What is Shm-CD?

[Daverz]

Yes, I did.

Are you able to compare checksums?  Different checksums doesn't necessarily mean there is an audible difference, but it would be interesting if they matched.

[RJR]

I believe the original CD release was this AAD release (AAD meaning, I believe, that mastering was done in the analog domain with digitization done only in the last step of the transfer to CD.) 



Which should be better because it's less digital!  (It really is quite good IMO).  I never really compared it to the "Decca 100 Best" (non-SHM) CD below until now (I bought the Japanese issue primarily for the Wind Serenade).  The newer one does sound a bit clearer with a wider, deeper soundstage.  In any case, it's a very exciting performance.

I like it too. A compelling performance.

[RJR]

Are you able to compare checksums?  Different checksums doesn't necessarily mean there is an audible difference, but it would be interesting if they matched.

Checksums? Seen that word before but I don't really know what it's all about. Are you suggesting that I rip the two cds with EAC and see what the result is?

[Daverz]

Checksums? Seen that word before but I don't really know what it's all about. Are you suggesting that I rip the two cds with EAC and see what the result is?

Yes, EAC would produce checksums for each track.  Though a difference in checksums does not necessarily mean an audible difference.  There is also software that will compare only the PCM part of the tracks, though I don't know what that would be for windows.

[Tapio Dmitriyevich]

My stereo is not high end: A Luxman receiver, Dynaco speakers, CDs and DVDs played back on a $100 dollar Toshiba DVD player. The original Kertesz/Dvorak Ninth has very good sound, but the the SHM-cd is superior. No doubt about it. The timpani drum roll at minute two of the first movement sounds like rolling thunder, the woodwinds, horns and strings much clearer.

Probably you get better mastering for your money. As so often.
Also: We have too many bit identical rips of different "normal" CDs - therefore read errors cannot be that much of a problem. Furthermore, never ever audible. Don't get me wrong: It's good to choose the best available medium.

Anyway I do not care, I don't buy physical media any more.

[RJR]

Probably you get better mastering for your money. As so often.
Also: We have too many bit identical rips of different "normal" CDs - therefore read errors cannot be that much of a problem. Furthermore, never ever audible. Don't get me wrong: It's good to choose the best available medium.

Anyway I do not care, I don't buy physical media any more.

Please explain to me what non-physical media might be? Or have you just decided to listen to the music of the spheres instead?

[Roberto]

Although I am very sceptical about the audiophile experiences, the difference could not only the difference between 0's and 1's. In my opinion the error correction of the CD format is good enough to create an accurate datastream (if the CD is not damaged and the player works correctly). But the difference may come from the CD player's analogue stage also. When the digital pickup reads the disc the servo has to work continuously. If the disc has less surface irregularity the servo maybe has lesser work. In the ordinary CD players there is only one power supply. It provides electricity to the servo and the DAC too so maybe the servo affects the electric supply of the DAC. If the servo works other way the sound will change. (By the way: I don't have Shm-CD but I have seen it on Amazon. I didn't know what is it but now I found this topic.  )

And what if the audio system has separate DAC and transport? I don't know. But people often hear what they want to hear. (Me too.  )

[Daverz]

Please explain to me what non-physical media might be? Or have you just decided to listen to the music of the spheres instead?

It's pretty obvious to me that he means he only listens to digital audio files.

[RJR]

It's pretty obvious to me that he means he only listens to digital audio files.

Well, bully for him.
For myself, reproducing music digitally is akin to piecing something together, like a puzzle or a mosaic. Analogue reproduction is more like painting with brush strokes, or the play of the waves along the ocean's surface.

[SurprisedByBeauty]

I'm playing an SHM-CD just now (and SHM-SACDs), which I bought solely because I really, really wanted the Mravinsky Tchaikovsky Semi-Cycle on three separate CDs, rather than 2 CDs with the Fifth split. (And I didn't want to rip my own copies, either.)

I have little intention to do a comparison, because I don't suspect there to be a particularly great difference to the regular CDs... and, more to the point if there IS a difference, I wouldn't be able to tell whether the different mastering might not be to blame or laud.

But having the darn things, I am interested in the hearing and the science behind it, anyway. And subjective differences in experience apart, there seem to be some misunderstandings what SHM-CDs are supposed to accomplish in the first place.

Those of you with a good sound system should immediately hear the difference.

Are you able to compare checksums?  Different checksums doesn't necessarily mean there is an audible difference, but it would be interesting if they matched.

