HDCD article

[dave2010]

While looking at the details of some SACDs (e.g Beethoven 5, Honeck, Pittsburgh orchestra) i noticed that some SACDs are hybrid SACD/HDCDs. I thought I'd revisit HDCD technology, and found this interesting article - http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/HFN/HDCD/Enigma.html This seems to suggest that HDCD works well sometimes - but at other times it makes a complete mess of things. As a result some recordings sound really good, while others arguably sound worse than they might have done without the tinkering with HDCD.

Also, is it easy to tell if a CD player has HDCD capability?

Finally, for ripping CDs, which software makes an attempt to decode HDCDs? I do recall one CD a few years ago, which gave atrocious results in iTunes, as Apple screwed up their software, and whatever encoding was used completely messed up the CD rips. This was fixed about two versions later, but whether the decoding of HDCDs is accurate or simply as a CD representation I don't know.

[Desmo]

Well my player has a [HDCD] logo on the front of it - so I assume that's the clue :-)

[Spectral Morn]

While looking at the details of some SACDs (e.g Beethoven 5, Honeck, Pittsburgh orchestra) i noticed that some SACDs are hybrid SACD/HDCDs. I thought I'd revisit HDCD technology, and found this interesting article - http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/HFN/HDCD/Enigma.html This seems to suggest that HDCD works well sometimes - but at other times it makes a complete mess of things. As a result some recordings sound really good, while others arguably sound worse than they might have done without the tinkering with HDCD.

Also, is it easy to tell if a CD player has HDCD capability?

Finally, for ripping CDs, which software makes an attempt to decode HDCDs? I do recall one CD a few years ago, which gave atrocious results in iTunes, as Apple screwed up their software, and whatever encoding was used completely messed up the CD rips. This was fixed about two versions later, but whether the decoding of HDCDs is accurate or simply as a CD representation I don't know.

None of the CDs I have that are HDCD incoded sound poor, in fact they sound very good. When Pacific Microsonics were bought out - by Microsoft I think - the format pretty much died with few companies offering it on their hardware now. If your player has it, it will be listed on its front fascia - probably an indicator light - if not then it won't.

Sadly some CDs that carry the logo no longer have it - the Nick Drake CDs had once but not now, but the art work still says its there - and some that don't have it listed do.

My MSB Link Dac has it, as does my Toshiba SD9200 and 9500, and I have a MF X Series DAC and PSU that has it too.

[AlfaGTV]

Actually Windows Media Player will play HDCD material if properly ripped! At least it did up until recently.

[Macca]

I have one - Ten Years After 'A Space In Time'. Very good sound quality. But it is also a re-master so all bets are off as to what improvement the HDCD makes. I suspect all the HDCD issues were also re-mastered. In theory the HDCD coding should make no difference in itself. I don't seem to have a single HDCD capable CD player despite having a dozen or more players.

[dave2010]

None of the CDs I have that are HDCD incoded sound poor, in fact they sound very good. When Pacific Microsonics were bought out - by Microsoft I think - the format pretty much died with few companies offering it on their hardware now. If your player has it, it will be listed on its front fascia - probably an indicator light - if not then it won't.

Sadly some CDs that carry the logo no longer have it - the Nick Drake CDs had once but not now, but the art work still says its there - and some that don't have it listed do.

My MSB Link Dac has it, as does my Toshiba SD9200 and 9500, and I have a MF X Series DAC and PSU that has it too.
The Honeck Beethoven SACD hybrid from Reference Recordings declares it has HDCD and it's fairly recent. http://www.amazon.com/Beethoven-Symphony-Nos-5-7/dp/B015OPM7G0 If there isn't actually an HDCD on the CD layer, then how could one tell?

I think Linn also do similar hybrid SACDs, and again there are probably some recent ones.

[WAD62]

I have several HDCDs , and also have an old Audiolab CDM transport with an LED that lights up when I insert one of them...:)

However I've not used that for years, when I ripped them to FLAC with dBpoweramp, I used the HDCD DSP, which allows one to make a red book version, and/or the 20 bit version in the form of a 24 bit rip...Frankly I can't tell the difference between the two versions on any of them :eyebrows:

[Audio Advent]

I suspect all the HDCD issues were also re-mastered. In theory the HDCD coding should make no difference in itself. I don't seem to have a single HDCD capable CD player despite having a dozen or more players.

