| Search | Login/Register
   Home » Didital Things » The BSO and Digital Music. (45 posts, 3 pages)
  Print Thread | 1st Post |  
Page 1 of 2 (45 items) Select Pages:  1 2 »
   Target    Threads for related reading   Most recent post in related threads   Forum  Replies   Views   Started 
  »  New  Chesky Records went "raw files"...  Chesky Records went "raw files"....  Didital Things  Forum     0  20455  04-16-2009
  »  New  Pacific Microsonics Model 2..  This is very typical....  Didital Things  Forum     85  735329  05-28-2009
  »  New  After-concert download – a truly phenomenal thing...  Excellent idea! nt...  Musical Discussions  Forum     1  23355  10-19-2007
  »  New  The High Resolution PCM files business, where?..  Really bad...  Didital Things  Forum     31  238218  09-29-2009
  »  New  A need for Resolution /Sampling Assessment Test..  Well, we kind of 'have' a file Virginity Assessment Tes...  Didital Things  Forum     1  28068  10-06-2009
12-02-2008 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,182
Joined on 05-28-2004
Post #: 1
Post ID: 9051
Reply to: 9051
The BSO and Digital Music.
fiogf49gjkf0d
This is from BSO web site. I do not post link as they move it around. Go to BSO web site and find Digital Music link, or tab, or whatever... Here is from BSO web site:

The BSO Digital Music Service allows patrons to purchase and download from the BSO website, digital music files of music that the BSO produces! The initial rollout of this service will include albums produced by the BSO since 2001. Music albums include the recent Chamber Players Mozart album, and the BSO Symphony Hall Centennial Celebration-Set! Albums are available in 320Kbs MP3 format and select albums in Windows Media Audio (WMA) Lossless Surround format will also be available for purchase!

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the BSO Digital Music Service?
The BSO Digital Music Service allows patrons to purchase and download from the BSO website, digital music files of music that the BSO produces. The initial rollout of this service will include albums produced by the BSO since 2001.

What can I purchase through this service?
There are three types of digital music that can be purchased through this service: album, work, and track. Albums are most synonymous with a conventional album found on a CD or record. Works represent a complete work of music, such as a complete symphony. Track represents an individual song or a movement within a larger piece of music. Albums and works represent a collection of individual tracks.

What types of digital file formats will be sold?
The primary format of digital music sold through this service will be in MP3 format. MP3's will be encoded using the Fraunhofer MP3 codec and will be encoded at 320 kilobits per second (kbps). For select albums, and for most albums sold in the future, a Windows Media Audio (WMA) Lossless Surround format will also be available for purchase. These files are encoded at a much higher encoding rate of 12,700 kbps and offer Dolby 5.1 Surround Sound. Because of the higher encoding rate, WMA files are substantially larger than their MP3 counterparts (twenty times larger) - as such we strongly recommend that you have a high-speed Internet connection to download these files. At the present time, the BSO Digital Music Service is not providing an Apple counterpart to the WMA format. This is because most formats of this nature, which can be played on an Apple computer, require substantially more technical experience than is represented by the general consumer. The BSO wants its patrons to have seamless access to the digital media provided and as such, prefer to utilize technologies that are readily accessible to the general public. As these technologies advance and become more accessible, the BSO will incorporate these technologies into its core offerings.

How do I browse the catalog?
To get to the Digital Music Service, click on the words "Digital Music" from the horizontal navigation on any web page within the website. This will take you to a table of contents of digital albums available for sale on the website. Click on a product's name will take you to the detail page for that product. For example, clicking on a digital album's name will take you to the detail page for that album. On this page you will see the works and/or tracks that make up that album. If you click on a work name or a track name, you will be taken to the detail page for the relevant work or track. To go back to the previous page, you can click on the "Back" button in your Internet browser's toolbar or you can always click on "Digital Music" in the navigation to get to the "homepage " for the Digital Music Service.

Can I listen to audio samples of music before I decide to purchase it?
Yes. For each track that is sold, whether individual or as part of a larger work or album, there is a green "Play" button preceding the name of the track. When you click on this button, a 45-second excerpt will be played of the track in question. Clicking on the button while it is playing the excerpt will pause the music.

Does your digital music have Digital Rights Management embedded in it?
No, digital music sold through the BSO Digital Music Service does not contain digital rights management(DRM). As such, you can play it on any compatible device.

How much does it cost to purchase digital music from this service?
Pricing for albums will be $8.99 for an MP3 album and $12.99 for a WMA album. Tracks will be priced $.89 (MP3) and $1.29 (WMA) if the track duration is under 7 minutes in duration. Otherwise, if longer, the price of the track will be scaled up to reflect a price that is commensurate with the proportion of time that the track consumes compared to the overall duration of the album. Works (i.e. a complete symphony) will be priced similarly to tracks over 7 minutes in duration - their price is not the sum of the costs of each track in the work, but rather the price is a proportion of the time the work consumes compared to the duration of the complete album. This offers an economy in scale - meaning it will be cheaper to by complete works or complere albums, rather than buying all the composite tracks separately.

Do you offer a subscription service?
Not at this time. Subscription services in which patrons pay a flat fee to gain access to the complete digital catalog for a set period of time, is not currently available. The BSO plans to unveil a subscription service of this nature around Q1 2009.

