Where is the magic in a SHM disk?

The magic is in the price.

Tim

 

It's not hard to realize that an optically clearer material would allow the laser to read the pits with greater accuracy and therefore less errors, which in turn will result in improved sound. Simple stuff really.

 

I guess theres some sort of placebo effect present when people defend SHM-discs. I suppose the only difference is that SHM is made of somewhat different material and therefore the price is higher.

Never really cared for any of those SHM-releases and was kinda poor looking when some people claimed Led Zeppelin The Definitive Collection was better on SHM (as its really awesome already). And then some of the people who owned both versions of the box, said theres nothing different in SHM.

 

Yep.

I'm flummoxed as to why anybody would think the plastic would add anything to the sound quality. The surface is the same, the data's the same... only the mastering would be different (possibly).

I can see some of the SHM releases being valuable as collectors items, especially if you run into a nutty completist who's got to have everything by a specific artist.

Maybe Steve could master a SHM disc, so it'd be a SH-SHM disc.

 

The surface coating is NOT the same, it is considerably clearer.

 

My 2 cents...

The coating on these SHM disks appear to be similar to the coating material on blu-ray disks. I suspect that's why there are also blu-spec disks as well made by Sony.

As for the sound, it is often a different mastering which is quite obvious when you have a look in Audacity or Audition. Most of the ones I've seen IMO have tended to boost volume and appear quite compressed.

Overall, nothing special other than the hype around the material used.

 

I have several CDs, both on regular CD and SHM with the same mastering. The SHM does sound different. You can tell the laser is reading the material more clearly and steady, but that sounds unnatural, so I don't like them. It is too perfect. Sounds to me like it is being played in a laboratory. Rock CDs should be more jittery and raw. Maybe they would work for classical, or something.

 

These Prince discs are slightly louder and EQed, that's why they sound different from the old editions.

More informations in this thread: New Prince SHM-CD editions - sound quality?

 

Wow. I'm no SHM supporter but this is one of the craziest things I've read on this forum.

 

When it comes to stuff like this on this forum, people tend to make rash statements about functionality without any technical evidence to back it up.
The bottom line is if you rip an SHM-CD to a blank CD with no scratches, you will get identical playback bit for bit. And even if there was a Bit or Byte out of place, the error correction mechanism will ensure that it is replaced with the correct bit.

 

Ripping the music is not the issue. It is the material of the starting SHM CD. That is what the laser reads more clearly, and that is what makes the difference in playback.

 

What I desribed is what the SHM material does. I did not invent SHM. Some crazy Japanese scientist did.

 

Invisible green marker

 

OH! LORD!

 

If only.

 

You know there's an obi strip there, don't you?

 

I'm going to whip up some popcorn. Who wants some?

 

Hi Grant,

Like most topics in audio, there will always be arguments - usually from folks who haven't heard what they're arguing about. Too bad about all the posturing, isn't it?

Anyway, back to the topic at hand: My experience has been quite different.
There are a few SHM (and HQCD) samplers out there that include one SHM and one regular CD, both from the same mastering session. When I first auditioned one of these, before verifying both were the same mastering, I was quite sure they had different EQ, so basic was the difference in the sound of the trumpet, cymbals and piano in Miles' "'Round Midnight".

I was actually pretty shocked to find that after extracting files from both discs onto the computer's hard drive, I could null them against each other, 100%, to the sample - indicating to me a single source for both discs (i.e. the same CD master). Once extracted to hard drive, both sounded identical too. But they sound *very* different when played in a CD transport or player.

That last isn't an unusual experience for me. I've been saying since the first CDs I mastered in 1983 that CDs from different pressing plants (and often different lines within the same plant) all sound different from each other and none sounds indistinguishable from the CD master. This has always been true in my experience, regardless of the transport or player used. Even with the best CD pressings in my experience, there is always a little bit of loss and with most pressings, there is a considerable loss of focus and fine detail. The losses all go away with proper extraction to hard drive but they are still present when the discs are spun in a transport or player.

What I've heard from disc processes like SHM and HQCD is that the replicated discs - if played via a transport or player - are better at providing the sound of the masters from which they are made. When the mastering is the same and listening will occur from a computer's hard drive, there is no advantage to the better manufactured discs. But when a transport or player will be used, in my view, there is a definite advantage to the better discs, that at times can be not at all subtle.

Best regards,
Barry
www.soundkeeperrecordings.com
www.barrydiamentaudio.com

 

Yes.. however when you rip a standard CD you will find that, unless your CD is badly scratched, your rip is the same (bit by bit) as the rip made by another person using different equipment so there is really no need for "greater accuracy".

 

Isn't the claim of more accurate readbability/playback one of the purported reasons for buying gold CDs also? If that's the case, do any SHM and Gold discs exist which use the same mastering to perform some sort of shootout?

 

Hi Barry, are you talking here about the quality of the transport or player, i.e, SHM discs play better on low grade players?

 

I knew there was something to it, Barry. I feel the opposite of you, however. I don't like the "enhanced" sound that these new manufacturing techniques provide. Maybe if all CDs had always sounded like that, then maybe, but I feel that SHM is too far apart from the regular old CDs that we all know and love. Thank you very much for your input.

 

This is what I've said several times here at this forum, that when listening to these wonderful SHM-SACDs; each and every one of them is "digital perfect", representing the DSD 64fs master more faithful.
Transients in music has incredible speed on these SHM-SACDs.

 

Yes, but you are commenting on the SACD part. Barry was talking about the SHM only making a difference in sound, which is what I have said from day one. I knew I could hear a difference, and most everybody on this forum called me a liar.