How to author high resolution audio discs?

[carlmart]

I don't seem to find any info anywhere else on the forum on how to author high resolution audio only discs.

My plan is to capture all my LP vinyl collection onto 24/96 files that can resolve all the high quality analog recordings could provide.

The idea is to use my MIA audio board, using high quality RIAA preamps. The problem is how and what disc type to author to, so I can play at least 24/96 audio.

My Bluray player might be a way to get that resolution playing, but I do not want to author bluray. DVD should be fine.

What do you suggest?

[Brazil2]

The problem is how and what disc type to author to, so I can play at least 24/96 audio.

What do you suggest?
http://dvd-audio.sourceforge.net

[CWR03]

Check on Roxio's audio DVD format. If 24/96 audio is compatible with DVD standards, it shouldn't down-convert the file. I've used it with MP3 files, and it's both incredibly easy to use and makes nice easy-to-navigate menus for the albums, and you can use your album art for the stills while the tracks are playing.

[Midzuki]

Yep, uncompressed PCM @ 24-bits @ 96kHz is compliant with the DVD-Forum specifications. Before you try to author your first "audio-only" DVD with any decent authoring application, I recommend the reading of the DVD-lab PRO Manual:

www DOT mediachance DOT com/dvdlab/Helppro/

not because you should use DVD-lab PRO, but because
it still is a great tutorial about "how DVD-Video works". :cool:

--------------------

Brazil2 wrote:

http://dvd-audio.sourceforge.net/

Please correct if I'm wrong,
but I don't think all (or most) Blu-Ray players support DVD-Audio.

P.S.: Just out of curiosity, are you Brazilian ? :)

[2Bdecided]

My plan is to capture all my LP vinyl collection onto 24/96 files that can resolve all the high quality analog recordings could provide.

Have you tried copying them onto CDs, which are already more than capable of capturing all the audible information on your LPs losslessly?

http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=7516#entry74075

As for playback, at any samplerate, disc based formats are so 20th century. Even "audiophile" record labels are now mainly supplying lossless digital downloads rather than optical discs e.g. https://www.hdtracks.com/ http://www.linnrecords.com/ etc etc etc

Cheers,
David.

[carlmart]

http://dvd-audio.sourceforge.net

That's for DVD-Audio, which is not compatible with any of my players. Same thing for SACD. I want something I can play on any DVD player, and not use AC3 or DTS. They are compression based system, and so lossy.

I recommend the reading of the DVD-lab PRO Manual:

OK, I will read it.

Have you tried copying them onto CDs, which are already more than capable of capturing all the audible information on your LPs losslessly?

Merely capable I should say. Bit rate should be much higher and oversampling too.

Digital media is much more practical, but the standard that became popular (16bit/44.1KHz) is limited and much below what high resolution analog systems could provide at the time CDs became a standard. To approach a high resolution system, completely transparent, bit rate should be 24 bit and oversampling 384KHz. Back then, during CD's first years, recording so much information per second would be impractical. Not it is not, with magnetic or mem card storage being so cheap, so maybe it's time to go back to it.

What I could find out was that what I was looking for was an audio DVD-video file, which is compatible or can be read by any DVD or BD players.

[GodofaGap]

Digital media is much more practical, but the standard that became popular (16bit/44.1KHz) is limited and much below what high resolution analog systems could provide at the time CDs became a standard. To approach a high resolution system, completely transparent, bit rate should be 24 bit and oversampling 384KHz. Back then, during CD's first years, recording so much information per second would be impractical. Not it is not, with magnetic or mem card storage being so cheap, so maybe it's time to go back to it.
You realize you are not a bat right? Even if your recording system provides higher resolution (and with vinyl this chance is 0, as the practical bandwidth of vinyl is below that of a CD) you wouldn't be able to hear it anyway. You might record some noise above 22 kHz, but it is not part of the real signal.

[manono]

What I could find out was that what I was looking for was an audio DVD-video file, which is compatible or can be read by any DVD or BD players.
Read what Midzuki said. Or read this:
[3.6.2]Audio details of DVD-Video
The following details are for audio tracks in DVD-Video. Some DVD manufacturers such as Pioneer are developing audio-only players using the DVD-Video format. Some DVD-Video discs contain mostly audio with only still pictures.