How do I purchase digital media from the BSO website?
Simply add digital media items to your shopping basket like you would purchasing a conventional CD or tickets to a performance. Simply browse the catalog. If you are in the table of contents (where albums are listed) and you want to purchase a digital album, simply place your mouse cursor over the "Buy Options." The website will display whether you can purchase an MP3 and/or WMA format. Simply click on the appropriate buy button to add that format to your shopping basket. If you are on a product's detail page, the available buy buttons will appear, which upon clicking will add the appropriate product's media format to your shopping basket for purchase. If you are ready to check out, simply click on the "Checkout" button on the shopping basket page to complete the purchase process.

Do I have to register or log into myBSO in order to purchase digital music?
Yes. Registering for myBSO allows us to serve you better and is a requirement of the commerce system that we use. Your name, email address, and login credentials (username and password) are all that we require in order to register a myBSO account. During the registration process you can opt in to receive additional information from the BSO. Please be assured that if you do not opt in, the BSO will not send any sales and marketing material to you. We will only communicate information to you via email if it is immediately relevant to a purchase you made on the BSO website.

I have bought digital music, but how do I download it now?
After you have purchased your digital music and have received your order confirmation, there are three ways to access your downloadable content: 1) click on the "Download" button on the order confirmation page, 2) click on the link regarding downloadable content from your email confirmation, 3) click on the "My Downloads" page within the myBSO portion of the website. To access the "My Downloads" page, click on "MY BSO" in navigation located in the top right-hand corner of any web page. If you are not logged in, you will be prompted to log in using your myBSO credentials. If you are logged in, click on "My Downloads" in the left navigation of any page within the myBSO section.

On the "My Downloads" page, you will see all the digital music items you have purchased. You can simply scroll down to the media you want to download and click on the "Download" button to start the download process. If you have many items on your "My Downloads" page, you can use the "Filter By" option to only show that item on the page. If you have done this already, and then want to see all the other options, simply select the "Show All" option.

The BSO Digital Music Service utilizes a self-contained application called the BSO Download Manager, which facilitates the download of and ensures the data integrity of the digital files you want to download. To use this application, you must agree to the security disclaimer before it can start. If you choose note to use the BSO Download Manager, you will need to click on the link provided in order to download it using your Internet browser.

Only 15 files are downloading in the BSO Download Manager, why?
The BSO Download Manager can only accommodate 15 simultaneous downloads at one time. If you attempt to download more than 15 files at one time, any file added after the 15th file will be queued for download until one of the first 15 files has been completely downloaded. Note that if it takes more than 20 minutes for one of the first 15 files to download, then any of your subsequent files in queue will most likely produce an error as the link for their download has expired. If this occurs, please wait until all of your current files in the Download Manager have completely downloaded then refresh your "My Downloads" page and then download the remaining files.

I experienced an error while downloading a file, now I cannot seem to download the file. What do I do?
If you should experience and errors in downloading a file, please wait til all other files in the BSO Download Manager are downloaded and then refresh your "My Downloads" page. This will re-initialize your available download links. Once this is done, please try downloading the file in question again.

Now that I downloaded my music, how do I play it?
If you are accustomed to using music players like Windows Media Player, iTunes, Rhapsody, etc. simply import the music to your player as you normally would. All digital music files are embedded with ID3 tags which provide you with all the details you need to know what you have. We have also embedded cover art into each digital music file.

If you have never used digital music before, the easiest way to play the music is to double-click your mouse on the file you want to play. This will automatically load the file into the music player on your computer that is associated with that file type. If you own a PC, this will most likely be Windows Media Player. If you own an Apple computer, this will most likely be iTunes.

How do I play Dolby 5.1 Surround when listening to a WMA Lossless file?
Your computer or device on which you want to play the WMA Lossless file must be able to play digital surround sound files. Most consumer desktop computers are capable of playing surround sound. Please refer to your computer's user's manual or technical specifications for assistance. Please note, a large percentage of consumer laptops (portable computers) cannot play digital surround sound.


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
12-02-2008 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,182
Joined on 05-28-2004
Post #: 2
Post ID: 9052
Reply to: 9051
Ok, the news is out. What the Dolby 5.1 is all about?
fiogf49gjkf0d

Upon further search I found the flowing:

http://www.boston.com/ae/music/articles/2008/12/02/bso_launches_its_own_music_download_service/

They look like offer two formats: MP3 at 320kbps this is a crap and multi-channel WMA Lossless. The WMA Lossless is 88/24 and this might be interesting if it goes 2 channels. Only God knows why those fools decided to go it in 6 channels. I am sure the BSO people consulted with some kind of “industry specialist”  and that fucking idiot pointred them into 5.1 channels direction. Very sad!

There are a few other concerns that I have. 

1)     What source BSO used for their WMA 6-channels – was it the BSO archives take or it was juts copy of BSO CD. I think it is the last one.

2)     How much Dolby 5.1 processing destroys sound?

3)     If it future BSO will be releasing in WMA format their current events then will the feed be edited before porting to  WMA

4)     Does Dolby hjave a way read or to extract 2 channels from the file?

The Cat

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
02-25-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,182
Joined on 05-28-2004
Post #: 3
Post ID: 9911
Reply to: 9052
How it works….
fiogf49gjkf0d

It is a recursive subject at my site that the sad state of music/audio industry is not due to some cosmic or social reasons but due to the very specific and very idiotic actions of very specific individuals who run the industry. Here is the case to point.

