sony SA-CD player at Best Buy for around $130. My total
investment for the SA-CD and DVD-A disc players is about $350. It might be
possible to get both format players for less than this now.

Andrew

 

Apex is coming out with one 7701 that is both - SACD and DVD-A
The price is $250, waiting for it to drop to $100 or so in the next few months...
maybe I can get one used...

I couldn't see buying SACD titles right now without a player, so I instead bought some DVD-A titles,
since I can play them now. If I do get one, I would probably immediately transfer my SACD's to DTS-CD.....
as a backup copy. There's more than one way to copy a disk.

I admit I have a general spite for the record industry for not advertising / promoting DTS-CD's
in general, and disabling the ability to make a backup copy of an SACD.
DTS is a Great format without the hype. I also eventually plan on backing up some
of the the DVD-A's to DTS CD as well. I applaud DVD-A's compatibility with Dolby Digital.
That's the right way to do it. I also haven't found a single DTS CD that isonly two channel,
unlike the SACD's rehash of stereo mixes. At least you know what you are getting with a DTS CD / DVD-A.
Let's confuse the consumer a little more.

Sorry, but I can't really hear the difference between 48K / 96K DVD-A stereo and 192K stereo SACD.
Maybe we will find a useful reason for it, but that's the least attractive feature of the SACD.

Hey, I know - I can put some subliminal messages for making vampire bats attack people in the 96 KHZ
effective range of a 192 KHZ SACD when played really loud = What a great gimmick for a Goth band....
I could see Maybe blowing a dog whistle really loud and driving the neighborhood dogs mad.
Hmmm...I need to email that band "Tool"......

----- Original Message -----
From: ixqy at aol.com
To: isaotomita at yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2003 3:01 PM
Subject: Re: [isaotomita] Re: Arturia Moog Modular V - what Tomita says


In a message dated 3/24/03 1:34:18 PM Central Standard Time,
andy_despres at hotmail.com writes:

> I went and bought an El-Cheapo Sherwood reciever for $129 that has 6
discrete
>
> analog ins but I haven't decided to buy a DVD-Audio player that is also an
> SACD player.
> Waiting for the price to drop, and I am not paying $500 for something that
> will depreciate and
> cost 79 dollars in a few months.


I bought an Sony SA-CD player at Best Buy for around $130. My total
investment for the SA-CD and DVD-A disc players is about $350. It might be
possible to get both format players for less than this now.

Andrew






Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT




To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
isaotomita-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

 

> Apex is coming out with one 7701 that is both - SACD and DVD-A
> The price is $250, waiting for it to drop to $100 or so in the next few months...
> maybe I can get one used...

I hadn't realized the price of analog converters had dropped that much
but I guess it has.

> I couldn't see buying SACD titles right now without a player, so I instead bought some DVD-A titles,
> since I can play them now. If I do get one, I would probably immediately transfer my SACD's to DTS-CD.....
> as a backup copy. There's more than one way to copy a disk.

?? I thought most SACD were not usually surround. How do you pull stuff
off an SACD anyway? Analog dub??

> I admit I have a general spite for the record industry for not advertising / promoting DTS-CD's

Well it only wins for ease of copying! Its a benefit to the consumer
since it should play on existing Home Theatre gear but there isn't any
other advantages I can think of marketing still another format. Its a
kind of sideways trade of a lossy format that does surround
conveniently. Yes it sounds better than Dolby AC-3 but thats not saying
that much and one would kind of like something audibly better than CDs
if one has to switch.

Still it is a great way for home made electronic surround excursions
except that the audience is limited to DTS owners with CD-R capable
playback hardware

> in general, and disabling the ability to make a backup copy of an SACD.

I'm sure they don't want to stop with SACD, witness most Japanese new CD
releases are screwy "Secure" format or whatever thats called.

I keep thinking as I think others are that one should be able to prove
in court that these things are not a compact audio discs and being
deceptively sold unless they bear a clear warning which has not yet
been made madatory

> DTS is a Great format without the hype. I also eventually plan on backing up some
> of the the DVD-A's to DTS CD as well. I applaud DVD-A's compatibility with Dolby Digital.
> That's the right way to do it. I also haven't found a single DTS CD that is only two channel,

But there would be no point!! Its already lossy compression

> unlike the SACD's rehash of stereo mixes.