A DVD-Video disc can have up to 8 audio tracks (streams) associated with each video track (or each video angle). Each audio track can be in one of three formats:

Dolby Digital (AC-3): 1 to 5.1 channels
MPEG-2 audio: 1 to 5.1 or 7.1 channels
PCM: 1 to 8 channels.
Two additional optional formats are provided: DTS and SDDS. Both require the appropriate decoders and are not supported by all players.

The ".1" refers to a low-frequency effects (LFE) channel that connects to a subwoofer. This channel carries an emphasized bass audio signal.

Linear PCM is uncompressed (lossless) digital audio, the same format used on CDs and most studio masters. It can be sampled at 48 or 96 kHz with 16, 20, or 24 bits/sample. (Audio CD is limited to 44.1 kHz at 16 bits.) There can be from 1 to 8 channels. The maximum bit rate is 6.144 Mbps, which limits sample rates and bit sizes when there are 5 or more channels. It's generally felt that the 120 dB dynamic range of 20 bits combined with a frequency response of around 22,000 Hz from 48 kHz sampling is adequate for high-fidelity sound reproduction. However, additional bits and higher sampling rates are useful in audiophile applications, studio work, noise shaping, advanced digital processing, and three-dimensional sound field reproduction. DVD players are required to support all the variations of LPCM, but many subsample 96 kHz down to 48 kHz, and some may not use all 20 or 24 bits. The signal provided on the digital output for external digital-to-analog converters may be limited to less than 96 kHz and less than 24 bits.
Some of the boldfacing is mine:
http://www.dvddemystified.com/dvdfaq.html#3.6.2

[carlmart]

You realize you are not a bat right?

No, I realize I'm quite right. I have worked as a recording engineer for a long time now, coming from analog tape recording in high quality studio machines. Like Nagra or similar. And the accuracy to pick very low level information that you could get in analog, you can only approach it with higher bitrate/oversampling in digital.

Even if your recording system provides higher resolution (and with vinyl this chance is 0, as the practical bandwidth of vinyl is below that of a CD) you wouldn't be able to hear it anyway.

Who says so? Have you ever listened to a high resolution analog chain using high quality vinyl LPs? Your assertion seems to suggest you have not.

Why do you think many demanding listeners still play and keep their LP players, and listen to them now and then? Because they are crazy or imagine they are listening things?

I won't go into a discussion over this. If you don't think is worth it going to a higher resolution, that's your opinion. But don't state opinions as facts.

You might record some noise above 22 kHz, but it is not part of the real signal

It's not noise. It's room information and instrument's harmonics that help the ear and brain make it sound as much as possible to the real thing. Which is the only thing I care about.

[carlmart]

Read what Midzuki said. Or read this:

Some of the boldfacing is mine:
http://www.dvddemystified.com/dvdfaq.html#3.6.2

Thanks Manono. Apparently this program I tried, Audio DVD Creator, does that.

[GodofaGap]

I won't go into a discussion over this. If you don't think is worth it going to a higher resolution, that's your opinion. But don't state opinions as facts.
They are facts. The limits of human hearing and vinyl are not well kept secrets. That no one has ever shown a real world advantage of 24/96 as a distribution format under a controlled test perhaps is, but it's a bit of a shame that as a recording engineer you do not seem to be aware of any of this.

[Ghitulescu]

They are facts. The limits of human hearing and vinyl are not well kept secrets.
The reason that 300€ worth LCD TVs are sold near 25000€ ones, is caused among others by the inability of some/most people to see the difference. So is the case with MP3. The artefacts of MP3 were regarded as acceptable considering the space it saved. Meanwhile the people "tuned in" to MP3 and lost the ability to "hear".

I can spot the difference of a "regular" MP3 over CD-DA even in my car stereo. Some people don't. AC/DC or Jimi Hendrix would probably sound the same, though.

I remember that at the last HiFi forum, held at MOC (München), there were still no digital gear to beat an old studio, analog, tape-based recorder (I don't remember now, but I think it was a 16track Studer). An unanimously opinion of people that, unlike common people, have the skills to discern.

The reason most people disregard the vinyl is simply because they don't have access to quality records and/or gear.

That the human hear cannot hear say 5Hz, well, try this: create a 5 to 10 Hz perfect wave, some 30-90 min. long in any audio editor, then play it at home when you have guests. Then see what happens :p

[2Bdecided]

Why do you think many demanding listeners still play and keep their LP players, and listen to them now and then? Because they are crazy or imagine they are listening things? If you think copying an LP onto CD degrades the sound, then I'd say it's placebo or poor equipment.