A few months BSO started their service offering to download live BSO performances. A few days ago I have downloaded one performance. It was not MP3 but WMA Lossless, about 6 Gigabytes of music. What can I say? Listening what they did with sound it is too late to argue with them – all the is necessary to do with those people who made it is to take a grenade launcher and kill each single person who ever was involved in the production of those files. It is beyond being laughable of bad. What they did was lately a cultural terrorism and they keep any single people who got the files as a hostage. Ok, let not to kill them – let to cut their fucking hands off in order they never were able to touch any other recording…

What the most shocking in this whole story that no one from BSO of course has nothing to do with it. I am sure the BSO contacted some local “professional” audio studio that “pressed” for them the files. I am sure that the idiots who work there are “highly qualified”, perhaps well decorated by industry “recognition”. Well, do you want to understand what I mean? Invest $12 and download let say the Mahler 6 as I did. I will see what kind songs you will sing what you hear THAT.

The caT

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
02-25-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Paul S
San Diego, California, USA
Posts 2,671
Joined on 10-12-2006
Post #: 4
Post ID: 9912
Reply to: 9911
Production Values
fiogf49gjkf0d
Funny, I was just having more or less the same conversation earlier today, only in my case it was the straight-descent-to-Hell of Jazz and Classical programming in Southern California.

Is there any way to understand these problems?

Sure, there is (although accepting the situation is another matter, altogether...).

The problem is, "Air Time" itself is a "Product", meaning, it has "Value", in terms of Money, in and of itself, at least in the eyes and dimly-lit minds of the folks-who-decide-such-issues.

OTOH, since Art is NOT and will never be a "Product", its "Value" in terms of its worth, in terms of Money, in terms of Air Time, etc. is always open to question, ie, how much Time and Money is a piece of "music" worth to "invest" in (to try to make more Money with it)?

Meanwhile, the Morons who get paid to fill the "Air Time" and/or "create the Products" either have no idea of what separates Art from "Product", or they don't care when it comes time for "Business", so it is Hit-and-Miss at best and Not-Likely at worst in any given instance when "Business" is concerned, and "versus Art" is only in OUR dreams, because these bums flat do not differentiate.

How pervasive is this?  Go to the effing concerts and watch and listen as the audience goes nuts for a performance you only stuck around for to verify that people generally don't get Music any better than they get Economics or Astro-physics.  And the same people that blow capillaries applauding that dreck are the ones who go home and order up the subsequent e-files for "enjoyment" at home, the office or for "impressing the right people..."  And they are HaPpY with it!

Face it:  They don't get it and they are not going to get it because to them it's just another form of entertainment, likely with less far less importance to them than Fast Food.  Or, from the "creative side", it's just another "investment" taking the form of a music-ish commodity.

Anyone invloved in Marketing has had years of Statistics and Statistical Analysis, and it is this and Money and not Art or Aesthetics that motivates the decisions of the sort we are talking about here.

Let's hear it again for the Happy Accident; not only gear, but recorded music, as well.

Paul S
03-02-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,182
Joined on 05-28-2004
Post #: 5
Post ID: 9930
Reply to: 9911
BSO’s digital on trail.
fiogf49gjkf0d
 Romy the Cat wrote:

It is a recursive subject at my site that the sad state of music/audio industry is not due to some cosmic or social reasons but due to the very specific and very idiotic actions of very specific individuals who run the industry. Here is the case to point.

A few months BSO started their service offering to download live BSO performances. A few days ago I have downloaded one performance. It was not MP3 but WMA Lossless, about 6 Gigabytes of music. What can I say? Listening what they did with sound it is too late to argue with them – all the is necessary to do with those people who made it is to take a grenade launcher and kill each single person who ever was involved in the production of those files. It is beyond being laughable of bad. What they did was lately a cultural terrorism and they keep any single people who got the files as a hostage. Ok, let not to kill them – let to cut their fucking hands off in order they never were able to touch any other recording…

What the most shocking in this whole story that no one from BSO of course has nothing to do with it. I am sure the BSO contacted some local “professional” audio studio that “pressed” for them the files. I am sure that the idiots who work there are “highly qualified”, perhaps well decorated by industry “recognition”. Well, do you want to understand what I mean? Invest $12 and download let say the Mahler 6 as I did. I will see what kind songs you will sing what you hear THAT.


Do I need to get softer on BSO, do I?

I have a local guy contacted me over weekend who downloaded BSO file and found them very appropriately sounding. He wanted to know why he and I had such a drastic different view about the quality of BSO files. So, I send hism my file and he send me his, our original WMA files had the same MD5 hash value.

His file did play orders of magnitude better then mine. After further investigation I realized that my WaveLab 6, while it plays the 5ch BSO files internally converts 5ch into 2ch and do a lot of other pressing that absolutely ruin sound. He, in contrary opens the 5ch files by multichannel editing software SoundForge 9, manuals copy two channel into a new 2ch file and saves it – how more idiotic shall it be? I wonder how many of BSO file buyers can play them in original ruined by multichannel processing 5ch version and how many will get the same result as I do by playing it by 2ch players.

With the size of the files that they offer it might be a good 88K version in two channels instead of 5ch in 22kBs. I also need to note that despite that those “properly extracted” two channels file sounded much better them my files but they did not sound appropriate to me as it was very well auditable results of heavy DSP processing.

The Cat

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
03-06-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,182
Joined on 05-28-2004
Post #: 6
Post ID: 9955
Reply to: 9930
Wow, what a news!!!
fiogf49gjkf0d

After a few complains of mine to BSO about the ridiculousness of this new digital files programs (the ways how BSO does it) they apparently got sick from me and game me a phone of BSO New Media Manager. I spoke with him today but I literally was not able to bitch about anything as the news he gave to me exceed all my expectations and made me almost horny.

