not match what the DSP-A1 could do at home (at least in my room) with the CD version is a credit to the Yamaha DSP technology.
Of course, it is also possible that the master tapes were indeed configured for future surround-sound productions, and in that case the Yamaha DSP ambiance simulation processing looks even more impressive.
I do have to make one point. Yes, with multi- channel materials that use the surround channels only for simulating hall ambiance, I believe that good, home-based DSP ambiance-generating technologies (this would also include DPL II and DTS Neo:6 ambiance-extraction technologies) in combination with good two-channel source material will be as successful at simulating a live-music space as good SACD and DVD-A surround source materials. This certainly would apply to most classical material and a lot of acoustic jazz, too. However, with recorded pop music all bets are off.
Most pop music is not recorded with the intention being to simulate a live performance in a hall, club, auditorium, etc. Rather, they are typically engineered to be ends in themselves. This means that the engineers often place performers (vocalists, drums, horns, and even pianos) in all of the channels, essentially putting the listener into the middle of a musical soundfield. With that kind of material, SACD and DVD-A surround recordings (as well as music recorded with
DDor DTS technology) have a major advantage over synthesized ambiance from two-channel inputs.
There are classical-music exceptions, of course. Think of some of the stuff Berlioz did, as well as some church-choral music, and of course something like the 1812 Overture, would probably sound really impressive with the cannons coming from all around you. And if the listener also wants audience sounds (applause, chair squeaks, coughing, etc.) around him when listening to classical performances recorded live then obviously surround-sound recordings have an edge. Still, for most acoustic-music recordings that are to simulate live performances, DSP ambiance simulation working with good two-channel inputs will almost always sound as realistic as the surround- sound versions.
Now, this leaves only one other item to deal with regarding the supposed superiority of SACD compared to the compact disc: per-channel sound quality. Well, if it was there I did not hear it. The results were similar to what I experienced with DVD-A materials. The extended bandwidth and lower noise floor of the SACD simply did not mean anything as best I could tell. The CD was more than quiet enough (the major background noise involved non-obnoxious hall artifacts and possibly very low-level microphone noise and not the digital technology) and the extended bandwidth above the top audible octave provided by
SACD technology remains, in my opinion, laughable overkill.
Of course, this only involves one comparison. It is possible that other contests would lean in favor of the SACD versions. However, I have pointed out before that this particular CD is one of the very best sounding concert-hall recordings I have ever encountered (I often use it when doing my speaker testing A/B comparisons), as well as one of the best baroque- ensemble performances that you will ever hear. I think that the technological excellence of any CD is important in a face off of this kind, because it reduces the chances that it would sound worse than an SACD because of poor mastering done with the former. If SACD is to better what CD technology can offer it has to be able to surpass the very best example of that technology.
In this case, the only way the SACD surpassed the two-channel CD version involved the additional channels. However, once the Yamaha DSP-A1’s ambiance-simulation circuits were called into play to assist the CD by simulating additional channels the contest was over. The processor/CD collaboration delivered the superior goods. The good news about this is that this kind of assistance can be applied to every CD already in one’s collection if one is willing to spring for a good DSP device.
I did manage to listen to a number of other SACD recordings, and those will be reviewed in my Scoping Software column, possibly in this issue. I also listened to a number of DVD-A releases on the player, most of them previously reviewed by me after being played on the Onkyo DV-S939 installed in my main system. The sound was notably good if the discs were recorded well and often a major flop if they were not. (Flop status is not uncommon at all with quite a few DVD- A and SACD releases, due mainly to them being remastered from rather old source materials.)
One excellently recorded DVD-A release, the Swingin’ for the Fences jazz item noted previously, has a genuine center channel feed and it actually sounded terrific even with the NHT VS1.2 center speaker in my middle system mounted fairly high up on a big-screen TV monitor. (Fifteen inches higher up than the vertical source center of either of my Cantata main-channel systems.) The centered up trumpet section actually sounded like it was at the back of the ensemble, located fairly high up on risers.
However, speaker-location issues aside, SACD and DVD-A sound quality will have far, far more to do with the recording and mastering techniques involved (particularly involving microphone quality and placement, as well as mixing judgments) than with the disc technologies themselves. And that’s a fact.
OK, so what do I think of this Yamaha DVD- S1500 player. Well, I think it is a really nice unit. I went over some of the problematic characteristics