If you think LPs sound different from commercial CDs, then yes, many do, but most modern CDs are clipressed, and most LPs are replayed with audible distortion, cross talk, frequency response changes, etc etc. Not to mention differences due to remixing, remastering, degraded tapes, etc etc etc.

I won't go into a discussion over this. If you don't think is worth it going to a higher resolution, that's your opinion. But don't state opinions as facts.When someone can ABX 44.1kHz 16-bits against a "high resolution" source, then we can talk about facts.

It's not noise. It's room information and instrument's harmonics that help the ear and brain make it sound as much as possible to the real thing. Which is the only thing I care about.There is no evidence that the human ear does anything with information over ~20kHz (except via bone conduction - but I'm guessing you don't rest your skull against your speakers). There's one Japanese paper showing changes in brain scans(!) when people listen to content above 20kHz, but a) the people didn't consciously report any audible change, b) there may have been changes to the signal below 20kHz, and most importantly c) no one has been able to repeat the positive results from this single experiment.

Anyway, doom9 isn't the place for this discussion - try hydrogenaudio.

Cheers,
David.

[2Bdecided]

To approach a high resolution system, completely transparent, bit rate should be 24 bit and oversampling 384KHz.The bitrate defines the noise floor, the sampling rate defines the bandwidth. Anyone who suggests anything more is talking about magic, voodoo, and fairies.

The specs you ask for will give a digital noise floor 144dB below the peak signal, and a bandwidth out to 192kHz. Sadly it's not possible to make even the simplest real-world electronic circuit to match this, but it doesn't really matter - human ears don't get close either.

Cheers,
David.

[mpucoder]

As interesting as this discussion may be, it has drifted way off topic, which is:
I don't seem to find any info anywhere else on the forum on how to author high resolution audio only discs.

My plan is to capture all my LP vinyl collection onto 24/96 files that can resolve all the high quality analog recordings could provide.

The idea is to use my MIA audio board, using high quality RIAA preamps. The problem is how and what disc type to author to, so I can play at least 24/96 audio.

My Bluray player might be a way to get that resolution playing, but I do not want to author bluray. DVD should be fine.

What do you suggest?
DVD-Video supports stereo 24/96 LPCM. And most, if not all, DVD authoring programs (even the free MuxMan)
can produce a DVD with this audio and a still image.

[CWR03]

I did research my own Roxio suggestion further. It looks like only Roxio Media Edition 9 had the ability to create a DVD audio disk; the 2010 version doesn't have it listed on their web site. The version 9 does not re-encode the audio in any way if it's to the DVD specs.

[carlmart]

They are facts. The limits of human hearing and vinyl are not well kept secrets. That no one has ever shown a real world advantage of 24/96 as a distribution format under a controlled test perhaps is, but it's a bit of a shame that as a recording engineer you do not seem to be aware of any of this.

The information I have, read on Studio Sound magazine many years ago, was that in spite of so stated human hearing limits, tests were made that took the "listening experience" to almost 30K.

The question in the oversampling is not that we could listen up to 96KHz or above, but that the filters used in the A/D and D/A processing are quite above the upper listening range. This the reason I think explains why many people reported less fatigue when listening to higher oversampling recordings. This is also a fact.

High quality vinyl could reach very high frequency limits when well pressed, the limits being mostly in noise and longevity. We made several tests in the '80s, with a friend of mine who manufactures speakers, between analog and digital recordings of the same record, also modifying the analog stages in CD players to get better results. And even so there were analog recordings that sounded much more real than the CDs.

Believe me I am aware of many things, as I worked on the electronics of the digital units to improve things that could be very much improved.

Look into the many articles published in The Audio Amateur magazine in the '80s and '90s dealing with what made digital recordings sound not as "perfect" as Philips made us believe.

[carlmart]

David, you're right when you say this not the place for this discussion. And I am not interested in going to hydrogenaudio to have it.

This discussion between objective vs subjective, which in the end is what it is, doesn't get you anywhere if you can't make people listen to things. Like on that MOC audio forum mentioned above.

There are many things in audio that have not been well explained, and those are things I experienced in my live recording situations in film & video.

My question was simply about ways to do high bitrate/oversampling digital recordings using discs. That's all and I'm not interested in anything further than that.

[2Bdecided]

This the reason I think explains why many people reported less fatigue when listening to higher oversampling recordings. This is also a fact.Yes, it's certainly a fact that people will report "I can tell that something is different" when they are told that something has changed - even if it hasn't (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Placebo).