Richard, (it was his name) was not only familiar and well understood all problems that I intended to complain about but he had a ready to go solutions. Get this. BSO is about to release two new downloadable uncompressed formats: 44/16 and 88/24. The prices for 88/24 are plans to be very aggressive – even lover that the 5-chenal files now.  Furthermore the 88/24 file will be available not only for the newest James Levine collaboration with BSO but also for selected BSO archives! Holly cow!

The first batch of the new Levine’s recording in 88/24 BSO wikll make available on April 6. I asked them do not remove the walk-in and applauds from the recordings and to start the files from the few seconds before of the door for a conductor is opened. They might even comply with it!!! OK, we are going somewhere…

The Cat

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
03-06-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
clarkjohnsen
Boston, MA, US
Posts 298
Joined on 06-02-2004
Post #: 7
Post ID: 9956
Reply to: 9955
Good work!
fiogf49gjkf0d
That is the best news of the week/month/... hell, the entire year!
 
especially about the archives.
 
good work!
 
clark
04-06-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,182
Joined on 05-28-2004
Post #: 8
Post ID: 10172
Reply to: 9955
OK. BSO – the game is up!!!
fiogf49gjkf0d
As it was promised BSO released today two new formats: AIFF (stereo) in 88.2kHz/24bit and WMA (stereo) in 88.2kHz/24bit. THAT what I was waiting. The Daphnis et Chloé, the German Requiem, the Mahler 6 are absolutely wonderful. I just bought all 4 recordings and downloading the AIFF files now. If you can play 88.2/24 then you shall be crazy do not get those files…

http://www.bso.org/bso/shop/productCategories.jsp;jsessionid=ZE3G2MM4NF3SSCTFQMGCFEQ?id=bcat13430002

Now, I did not listen them yet but I see that they are cut by tracks. That is VERY bad sign. Firstly is because the files were mastered and secondary - how the hell to play them as a continuing program?

Two moments:

1)      What is conceptual difference between AIFF and WMA? I can play bothers and I never played any of them. I took AIFF as the WMA is some kind MS compressions. Are AIFF uncompressed files?  The AIFF looks like a way to go but it has 32 bit 2G limitation....

2)      Do the BSO editing kill the Sound? Let compare the BSO files with my LIVE FM recordings of the same perfomances. Sure I will not be able to match dynamic but I home I will be able to battle tone, imaging/space. I do not think that BSO “files-editors” will be able to compete what I get.

Anyhow, that is VERY good news and I can wait unit the files will go through.

Do not miss James Levine’s VERY smart interview about his arbitration for those recordings.

http://www.bso.org/bso/mods/c_09_gen_images.jsp?id=36700016

Rgs, Romy

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
04-06-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,182
Joined on 05-28-2004
Post #: 9
Post ID: 10173
Reply to: 10172
The BSO’s 88/24 files - the first few minutes...
fiogf49gjkf0d
I got the new BSO 88/24 files them briefly listened a few fragments. Generally I do like them and they are nothing like the 320kbps multi-channel WMA that BSO marketed before. My fear that the files might have issues with tone turned out to be not necessary – tonally the files are very fine. They have no compression, dynamic like hell, colorful and very good balanced. They are better than I expected and very good files, at least the AIFF files. BSO shall be crazy to release them for $9, I suggested to BSO to make them for $30-$40 and the quality the BSO delivered proofed that I was right. Anyhow, whatever BSO does now is truly priceless gift.

Now, a few aspects of criticisms:

1)      The recordings are started from silences but I would like to have the recording stated from the moment when the conductor’s door it open.
 
2)      I would prefer to have option to download sliced file or one single large file with dropped markers or without any dividers.
 
3)      I do have problems with the fact that the BSO files a bit too sharp and overlay boldly contrasty, not too much but it there. I wonder what A/D was working there….
 
4)      I do feel that some aspects of “magic” that took place sometimes during some of those performances got substantially reduced or eliminated in those recordings. My live FM file have it, the BSO files I feel have it less.
 
Regardless of my criticism, the BSO is congratulated. Let others to follow and please buy the BSO 88/24 files: let them to know that what they do is the VERY right direction to go.

The Cat

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
04-07-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
tuga


Posts 174
Joined on 12-26-2007
Post #: 10
Post ID: 10174
Reply to: 10172
AIFF
fiogf49gjkf0d
Hello Romy,
An AIFF file is an uncompressed PCM file as seen by a mac (like the tracks in a CD).
Best,Tuga
P.S.: Nice, an html toolbar that shows up on Safari.
P.S.2: I was able to edit this post!

"Science draws the wave, poetry fills it with water" Teixeira Pascoaes
04-07-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,182
Joined on 05-28-2004
Post #: 11
Post ID: 10175
Reply to: 10174
AIFF vs. WAV for 88.2kHz/24bit
fiogf49gjkf0d
Yes, I educated myself last night with all those Mac file formats (I have Mac phobia). The AIFF as well as WAV are uncompressed formats and from what I see the AIFF play very nice. I have no idea which one is preferable for high-resolution recordings, I probably need to do some experimentations.  The people on web that I was able to see mostly talk about 16 bit AIFF and WAV and about the recording of “songs” – when I read about the “songs” I want to vomit…

It looks like AIFF has 2G limit, at least under Windows (I do not know it is has it under Mac), the WAV file have 64 bit version with unlimited file size.  Anyhow, I need to play with it more.