The data meets redbook specs, but the quality of the pressing doesn't always allow the hardware to read the information properly. The error correction is stricter in recorded CD-Rs (per the spec), which makes it easier for the reading hardware to reconstitute the original. It is a myth that CDs are 100% accurate in getting the 0s and 1s out of the surface of the disc and therefore that they are a bit-perfect medium. If you google for audio cd error correction and redbook error correction you will get your info.

If I understand it correctly, the SHMaterial is supposed to make your CD Player's work easier by incorporating better materials that's a.) more reliable in production and b.) easier to read. (It was invented during the search for better light emitting LEDs; essentially it's a clearer plastic.) We all agree that the digital source going in is the same (theoretically... if the masters were identical; Japanese re-masterings are in fact often different but let's ignore that for a second), and therefore the digital source coming out should be the same, too. There cannot be a difference in the checksum because the SHMaterial doesn't change anything -- and even the most flawed CD, thanks to error correction, will reveal the original digital code once it is burned successfully.

Three things to consider:

A CD Player reading the source in real time has to correct any mistake or blip it encounters. The claim is that if there's much of that going on, it can degrade the sound.

A recording that's been burned to a hard drive should theoretically sound superior to its source CD being played on a CD player. This is why hard drive players are said to beat even the finest CD players in Sound Quality.

A SHM-CD makes it easy for a CD Player to read the material and, ideally, it could now sound as good as if you had burnt the CD (SHM or not) onto your hard drive and ran it through the same DAC.


This would also suggest that I don't follow RJR entirely: Wouldn't the SHM difference show up most prominently if you -- yes, had a good system: speakers, DAC, Amp that allow you to hear great detail, but in that system a CD player that was poor at correcting blips (= technical term!  ). The worse the CD player, the more an SHM-CD would matter.

That would lead us to the conclusion that a SHM-CD can never sound better than the same mastering ripped to a hard drive -- but that it is probably to sound as much (or some way towards that much) better as a hard drive played recording does over a spun CD. (However much that is or we are willing to believe it is.)

Oh, and those covers!


Tchaik. Sy.6
Mravinsky / Leningrad Phil
DG/SHM-SACD

[Todd]

SHM-CDs are old news; UHQCDs are where it's at for over-priced, marketing BS-driven reissues today.

[king ubu]

There's BluSpec (I and II?) as well ...

[Todd]

There's BluSpec (I and II?) as well ...

Those are also a few years old, so something new was needed.  I have but one Blu-Spec 2 release - Ikuyo Nakamichi's Mozart sonatas - and the recordings are in state of the art sound.  But then, Ms Nakamichi is, in my experience, arguably the best recorded pianist in the world, and all of her old, Plain Jane CDs sound just as good as the new fangled technology release.  And that's using Audiophile^®-approved gear, I should note. 

[Pat B]

I suspect the value, if any, is in the remastering. Prices seem to be in the same ballpark as conventional Japanese imports. I'm not going to seek them out, but I've seen worse audiophile boondoggles.

[PerfectWagnerite]

Those are also a few years old, so something new was needed.  I have but one Blu-Spec 2 release - Ikuyo Nakamichi's Mozart sonatas - and the recordings are in state of the art sound.  But then, Ms Nakamichi is, in my experience, arguably the best recorded pianist in the world, and all of her old, Plain Jane CDs sound just as good as the new fangled technology release.  And that's using Audiophile^®-approved gear, I should note.

This is what you have?

[asin]B00DDWU6OC[/asin]

Man you got expensive taste !

[SurprisedByBeauty]

SHM-CDs are old news; UHQCDs are where it's at for over-priced, marketing BS-driven reissues today.

Oh, you aren't kidding. :-)

That said, it seems the advantages, if there are any audible ones, would be exactly the same as with the SHM-CDs: Relieving the CD Player and approximating Solid State Memory quality.

[Todd]

That said, it seems the advantages, if there are any audible ones, would be exactly the same as with the SHM-CDs: Relieving the CD Player and approximating Solid State Memory quality.

Unless there is objective, quantitative data available, from a third party, to support the notion that SHM-CD or UHQCD actually produce a better, more reliable physical end product, it's all marketing gimmickry.  I can report that SHM-CDs I own and have ripped have behaved exactly like standard CDs in terms of rip speed, error correction, etc.

[Todd]

I suspect the value, if any, is in the remastering.

Yep.

This is what you have?

[asin]B00DDWU6OC[/asin]

Man you got expensive taste !

It was cheaper to import from Japan when it was new.