2. digital
  3. 1060452773

XRCD Technology

I have received promotional material for these discs, but I don't really know what they are. What I gather is that they have been mastered using 24 bit digital resolution, and higher sampling rate. But I thought that this has long been true of all mastering equipment. Whatever the precision of the mastering process, the final result has to be truncated (or rounded) to 16 bits for the CD product.

The discs I have seen are performances that have always been recognized as superb examples of the original recording process. I suspect that if these discs really are above average it is probably due to the good work done 40 years ago..not the recent mixdown which, at best, can only avoid screwing things up.

Tell me why I should buy one of these things, instead of another SACD.
eldartford
tireguy
1,964 posts
 
Good SACD will blow away XRCD(any form of it), that being said XRCD is with out a doubt my favorite sound quality label for redbook, they are VERY good. It has a lot to do with the original recording, it has even more to do with transfering the master tape to cd- they don't over look any aspect of the transfer. They even explain how they do this in the case of every XRCD. If you have not tried them then go out and get a few of your favorites, you will be in for an enjoyable experience. I still feel that on the same recordings that SACD is better, fwiw. The other thing is not every title you want is available on XRCD or SACD this way you cover more of your favorite music with a quality mastering.
drrdiamond
671 posts
 
I have three versions of Procol Harum's Home. One of which uses the XRCD technology. But, my Mobile Fidelity (nonSACD) version is MUCH better.

But that is only one experience, others may be different.

Richard
bomarc
501 posts
 
XRCD, as you seem to have deduced, is a mastering process. The resolution, and other technical details, aren't really important. The JVC guys simply do a very, very good job of mastering. That's why they sound better than the original releases (and they really do).

Yes, they start with good original recordings, because what's the point of carefully remastering a lousy recording? But the product demonstrates what good mastering can do.

As for SACDs, I happen to think the primary reason they sound better is also that they've been remastered, rather than because the extra resolution makes so much difference. Assuming I'm right about that, the XRCD/SACD choice comes down to who did the better mastering job. Given the track record at JVC, I'd bet on XRCD in most cases.
More to discover