The Cat

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
04-07-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,182
Joined on 05-28-2004
Post #: 12
Post ID: 10178
Reply to: 10173
Just played the BSO Ordinal files.
fiogf49gjkf0d
 Romy the Cat wrote:
I got the new BSO 88/24 files them briefly listened a few fragments. Generally I do like them and they are nothing like the 320kbps multi-channel WMA that BSO marketed before. My fear that the files might have issues with tone turned out to be not necessary – tonally the files are very fine. They have no compression, dynamic like hell, colorful and very good balanced. They are better than I expected and very good files, at least the AIFF files. BSO shall be crazy to release them for $9, I suggested to BSO to make them for $30-$40 and the quality the BSO delivered proofed that I was right. Anyhow, whatever BSO does now is truly priceless gift.

Now, a few aspects of criticisms:

1)      The recordings are started from silences but I would like to have the recording stated from the moment when the conductor’s door it open.
 
2)      I would prefer to have option to download sliced file or one single large file with dropped markers or without any dividers.
 
3)      I do have problems with the fact that the BSO files a bit too sharp and overlay boldly contrasty, not too much but it there. I wonder what A/D was working there….
 
4)      I do feel that some aspects of “magic” that took place sometimes during some of those performances got substantially reduced or eliminated in those recordings. My live FM file have it, the BSO files I feel have it less.
 
Regardless of my criticism, the BSO is congratulated. Let others to follow and please buy the BSO 88/24 files: let them to know that what they do is the VERY right direction to go.

Absolutely wonderful files, way beyond what I expected, considering the sound the BSO realized before. The files blew my FM files out water and this is very good. What particularly is VERY interesting for me is that my FM files and the BSO files were recorded from the same microphones and from the same feed – very interesting to listen both of them and very educational.

With all very obvious advantage of the BSO Ordinal files I have to note that there is SOME aspect of my FM files that do appreciate even having the BSO Ordinal files in hands. The FM files are “kinder”. I never thought that I will be able to say it buy Macondo can’t handle dynamic of the BSO Ordinal files. I found myself lowering volume during louse passages and adding volume in soft passages. Macondo with those BSO Ordinal files at -6dB screams like wounded in ass hippopotamus – who could believe that I will complain that  playback is too dynamic!? What to my surprise I learned is that Fm compression and FM noise (dither) makes Macondo to sound more even in a way to image more interesting.

To make wider generalization I would say the following: what I have now is a very much ultimate setup for my room to play secondary sources: LP, CD, tape, FM etc. However in case of the good raw 88.2kHz/24bit fillies are played then I think some design decisions of my playback shell be revised. I need to give some thinking to it as I feel that it is possible to get out of my playback more from those BSO Ordinal file that I am able to get now. I will post my further observations.

The Cat

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
04-07-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,182
Joined on 05-28-2004
Post #: 13
Post ID: 10179
Reply to: 10178
Just played the BSO Ordinal files II
fiogf49gjkf0d
Did you see me not to bitch about the things?

Ok, here is it. With all my admiration of the new BSO files here is another thing that I feel might be there - they might be more colorful. As colorful as they are they do have some pastel-ness of vibrant colorations. I think the reason is in the fact that the row files were edited not only sliced and as any other “master engineers of nowadays: the guys who do it most like used digital gain controls. Pay attention that the files recorded very hot and the peak of the BSO dynamic range heat 0.0dB digital. If they did not use heavy limiters during recording then no one would record at 0dB and let say they record at -2dB. So, in the following “damn mastering” they added 2dB to have the file to use the full dynamic range. Doing this the DSP (it it was used which is most likely) dared out the colors. I would very much prefer to have the original minus a few dBs files. Who care that they have not used headroom above. This is why we use 24Bit files that we not necessary need to record at full dynamic range as we have a lot of dB/bits below.

They we will not have something like this:

M6_BSO_File_0dB.JPG

Also, did anyone notice that bass on those recordings sound bit too mechanical, overly fast and in a way reminds the sound of contemporary reissue LPs?   It is not “bad” but is it the best it might be? Nope, I would like to have bass to sound differently…

The caT

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
04-08-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Antonio J.
Madrid, Spain
Posts 272
Joined on 08-16-2004
Post #: 14
Post ID: 10182
Reply to: 10179
Got the Mahler's 6th
fiogf49gjkf0d
in aiff format and listening to it in my very modest secondary rig. It's a PC with a two modules soundcard 24/96 capable, using Windows XP. For playback I'm using Foobar (I lost a copy of other more adequate software that I was sent on a computer crash and Windows reinstall) which can do well with 24/88 on its KS mode using the aiff codec.

I can't judge sound quality seriously in this rig, but the music is well worth the 10 bucks. Thanks for the heads up Romy!
04-08-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
mats
Chicago
Posts 87
Joined on 09-18-2005
Post #: 15
Post ID: 10183
Reply to: 10182
Deutsches Requiem
fiogf49gjkf0d
AIFF to Mac pro, made a 16/44 disc, and wow, even in this format it is very enjoyable,and shockingly dynamic!  (I guess it is time to call Lavry.)This is such a moving piece, and to think how much more music can become available, a new era seems to be rising out of the ashes of sonic mediocrity.  Our dollars will surely be our vote, and perhaps also comments on forums such as this.  I wonder if there is a risk of some dark backlash from the record labels once it becomes known that an orchestra can sell directly to the consumer a product so superior?
Thanks Romy,
Mats
04-08-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
clarkjohnsen
Boston, MA, US
Posts 298
Joined on 06-02-2004
Post #: 16
Post ID: 10184
Reply to: 10178
Are the performance dates given?
fiogf49gjkf0d
As one who frequently listens to both weekend broadcasts, I'd like to know which one is uploaded. Do they tell us? Or could it be... a compendium?

clark
04-08-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,182
Joined on 05-28-2004
Post #: 17
Post ID: 10185
Reply to: 10184
The guy who did the BSO files...
fiogf49gjkf0d
 clarkjohnsen wrote:
As one who frequently listens to both weekend broadcasts, I'd like to know which one is uploaded. Do they tell us? Or could it be... a compendium?