Nope. HDCD was a then current technology used for contemporary releases. You didn't create seperate masters for HDCD and CD at all - the music is released straight as an HDCD with any non-HDCD player able to play the now 15-bit resolution instead. You didn't make two releases, one with HDCD and another without because both can be played on the same release. Either the release was HDCD in the first place or it wasn't.

In fact, since HDCD has been kind of fogotten about, you MIGHT now have re-releases downsampled again to 16/44.1 from the original 20bit+ digital master forgoing the HDCD encoding but that's the opposite of what you were thinking AND there are other dithering/noise-shaping techniques these days (and available in the 90s, after HDCD was devised) which don't require special encoding/decoding, they simply require 20bit+ DACS in the CD player and nothing more.

Noise shaping combined with dither is kind of non-logical if you think of digital as you would analogue - takes a twist of thought to get your head around it.

In theory, the HDCD coding should allow your player to play back in a pseudo resolution of 19 bits. The data is still 16 bit but the detail retreval and noise floor etc of the frequency range most audible to humans is the same as a 19+ bit resolution at the expense of a higher noise floor in less/non-audible parts (can't remember if that's high or low frequency range).

[lurcher]

The software I wrote for Jim (in the original article) could look at a WAV file ripped from a CD and detect the HDCD signalling bits. Much the same as a CD player that supported it did.

[Audio Advent]

However I've not used that for years, when I ripped them to FLAC with dBpoweramp, I used the HDCD DSP, which allows one to make a red book version, and/or the 20 bit version in the form of a 24 bit rip...Frankly I can't tell the difference between the two versions on any of them :eyebrows:

That's the way to do it (said Punch when he was on the forum last). I'm sure there are options for JRiver and Foobar too to rip the same to a 24 bit file.

[Audio Advent]

The software I wrote for Jim (in the original article) could look at a WAV file ripped from a CD and detect the HDCD signalling bits. Much the same as a CD player that supported it did.

If an LED is not then lit, you won't hear a difference! ;)

[struth]

Dont recall ever seeing a disc far less a player. Got a small handful of sacd,s but i cant hear much difference in presentation between layers.

[Audio Advent]

Interesting article!

Seems I have a few details of HDCD confused with other noise shaping and dithering techniques too. I remember reading about one that Meridian came up with in the 90s.

Thankfully we don't have to worry about these things any more because we can simply play the original 24 bit masters. It's always the physical format that becomes the set-in-stone limitiations.

I also can't help thinking that the biggest problem with things like HDCD is the desperate commercial ideology that is always applied, this notion that "everything must be patented to protect our intellectual property, our nest-egg! " . The reality is that the paywall behind which these standards sit become their downfall and create their eventual worthlessness. And so those companies then are forced to rely on marketting and PR to promote it with often consequences for quality.

Perhaps if they were IP-free standards, HDCD would have become more universal, within ALL players and the technology used freely by studios to actually make their recordings sound better and used well without any commercial pressure.

Sadly it takes a different mind-set to make that world - hope for the future with internet, collaborative and open-source culture becoming more mainstream but have to probably wait for those of a previous generation's mindset to all retire..

[lurcher]

Sadly it takes a different mind-set to make that world - hope for the future with internet, collaborative and open-source culture becoming more mainstream but have to probably wait for those of a previous generation's mindset to all retire..

If anything its going in the other direction, many of the original open source crowd are now leaving the profession and the new younger types seem more interested in making a quick buck and making sure everything is tied up under software patients.

[Macca]

Nope. HDCD was a then current technology used for contemporary releases. You didn't create seperate masters for HDCD and CD at all - the music is released straight as an HDCD with any non-HDCD player able to play the now 15-bit resolution instead. You didn't make two releases, one with HDCD and another without because both can be played on the same release. Either the release was HDCD in the first place or it wasn't.

).True but not relevant to what I was saying. However I just checked the Ten Years After album and it is a re-master (AAD from the original tapes) but is not an HDCD. No idea why I thought it was.