XRCDs

[Absolute0 0]

I'm not sure how many here are familiar with this format, it's touted to be substantially better than the redbook format without the need for additional equipment unlike SACD.

More information available here.

 

Does anyone have any experience with this format? How does it compare to redbook/SACD? I am very tempted to try it out but the price has been prohibitive, so perhaps those with experience could shed some light on whether they are worth the money.

[evil-zen 0]

Gramophone and New Disc Village carries XRCDs.

 

So far I have 2 discs, both in the Jazz genre. For now, my impressions are mixed. I have the Bill Evans Waltz for Debby XRCD and the normal Bill Evans Live in Village Vanguard. Both of them are recorded in the same session in the same place. There is less of a static background noise and instruments tend to be more outstanding and clearer from a darker background from the XRCD. However, the overall tone is brighter than normal ( >10khz) which appears to give an airy atmosphere. It seems like the Japanese prefers brighter sound compared to other regions of the world. True, they are of a higher quality compared to the normal pressings if you do not mind the brightness/airiness it brings.

 

The second disc I have is the Tsuyoshi Yamamoto Trio's Misty XRCD. This disc, like the Bill Evans XRCD, is also pretty bright/airy. Overall it sounds better than the Bill Evans disc due to it being a studio recording and not a live one. I do not have other CDs of the same band so I can't compare them. This album IMHO, is the best disc in my collection in terms of sound quality and one of the top musically too! I had the chance to hear this album way before I bought it.

 

I do not have an SACD player. But from reviews from the net, it seems like SACD is just better than CDs if done properly. And XRCD is still a CD.

 

Tsuyoshi Yamamoto Trio - Misty

Edited May 28, 2005 by evil-zen

[ZhiX 0]

I am using the iAudio x5L with superfi 5 and I can hear the difference bwteen XRCDs and normal CDs. It's really frustrating not to be able to obtain XRCD versions of those normal CDs that i like. The range of XRCDs are really quite limited.

 

 

[xjazzdummy 0]

I tried a few XRCDs. I can say that they sound different, but not necessarily. Once I opened up the WAV file of a song from both the redbook version and the XRCD version. Visually it's easy to tell that the XRCD is more compressed than the redbook, which may not be good news.

[cmk 0]

I tried a few XRCDs. I can say that they sound different, but not necessarily. Once I opened up the WAV file of a song from both the redbook version and the XRCD version. Visually it's easy to tell that the XRCD is more compressed than the redbook, which may not be good news.

The proof is in the listening, specs alone cannot tell the whole story.

[Musicwhore 0]

Not much of a fan of the music selection but the hdk2 makes a big difference from redbook.

 

http://www.fimpression.com/fim_news.htm

 

Go to the bottom of the page and play the sample. I got this cd and am a firm believer of the technology. I compared with SACD and heard no difference.

[milkpowder 0]

Just comparing the XRCD version of Jazz at the Pawnshop to standard redbook, the XRCD does indeed sound more lively. XRCDs (XRCD -> XRCD2 -> XRCD24 -> K2 HD) are superior to CDs because they are mastered at higher specs. The final CDs are also physically better made. Technically, the XRCD versions will be closer to the master tape. cmk is completely right though. The proof of the pudding is in the eating.

[mamboman 0]

I had the chance to A-B the CD vs XRCD and the difference is indeed very audible.