The point I think was to satisfy the high end market bothered by 16/44.1
not deliver Surround

At least you know what you are getting with a DTS CD / DVD-A.
> Let's confuse the consumer a little more.

Though DVD-A looks messy too. Author with the $500 software and you have
to use some other software for Dolby encoding, Theres that MLP format I
just heard about and you can replace the dolby with DTS too, so I guess
you can take advantage of DTS if you like its compression.

I see DVD video discs are already free in breakfast cereal boxes so the
differential between DVD media and CD as no real advantage to a DTS CD
except on a small or private scale
>
> Sorry, but I can't really hear the difference between 48K / 96K DVD-A stereo and 192K stereo SACD.
> Maybe we will find a useful reason for it, but that's the least attractive feature of the SACD.

But are you sure you have quality Digital to Analog converters? Some low
price stuff surely has to cut corners and might even downsample on the
fly. Unfortuantely price lowering and the fact the a lot of the problems
are above human hearing or speaker reproduction means there is perhaps
less incentive to really put quality into DA converters as those
troublesome areas of frequency have been upshifted.
>
> Hey, I know - I can put some subliminal messages for making vampire bats attack people in the 96 KHZ
> effective range of a 192 KHZ SACD when played really loud =

Actually one of the main reasons for 192 is to move the aliasing into a
higher orbit beyond your hearing (and to allow for more sloppiness in
the converters for better or worse) Even the best converter if you think
about it is making a feeble attempt to play more and more squared off
waves as you get into higher frequencies, so thats another.

What a great gimmick for a Goth band....
> I could see Maybe blowing a dog whistle really loud and driving the neighborhood dogs mad.
> Hmmm...I need to email that band "Tool"......

the speakers tend to roll off before that. Thats a vintage one, theres
lots of musicians who claimed "and I put on a special sound just for
Rover to hear" over the years

but yeah, the other weekend I was at this laptop jam and to be funny I
took a one pannel serge driven by a mc202 (the baby microcomposer with
almost an SH-101 synth built in). So I was having fun with some laptop
players where exactly did we stop hearing a high pitch, but then I
realized it might just be the speakers and it may or may not have been
our hearing threashold. I guess we needed a dog.

recent article
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/23/magazine/23SOUND.html
I'm upset they don't divulge what the other sound was besides the
backwards baby cry


> I bought an Sony SA-CD player at Best Buy for around $130. My total
> investment for the SA-CD and DVD-A disc players is about $350. It might be
> possible to get both format players for less than this now.

though with the mechanism existing to play both its more likely you'll
see a multiplayer (or SACD will die on gear not made by Sony)

>
> The sad part is there was no provisions for a digital output of a SACD or DVD-Audio
> signal.

Oh I thought there was a digital stream, guess not, I'm behind the
times. I've just got this powered speaker system I feed an optical to to
get 5.1 dolby/DTS off a standalone DVD player

> I went and bought an El-Cheapo Sherwood reciever for $129 that has 6 discrete
> analog ins but I haven't decided to buy a DVD-Audio player that is also an SACD player.
> Waiting for the price to drop, and I am not paying $500 for something that will depreciate and
> cost 79 dollars in a few months.

Sure, then again some things just die. DCC?? Consumer DAT ?? DIVX Discs

Exaggeration...? Maybe, but I have lost over $10,000 -
> $20,000 in depreciation of studio equipment alone in the past 3 years. I think I will wait till
> it's nearly free then buy one. (Just one Example - Mackie HD recorder was $2000, just
> dropped to $1300) among other stuff...that's $700 in six months.

Sorry to say but its the rare exception with anything digital that you
don't take a bath after 2 years. I tell that to everyone I teach or
consult for, you have a 2 year span to get what you want out of it. It
might still be useful but you won't be happy if you didn't get all your
profits out of it well before 2 years. You get price drops like that
with non-digital gear but thats mainly because whoever made it is going
out of business. Software for hardware really has very little upside investment-wise

>
> I am going to email ATI Toronto again and ask them about incorporating the S/w into the multimedia player....

very cool.

nick

 

You're absolutely right about the aliasing, that's excatly the point of thehigher frequency capacity of SACD.
There is less aliasing on SACD. Also, you are correct in saying the speakers do not produce tone above 20KHZ.
That reinforces the point that there is no need for 192K, really.... 96KHZ is somewhat arguable,
the overtones may reach up to 48KHZ (Nyquist theorem), but we will still never hear that...
Even if the speakers could actually reach that frequency.
I am happy with 24 Bit 48KHZ, I think it's a great improvement. HDCD shouldhave been the format
before SACD, but who knows what happened to that....