Ein Deutsches Requiem  was recorded on September 26 & 27, 2008

The BSO recordings were made by John Newton, Jesse Lewis, and Jesse Brayman. The Mixing and Mastering by Mark Donahue. All of them from Soundmirror, Boston MA 

http://www.soundmirror.com/

Looking that the Soundmirror is in the surround sound it now obvious who was responsible for the initial stupid BSO offering if the 5ch surround idiocy.
Considering that those guys are heavy in SACD word and that their leader John Newton was instrumental in SACD promoting I might only presume that the BSO concerts were recorded to SACD and then converted to 88/24. As I understand those people are heavy with EMM and DCS processors… So, it might be visible how we end up with the BSO file that in a way sound goof for B&W speakers and nelson pass amplifiers and remind the sound of LP cut in 2007.

Do not get me wrong, I do like the BSO files sound but I also admit that it is not as good as it might be.

The Cat

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
04-08-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
manisandher
London
Posts 158
Joined on 09-05-2008
Post #: 18
Post ID: 10186
Reply to: 10185
Not to everyone's liking...
fiogf49gjkf0d
 Romy the Cat wrote:


Do not get me wrong, I do like the BSO files sound but I also admit that it is not as good as it might be.

The Cat


The 88.2/24 files are HDCD... according to my DAC!

Mani
04-08-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,182
Joined on 05-28-2004
Post #: 19
Post ID: 10187
Reply to: 10186
The HDCD at 88.2/24? More about the BSO files.
fiogf49gjkf0d
I do not think they encode it with HDCD, I do not think that it is even possible. Most likely there is something in those files in the files that mislead your DAC and force it to throw the HDCD indicator.  Might be I am wrong but I do not think that they are HDCD.

When I got Pacific Microsonics I made a number of experiments with HDCD. It was working VERY nice with 16/44 out and into the Pacific but switching the Pacific to 88.2/24 killed any need to do anything. I even measured the signal at -95dB and I remember that at 88.2/24 even the Pacific’s own dithering injections were not necessary, though they were very effective at 16/44 and at -60dB.

I do not think that the truth will be known about the nature of those files. I think they are OK as they are with the Deutsches Requiem being the best among all (musically and technically). The Mahler is a bit too wicked and unfriendly with some strange imaging/stereo transformation/corruption but the last movement is the undeniable beauty that hard to discard.  I use for a few month my own FM recording of the beginning of the M6’s last movement as my own home demon showstopper. The BSO was breathtaking in there – you might need the space elegancy of FM get it in full glory. The Daphnis et Chloé? I do not know I did like it more from tuner, even though the recordings from 88.2/24 BSO is unquestionably better quality.  I did not listen the Bolcom files yet….

The Cat

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
04-09-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,182
Joined on 05-28-2004
Post #: 20
Post ID: 10192
Reply to: 10172
What to do with the damn AIFF files?
fiogf49gjkf0d
The BSO give us the concerts with sliced AIFF files. I wonder how can I make the program to run as a continue file?

I was trying to glue the AIFF file back into one file but the Brahms Requiem for instance makes 2.117G of combined file and 32 bit Windows can’t handle it. Going for 64-bit files of unlimited size (I use .w64 that is 64bit version of regular WAV files) does not look possible as the conversion from AIFF to WAV does make sound worse, I tried it a few times.

So, how the hell you people play those files? Do you run to you PC after each cut and load a new file – that is reticules!!! Is any way to make the file to load recursively, I can write something like this up but it shell be an option for it ready to go…

The Cat

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
04-09-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Antonio J.
Madrid, Spain
Posts 272
Joined on 08-16-2004
Post #: 21
Post ID: 10194
Reply to: 10192
I play them on Foobar
fiogf49gjkf0d
So I just need to click "open files" I add all the ones into a given work and the program plays them in a row. Probably sound quality is not near of what you get from your software, but considering how handicapped is the system I use, I really don't mind very much. It's good enough for me.
BTW, the Brahms' Requiem is wonderful. Thanks again for highlighting it.
04-22-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
manisandher
London
Posts 158
Joined on 09-05-2008
Post #: 22
Post ID: 10304
Reply to: 10194
Shedding some light
fiogf49gjkf0d
I've just received a really interesting email from
Mark Donahu, 

Chief Mastering Engineer at Soundmirror. I really appreciate his taking time to reply to my query - they're obviously a decent bunch of guys there...

PS. Sorry if this post is full of smileys - don't know why these are here.


-----Original Message-----
> From: "Mani Sandher" <mani@the2ndtier.com>
>

Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 11:49:25
> To: <info@soundmirror.com>
> Subject: BSO AIFF 88.2/24 files
> 
> Hi,

> I've recently downloaded a number of these files from the BSO website. They
> sound fantastic!

