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
jedinite24's avatar
jedinite24
1,502 posts
 
I've been living under a rock and just recently discovered 24 bit XRCDs. I'm thinking about buying a bunch but I keep wondering if my current audio set-up will not do the 24bit XRCDs justice. I'm currently using a Audio Alchemy DDE v3.0 / DTI 2.0 combo with an Oppo player as a transport. I'm just not fond of the 2 channel output of the Oppo player I have. Will the Audio Alchemy DDE v3.0 / DTI 2.0 combo lessen the sound quality of the 24 bit XRCDs? Do I need to get a non oversampling DAC to really enjoy 24bit XRCDs to their fullest potential? Should I just replace this combo with a better overall player? The person that introduced me to the 24bit XRCDs has a VERY nice reference Marantz CDP that is way out of my price range.

Thanks in advance.
mrtennis
3,295 posts
 
i have a number of xrcds--early and 24 bit versions.

i am not keeen on them and probably would not buy anymore.

here are my observations:

there is a change in frequency response. when comparing an xrcd to an original i have observed greater resolution because the highs are more emphasized.

if you prefer this perspective, thats ok.

i compared many xrcds to their originals, and, especially for classical, on the london label, i preferred the original.

i also compare some xrcd to riverside recordings and didn't feel the increase in price in price was justified.
jedinite24's avatar
jedinite24
1,502 posts
 
Thanks for sharing your thoughts MrTennis. I'm going to order a couple of 24-bit XRCDs and give them a shot in my system. I'll keep in mind what you said.
smoothjazz
24 posts
 
The XRCD of Gustav Holts' 'The Planets' with Zubin Mehta directing is by far the best version of this work I have heard, and I own about 5 different versions of this work on CD. In at least this case the XRCD is superior to anything else out there, except perhaps a live concert!
mrtennis
3,295 posts
 
hi smoothjazz:

do you find the highs a bit more emphasized than on the other 5 versions you have auditioned. i own a number of xrcds, including xrcd2s and find that compared to the commercial version, there is a change in frequency response and a feeling that the sound was a touch hardened. such an effect can reveal low-level detail hidden on a commercial recording, but that doesn't mean the xrcd pressing is superior to the commercial pressing, rather it is different.

of course the holst could be an exception. i would like to hear it for my self. i believe i have a version of mehta's performance on a commercial label--don't rember the label.

perhaps you could explain why you prefer the xrcd to the other 5 versions compared to it.

thanks.
More to discover