I too use a Dolby Digital / DTS signal via Fiber or Coax Digital, but apparently I am told the Uncompressed Digital output thing
is not a reality for 5.1 SACD and DVD-Audio, so you need to buy a new reciever with 6 analog inputs to hear the 5.1 channels.
That's why I bought the cheap Sherwood, mostly for surround mixing, but also if I do get an SACD and DVD-A.
I don't have either player, but if I assume the limited information on the players is correct (MFG's spec sheets are not always clear...) those signals have analog output only. Right now I am using my SACD input on my reciever for surround mixing from my Mackie SDR.
I have a separate Stereo, analog Feed to go from my mixer to a power amp tothe Event 20/20 Monitors for non-surround mixing.
My Front speakers are JBL 2800's which are nice, A JBL Subwoofer, a Bose 369 Center, and Bose AM-3 for the rear.
Most of the point of SACD was to deliver 5.1 Audio, although the Rolling Stone's album supposedly not in 5.1......
(I think that's what Bob Ludwig had said during his speech at parson's audio but I can't remember)

I think SACD will go the way of the DCC. I believe we will see DVD-Audio prevail.
I have a DCC, a Beta Machine, other stuff. Heck, I still use Super 8 Movie Projector type Film,
it looks great! Definitely has a feel to it. Wicked expensive though.

To pull stuff off SACD, you have to dub analog. Can't wait for the Ripping software and DVD-Rom
drive firmware upgrade corresponding to enable SACD designed to spite the industry. DVD audio
can be copied freely with some effort, and people are more likely to spend the money because they
don't need to buy anything new just to play the disk. I tried this and Motorhead's 5.1 DVD copied just fine.
(I have no idea why they did that in 5.1 it just sounds louder, not better)The fact that you can't
play an SACD on a computer was not a mistake, it was done on purpose. (I amtold by Dave Moulton,
and Bob Ludwig) that only Stereo 2 channel will play, if that....I haven't tried though because I don't have one.

----- Original Message -----
From: ndk
To: isaotomita at yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2003 5:47 PM
Subject: Re: [isaotomita] Re: Arturia Moog Modular V - what Tomita says



> Apex is coming out with one 7701 that is both - SACD and DVD-A
> The price is $250, waiting for it to drop to $100 or so in the next fewmonths...
> maybe I can get one used...

I hadn't realized the price of analog converters had dropped that much
but I guess it has.

> I couldn't see buying SACD titles right now without a player, so I instead bought some DVD-A titles,
> since I can play them now. If I do get one, I would probably immediately transfer my SACD's to DTS-CD.....
> as a backup copy. There's more than one way to copy a disk.

?? I thought most SACD were not usually surround. How do you pull stuff
off an SACD anyway? Analog dub??

> I admit I have a general spite for the record industry for not advertising / promoting DTS-CD's

Well it only wins for ease of copying! Its a benefit to the consumer
since it should play on existing Home Theatre gear but there isn't any
other advantages I can think of marketing still another format. Its a
kind of sideways trade of a lossy format that does surround
conveniently. Yes it sounds better than Dolby AC-3 but thats not saying
that much and one would kind of like something audibly better than CDs
if one has to switch.

Still it is a great way for home made electronic surround excursions
except that the audience is limited to DTS owners with CD-R capable
playback hardware

> in general, and disabling the ability to make a backup copy of an SACD.

I'm sure they don't want to stop with SACD, witness most Japanese new CD
releases are screwy "Secure" format or whatever thats called.

I keep thinking as I think others are that one should be able to prove
in court that these things are not a compact audio discs and being
deceptively sold unless they bear a clear warning which has not yet
been made madatory

> DTS is a Great format without the hype. I also eventually plan on backing up some
> of the the DVD-A's to DTS CD as well. I applaud DVD-A's compatibility with Dolby Digital.
> That's the right way to do it. I also haven't found a single DTS CD that is only two channel,

But there would be no point!! Its already lossy compression

> unlike the SACD's rehash of stereo mixes.