> However, the HDCD indicator on my DAC appears when I play them. Of course,
> 88.2/24 files don't need to be HDCD-encoded, so I'm assuming that you have
> used a Pacific Microsonics ADC to record and that this is applying a certain
> 'code' to the LSB which is fooling my DAC.

> Could you shed some light on this?

> Mani.


Mani,
Yes, the files were created using the HDCD Model 1 AD converter and you
will actually get improved audio if your DA converter properly decodes
the HDCD (Even at 88.2 kHz /24 bit!)
There is information about the filtering and dithering used in the AD
conversion process encoded into the master that allow the DA converter
to optimize its own reconstruction filter.  If you can turn off the HDCD
decoding you will find a significant decrease in the spatial imaging and
overall imaging acuity.
After extensive listening tests to all the available DSD sample rate
converters and many of the top tier AD converters (Meitner, dCS, Prism,
Lavery and Mytek) we concluded that the Pacific Microsonics conversion
was the best available means of converting the DSD source material to
88.2 PCM.
We're glad you're enjoying the new releases.
 
All the best,
Mark Donahue

PPS by Romy: I just reformatted you post. In the right corner of editor there is “W” button that remove all “style” formatting from coped and pasted text.
04-22-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,182
Joined on 05-28-2004
Post #: 23
Post ID: 10305
Reply to: 10304
About the Soundmirror comments.
fiogf49gjkf0d
 Mark Donahue wrote:

Mani,
Yes, the files were created using the HDCD Model 1 AD converter and you
will actually get improved audio if your DA converter properly decodes
the HDCD (Even at 88.2 kHz /24 bit!)
There is information about the filtering and dithering used in the AD
conversion process encoded into the master that allow the DA converter
to optimize its own reconstruction filter.  If you can turn off the HDCD
decoding you will find a significant decrease in the spatial imaging and
overall imaging acuity.
After extensive listening tests to all the available DSD sample rate
converters and many of the top tier AD converters (Meitner, dCS, Prism,
Lavery and Mytek) we concluded that the Pacific Microsonics conversion
was the best available means of converting the DSD source material to
88.2 PCM.
We're glad you're enjoying the new releases. 
 
Mani,

Thanks for sharing this, it is interesting and a bit disconcerting.

I disagree with Mark that HDCD is beneficial for 88.2kHz/24bit, at least my experiments suggested that it was not. From a different perspective to decode HDCD I need to play Pacific DAC and it is not my DAC of preference for 88.2kHz/24bit. When Mark suggests you to compare imaging with HDCD and without it hi is a bit misleading you. The advantages that you might hear would not come from the HDCD itself but from the fact that when HDCD is activated then Pacific might run LLE (Low Level Extension) algorithm  - reportedly by some serious pro folks with whom I consulted -  the best compression algorithm ever was  made available:

http://www.goodsoundclub.com/GetPost.aspx?PostID=5432

You remember I was compiling above that the BSO files with all their quality are not as good imaging wise as I would like them to be. Here it why: because apparently the Soundmirror guys referenced the files compression-wise the HDCD mode activated. Well, how many 88.2kHz/24bit DAC out there that can decode HDCD?

However, what bothered me in Mark Donahue reply is the evidence that the fucking SACD keep screwing us up. Take a look: the record in SACD, well they call it DSD but let pretend that it is the same. Then they need to convert it to PCM. Pay attention what they do – they run SACD D/A and then A/D in to PCM via Pacific. This is idiotic as the DSD to PCM conversion must be done via D to D operation with no conversion to analog. Pacific in D to D mode can’t not read DSD and apparently there are no god D to D convectors out there if the Soundmirror decided to do via analog conversion route. That is a shame. Now how much better would be if people abandon that idiotic SACD/DSD and Mark Donahue would record BSO right in PCM at 88.2 kHz/24bit or 172.2 kHz/24bit format? Then the files that we get will be as close to raw master files as it might be.

Once again: the marketing idiots who force professionals to use and consumers to buy SACD  keep vandalizing our recordings with own agenda.
The Cat

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
04-22-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
manisandher
London
Posts 158
Joined on 09-05-2008
Post #: 24
Post ID: 10306
Reply to: 10305
Let's watch our hypocrisy
fiogf49gjkf0d
 Romy the Cat wrote:
Now how much better would be if people abandon that idiotic SACD/DSD and Mark Donahue would record BSO right in PCM at 88.2 kHz/24bit or 172.2 kHz/24bit format? Then the files that we get will be as close to raw master files as it might be.


I think most people who frequent this site would totally agree with you here.

However, let's just remember that these files do actually sound very good:
  • "tonally the files are very fine"
  • "They have no compression, dynamic like hell, colorful and very good balanced."
  • "what they do is the VERY right direction to go."
  • "Absolutely wonderful files"
  • "The files blew my FM files out water"
  • "Macondo can’t handle dynamic of the BSO Ordinal files."

Also, maybe converting from SACD to PCM via analogue isn't that crazy after all:
  • "... any 'edited' file, a file with bit-rate change, a sampling rate change, a format change are not the representative of what digital is all bout but rather the evidence how much possible to screw up digital without recognizing it."
  • "I have seen people who refuse to do 88kHz to 44kHz conversion but instead they D/A 88kHz files and then A/D the feed to 44kHz as they feel that it has less damage to Sound then DSP 88kHz to 44kHz."