It's bizarre that such claims and methods are allowed to persist in audio, while equivalent claims or methods in video would be ridiculed. Why do you think that is? Neither human eyes nor ears are very good sensors, but they're both connected to the very same amazing "computer" - so why should audio and video be so different?

I would suggest it's because there are still real, measurable, and easily perceptible improvements to be made in video - while any remaining real and easily perceptible improvements in audio (mostly in transducers and soundfield re-creation) are well beyond the capabilities of most working in the so-called "high-end", so they concentrate on the slightly easier task of selling placebos.

Cheers,
David.

[jolson]

If the thread wreckers can move to Hydrogenaudio, /dev/null or some other suitable place we can get back on concentrating what this thread is for - authoring DVD-Video disks with 24/96 LPCM stereo.

Actually, several DVD Authoring programs have problems with it even though they shouldn't, it often becomes more manual work than you would think. But the suggested DVD-Lab Pro (just drag-and-drop), Goland Audio DVD Creator and Muxman (free) can do the task.

[2Bdecided]

OK, then I shall make two positive contributions for the bats in the audience...

1. Make sure you keep your original files, preferably as 24/96 FLACs with suitable metadata (title/artist/album). Then you can go back to them to create CDs, mp3s, or even other 24/96 files, when you want to listen to your music on something other than your DVD/BluRay player. Otherwise you'll have to rip the audio back off your authored DVDs, and probably re-enter all the title/artist/album information by hand.

2. Make sure your player has 24/96 LPCM output enabled. Almost all players downsample to 48kHz by default. Some can't be switched (the hardware may be capable, but no one bothered to put the option into the menus).

Cheers,
David.

[neutronstar]

That's for DVD-Audio, which is not compatible with any of my players. Same thing for SACD. I want something I can play on any DVD player, and not use AC3 or DTS. They are compression based system, and so lossy.
.

You can compile the equivalent of several CDs using uncompressed PCM format to DVD-Video. Depending on the authoring software you use, you will get 16 bit/48 kHz or perhaps 24 bit/96 kHz.
I have used Nero 7 Vision to compile several audio CDs:
Create a DVD-Video Disc from Multiple Audio CDs (http://www.jensign.com/audiodvd/)
Nero only supports 16 bits/48 kHz which is fine if you want to preserver CD-DA audio quality with 48 kHz being the minimum sampling rate audio spec for DVD-Video.
If you want to create DVD-Video discs with audio at 24/96 LPCM, a good solution is Audio DVD Creator (http://www.audio-dvd-creator.com/) which creates navigation menus and is relatively inexpensive.

If you DO have a DVD-Audio player, you can create compilations of mixed resolution tracks (stereo up to 24 bit/192 kHz and 5.1 surround up to 24 bit / 48 kHz). I have tried dvda-author (Sourceforge) which requires some effort. Steinberg's WaveLab 6 (full edition) supports creating DVD-A with full graphical menus. I have created CD-DA compilations using this approach. Here is an article on the procedure and what is possible:
DVD-Audio Multi-CD Compilations (http://www.jensign.com/dvda_multicd/)

[invisible]

I'm almost certain the people who think vinyl recordings need 96Khz 24bit would fail to tell the difference in a controlled hearing test with standard CD audio. I'd like to see some real experiments cited someday.

[carlmart]

Thanks for your suggestions, Neutronstar. Apparently there seems to be only one option if I want 24 bit/96 kHz: Audio DVD Creator.

Which I'm already using and was commented about on my opening words. It did cause a glitch that made my Bluray player to stop on one music.

So I hoped that someone might have some experience on these high resolution discs and could suggest options.

Far from me to enter into a pointless discussion on whether you can listen to 96KHz or not.

Another thing I did discover is that, if I want to improve my audio only resolution using my DVD, I will need an external DAC. Even if the DACs I'm now using are those inside my Onkyo receiver, passing through from BD player, perhaps an external DAC might get some gains.

[Ghitulescu]

Another thing I did discover is that, if I want to improve my audio only resolution using my DVD, I will need an external DAC. Even if the DACs I'm now using are those inside my Onkyo receiver, passing through from BD player, perhaps an external DAC might get some gains.

It depends on how good your Onkyo receiver is, however the main issue here is not the quality of the playback (all the renowned manufacturers have more or less a decent quality) but that of the "capture". I understand you have the Echo Mia, which is a good one, so maybe the quality of the record-player bzw. RIAA preamp would decide the result. Try to spend your money on the good end :p