The point I think was to satisfy the high end market bothered by 16/44.1
not deliver Surround

At least you know what you are getting with a DTS CD / DVD-A.
> Let's confuse the consumer a little more.

Though DVD-A looks messy too. Author with the $500 software and you have
to use some other software for Dolby encoding, Theres that MLP format I
just heard about and you can replace the dolby with DTS too, so I guess
you can take advantage of DTS if you like its compression.

I see DVD video discs are already free in breakfast cereal boxes so the
differential between DVD media and CD as no real advantage to a DTS CD
except on a small or private scale
>
> Sorry, but I can't really hear the difference between 48K / 96K DVD-A stereo and 192K stereo SACD.
> Maybe we will find a useful reason for it, but that's the least attractive feature of the SACD.

But are you sure you have quality Digital to Analog converters? Some low
price stuff surely has to cut corners and might even downsample on the
fly. Unfortuantely price lowering and the fact the a lot of the problems
are above human hearing or speaker reproduction means there is perhaps
less incentive to really put quality into DA converters as those
troublesome areas of frequency have been upshifted.
>
> Hey, I know - I can put some subliminal messages for making vampire bats attack people in the 96 KHZ
> effective range of a 192 KHZ SACD when played really loud =

Actually one of the main reasons for 192 is to move the aliasing into a
higher orbit beyond your hearing (and to allow for more sloppiness in
the converters for better or worse) Even the best converter if you think
about it is making a feeble attempt to play more and more squared off
waves as you get into higher frequencies, so thats another.

What a great gimmick for a Goth band....
> I could see Maybe blowing a dog whistle really loud and driving the neighborhood dogs mad.
> Hmmm...I need to email that band "Tool"......

the speakers tend to roll off before that. Thats a vintage one, theres
lots of musicians who claimed "and I put on a special sound just for
Rover to hear" over the years

but yeah, the other weekend I was at this laptop jam and to be funny I
took a one pannel serge driven by a mc202 (the baby microcomposer with
almost an SH-101 synth built in). So I was having fun with some laptop
players where exactly did we stop hearing a high pitch, but then I
realized it might just be the speakers and it may or may not have been
our hearing threashold. I guess we needed a dog.

recent article
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/23/magazine/23SOUND.html
I'm upset they don't divulge what the other sound was besides the
backwards baby cry


> I bought an Sony SA-CD player at Best Buy for around $130. My total
> investment for the SA-CD and DVD-A disc players is about $350. It mightbe
> possible to get both format players for less than this now.

though with the mechanism existing to play both its more likely you'll
see a multiplayer (or SACD will die on gear not made by Sony)

>
> The sad part is there was no provisions for a digital output of a SACD or DVD-Audio
> signal.

Oh I thought there was a digital stream, guess not, I'm behind the
times. I've just got this powered speaker system I feed an optical to to
get 5.1 dolby/DTS off a standalone DVD player

> I went and bought an El-Cheapo Sherwood reciever for $129 that has 6 discrete
> analog ins but I haven't decided to buy a DVD-Audio player that is alsoan SACD player.
> Waiting for the price to drop, and I am not paying $500 for something that will depreciate and
> cost 79 dollars in a few months.

Sure, then again some things just die. DCC?? Consumer DAT ?? DIVX Discs

Exaggeration...? Maybe, but I have lost over $10,000 -
> $20,000 in depreciation of studio equipment alone in the past 3 years. I think I will wait till
> it's nearly free then buy one. (Just one Example - Mackie HD recorder was $2000, just
> dropped to $1300) among other stuff...that's $700 in six months.

Sorry to say but its the rare exception with anything digital that you
don't take a bath after 2 years. I tell that to everyone I teach or
consult for, you have a 2 year span to get what you want out of it. It
might still be useful but you won't be happy if you didn't get all your
profits out of it well before 2 years. You get price drops like that
with non-digital gear but thats mainly because whoever made it is going
out of business. Software for hardware really has very little upside investment-wise

>
> I am going to email ATI Toronto again and ask them about incorporating the S/w into the multimedia player....

very cool.

nick

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT




To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
isaotomita-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

 

--- In isaotomita at yahoogroups.com, "Andy Despres" <andy_despres at h...>
wrote:

>
> I think SACD will go the way of the DCC. I believe we will see DVD-Audio
prevail.