Mani.
04-22-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,182
Joined on 05-28-2004
Post #: 25
Post ID: 10308
Reply to: 10306
I do not see hypocrisy but rather consistency.
fiogf49gjkf0d

It is not US’s Fox News  and not Stereophile and there is no need to pull the fractions of "stupid" soundbytes to prove any agendas. Anyone whoever are frequent this site know in context of what the said was said. Most important that I know what I said and how I thought and frankly I think that my thought process is incredibly consisting. I ma saying it not because I feel a need to defend my view but because it is what it is. Let see.

Yes, the BSO files do actually very good but as I always say: are they sound as good as they could sound?

The very next day after I heard the BSO files I posted (all my posts are still there):

“The Mahler is a bit too wicked and unfriendly with some strange imaging/stereo transformation/corruption…”

“What to my surprise I learned is that FF compression and FM noise (dither) makes Macondo to sound more even in a way to image more interesting.”

Pay attention that I found the imaging on BSO files not up to the pair with the rest qualities of those files and in some cases even my FM recordings of those concerts (that not even contestable with  BSO 88/24 files)  to be very much contestable or even better in term of imaging. It was not my fantasy or my will to criticize the BSO files but my knowledge how BSO shell sound recorded

Today in your post Mark Donahue said: “If you can turn off the HDCD decoding you will find a significant decrease in the spatial imaging and overall imaging acuity.”

Condensing that I do not use HDCD-able Pacific to play the BSO files do you see a consistency in my and his comments? Pay attention that Mark Donahue is the individual who in charge of all BSO life broadcasts and he very well know the rule of the game; in fact he owns the game…

Did you pay attention that at the very same day I heard the Mr. Donahue’s file I posted the following post:

http://www.goodsoundclub.com/GetPost.aspx?PostID=10195

… where I stressed that the properly applied compression might be beneficial. The reasons I did it because I found the uncompressed BSO files a bit disturbing as some dynamic aspects tear performing space apart.

Do not forget that BSO was recorded by “American recording techniques” many closed up microphones, miced-up sections and so on. It was not 2 mics dummy head recording where distanced allow some natural phase randomization. The instruments sound a bit hot and “space” managed by art of mastering and mixing instead the art position and playing.  I am not against the “American recording techniques” and the Soundmirror did fine job to mix the BSO sound…. but pay attention – I was complained that it was now there due to unreasonable and a slight uncontrolled use of dynamics.  What it turned out to be after all is that SoundMirror implied that “proper” BSO mixing only with HDCD’s compression activated. Well, I do not know how many folks out there with 88kHz and HDCD but since you do have this option then be judge yourself and take under consideration that 99.9999% of listeners will play them like I do – without the HDCD.

Regarding the SACD to PCM conversion – I do not know.  I have no idea what is out there but the fact that the conversion go over analog is ridicules. Particularly I feel that it is ridicules because the best SACD players of today play SACD disks and right there convert the stream into 344KHz and do further PCM not SACD decoding. I wish SoundMirror do not use SACD at all, record in PCM and if the Morons want to have SACD then make them from PCM files. BTW, if I am not mistaken up to recently all editing in SACD was done by silent conversion of DSD to PSM and then conversion back.

And the last. Whden I said about “VERY right direction to go” I meant my delight that BSO file went away from the idiotic 5 channel format that they started with and let us to have 88K 2ch stereo. As I posted at AA (now the dirt have deleted the AA those posts) I made my best to crash BSO sever the first few days after the 88K 2ch stereo files become available. I sent an insane amount of notifications about the BSO new options. My objective were to swamp BSO sever with orders, to make this server to choke with traffic, to send BSO the message that when they make right actions then the customers will come. I wish BSO do more or it, I wish they signed guest conductors to the deal and I wish 20-30 orchestras around the word do the same what BSO did with their 88K 2ch adventure. If it were so then we have a perfect model how orchestras and listeners might exists without the stupid music industry… BTW, I was a person who advised them the price the files $30-$40 per concert.  So, I do feel that BSO went to very right direction.

However, could the Sound of the BSO file be better?  Yes, it is and I feel that reconsidering the use the HDCD compression might be a first step.  Anyhow, I see no hypocrisy in what I advocate but rather very constrictive and very specific criticism. Be advised that you will not hear any single public voice out there who would offer any constrictive criticism about BSO sound quality. The Morons see 88kHz and they immediately have own brain and sense blackouted and they are willing to kiss the files in the asses. The exchange of stupid drooling is not my definition of collaboration and education…. but is you read my site for a while then you might know it…

The Cat

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Page 1 of 2 (45 items) Select Pages:  1 2 »
   Target    Threads for related reading   Most recent post in related threads   Forum  Replies   Views   Started 
  »  New  Chesky Records went "raw files"...  Chesky Records went "raw files"....  Didital Things  Forum     0  20455  04-16-2009
  »  New  Pacific Microsonics Model 2..  This is very typical....  Didital Things  Forum     85  735329  05-28-2009
  »  New  After-concert download – a truly phenomenal thing...  Excellent idea! nt...  Musical Discussions  Forum     1  23355  10-19-2007
  »  New  The High Resolution PCM files business, where?..  Really bad...  Didital Things  Forum     31  238218  09-29-2009
  »  New  A need for Resolution /Sampling Assessment Test..  Well, we kind of 'have' a file Virginity Assessment Tes...  Didital Things  Forum     1  28068  10-06-2009
Home Page  |  Last 24Hours  | Search  |  SiteMap  | Questions or Problems | Copyright Note
The content of all messages within the Forums Copyright © by authors of the posts