I think both SACD and DVD-A will go the way of the dodo, Andy. 90% of non-
audiophile or film buff people I know who have DVD-Video can't be bothered
with installing a proper discreet multi-channel speaker set-up, its too much
hassle, takes up too much space in their living room and is too expensive.

I think SACD will falter first and DVD-A will become a very specialised system
for the few, at best. To be honest, how many people are likely to buy this new
version of The Planets, especially if it doesn't get a release outside Japan?

 

Yep, that's completely true - The DVD-A media MIGHT survive, but only because it has
dolby digital tracks on it, (which can be played in a conventional DVD player, and downmixed to stereo).
That's it's only saving grace. No one will buy these DVD-A players, unless the regular DVD players are
no longer being made. Considering almost all of the salespeople don't even know what DVD-A , DTS CD,
or SACD is, It's doomed. Most retail outlets do not separate the DVD-A, DTSand SACD media - the
exception being being Best buy in Framingham Ma. which separates the SACD from the DTS/DVD section
- the SACD media is separated by 120 feet, apart from the all the CD's and DVD's and DVD-A,
sitting with the SACD players, and the DVD-A / DTS cd media is mixed in with the DVD Music Videos,
(which is at least a little organized.) It's mostly clumped in by artist (Like it's used kittly litter, they are trying to hide it).
Newbury comics is not promoting any format, and they throw the SACD's in with the CD titles by artist,
and the DVD-A's in with DVD movies by the artist, and they don't even know what a DTS cd is...It's the record industry's fault not just
the retail outlet's fault...(though I do admit that Best buy could have a better promo for the new formats....)
Who knows, only time will tell. I think it's a cool technology, but not everyone else does.

The other killer is a lack of media - It's a lot of work to make a 5.1 Mix,which usually requires going back to
the original multichannel master tapes / files (whatever). It's not as simple as re-mastering the 2 channel mix.
It also takes a lot of time, as there are not a lot of surround capable studios (However, mine is) that can
mix down this music, and also master it. It's a huge expense, very time consuming, and left for only the
musicians who can afford it....and still have their master mutichannel reeltapes/backup intact...

As it is I have to buy a record player, and a CD-4 cartridge, as I am goingto attempt to convert/master
"Snowflakes are dancing" to DTS CD which I have on Quad LP I got off ebay afew months back.
I have the decoder, but no record player yet. Anyone who is interested in hearing this when it's done,
let me know, I have no idea how it's going to come out, it may sound horrible...I will see if I can upload the
DTS encoded wave files, or I might decide to send the CD via mail. Maybe this will spur Tomita to release
more of his stuff readily available onCD over here, as well as SACD, DVD-A,DTS, etc.. you all know how
difficult it is to get his works on CD...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you can find it easily I would have asked that you buy the CD before downloading, as that
is a license for being able to make a backup copy. I have no idea how it's going to come out, it may
sound horrible...I am trying to do the right thing so that if there are to be any profits, I would either find
a way to get the money to Tomita or maybe start an orginization to import /remaster some of his works,
sort of like a "US Recordings Japanese Artist Preservation Society"...Maybeshipping costs, and a voluntary
donation to be sent to or used for Tomita or other Japanese Artists relatedstuff...I wish there were an easier way to do this....

(Hey, can't blame me for trying to do what's right, at least I am not a napster pirate...who has no regard
for copywrights)



----- Original Message -----
From: Ben Ward
To: isaotomita at yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 4:15 PM
Subject: [isaotomita] Re: Arturia Moog Modular V - what Tomita says


--- In isaotomita at yahoogroups.com, "Andy Despres" <andy_despres at h...>
wrote:

>
> I think SACD will go the way of the DCC. I believe we will see DVD-Audio
prevail.

I think both SACD and DVD-A will go the way of the dodo, Andy. 90% of non-
audiophile or film buff people I know who have DVD-Video can't be bothered
with installing a proper discreet multi-channel speaker set-up, its too much
hassle, takes up too much space in their living room and is too expensive.

I think SACD will falter first and DVD-A will become a very specialised system
for the few, at best. To be honest, how many people are likely to buy this new
version of The Planets, especially if it doesn't get a release outside Japan?


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT




To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
isaotomita-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.