Blu-ray Surround Music Albums

I usually spend my time over in the Audio Area/Surround Music forum but decided to look around a little and see what's being discussed about BD and music. And I don't actually mean live concerts...I don't like the compromises that are necessary during a live concert (floor slant monitor speakers, cheap microphones, back signal path and cheering masses of fans).

As the owner and chief engineer of AIX Records...a small audiophile label that has been releasing DVD-Audio/Video titles for the past 10 years...I've decided to produce or content on Blu-ray and have our first few discs in this format coming back from replication this week (we've already issued a couple of samplers in conjunction with Oppo and Dolby Labs).

I'm not sure, but I think we're the only ones putting out new HD audio/video "albums" using BD. I don't mean older analog or SD digital stuff parading as HD in BD but new tracks made specifically for the new format (Neil Young and Tom Petty).

About 5 years ago, we started recording HD Video of our sessions at the same time as the HD audio. Now with BD, we can release audiophile audio captures WITH the HD Video of the sessions. Think of these as "private performances" and you'll get the idea. It's because we produce the entire recording in a single session without any processing, overdubs etc. Why not have video as well?

I believe that downloads are the future of HD Surround music, but for the time being BD is a viable and easy alternative. It should be interesting to see whether people like what we're doing. Audiophiles have certainly embraced our purist approach...but they tend not to be interested in the video.

Morten from 2L is a friend and I agree his recordings are superlative. However, they lack the HD Video component and I'm trying to judge whether that matters to music fans or not. I can go either way...but now that we can have lossless audio in surround AND HD Video...why not?

I like the Abbey Road productions very much although the use of artificial reverberation is required because of the size and acoustic limitations of a traditional studio. We record in an acoustically rich performance auditorium.

But you're right. The level of acoustic detail and intimacy is absolutely amazing. I had my recording class in my studio for a field trip over the weekend...I think they finally understood what I've been talking about in the classroom after hearing it for themselves.

I'm an advocate of surround mixing but do include HD stereo mixes on our titles. They can be used on Apple computers running in HD.

We're including as much as we can fit on our BD titles. For example, the Pachelbel Canon Acoustica disc that coming soon has 2.0 PCM at 96/24, 5.1 and 7.1 at both "stage" and "audience" perspectives using Dolby TrueHD (lossless) AND legacy Dolby Digital. This plays against a full HD-Video of the piece.

It turns out that we have to put the video on twice...not because of space but because of bandwidth.

No Dial Normalization or any other processing.

It is possible to do PCM audio using sample rates at 192 kHz as 2L does. However, they record using DXD and then transcode to that standard. AIX Records captures all of our tracks at 96 kHz/24-bits and keeps that fidelity all the way through the post production process...no transcoding is necessary or required.

As for whether 96 kHz is enough...that's been debated at length by experts pro and con. I believe it is enough. I base that on a thorough analysis that I have done to recordings that market themselves as 192 kHz or 176.4, yet when examined using spectragraphs the maximum frequencies don't measure much beyond that a standard CD...around 25 kHz. When I do an analysis on my own recordings, I see frequencies above 35 kHz and even 40 kHz!

Remember you have to have microphones, preamps and the entire signal path capable of recording and reproducing beyond 48 kHz to take any advantage of 192 kHz. I'm convinced that 96 is more than enough and the rest is either merely marketing hype (bigger numbers are better!) or deliberate untruth.

One listen to an original HD recording and you'll know the difference...the problem is most so-called HD recordings or HD downloads are not in fact, high definition.

Thanks Russ! It doesn't take much to get me started about the whole audiophile snake oil thing. The podcast that Scott Wilkinson did a couple of months ago got into it pretty heavily...on Leo Laporte's network. It's definitely worth a listen.

But the proof is in the listening...and maybe the viewing. If anyone knows of another record label making ultimate fidelity surround records with HD Video on BD, I would like to know about it. That's why I'm so interested in what people think about this whole idea of a private performance in your media room rather than trying to take you sonically/visually to a live concert at a great venue. I hope there's a place for both. I do live concerts or movies one time (usually...there are classic movies like Caddy Shack that deserve mutliple viewings) but I listen to a great piece of music performed by a great artist many, many times.

We've been doing this on DVD-Audio/Video for over 10 years...but the process to get Blu-ray underway has been arduous and expensive. The current plans are to have about 2 titles per month coming out. They will be available through our web site.

The first one is done and waiting for the paper that I'm working on right now...there are 4 others that are close behind.

The Dolby Sampler or Oppo Calibration BD titles are definitely worth checking out to see what we've recorded and what's on the roster. Thanks.

Thanks for your feedback. With regards to the Tom Petty and Neil Young Blu-ray music releases, I didn't mean to say that they wouldn't benefit from being released on BD or that they are suitable. But I'm fiercely opposed to calling them high definition audio because the original source masters were recorded using analog multitrack machines, mixed to analog 2-track tape machines and then mastered to whatever digital format for consumer delivery.

The fidelity of the original tapes is where the "resolution" is locked in. It is possible to remove some of the hiss or restore other imperfections but the essential signal to noise ratio AND frequency response remains the same as the day it was captured. The specifications of the best analog tape machines of the day were around 60-65 dB and the frequency response up to about 20 kHz. The equivalent PCM digital specs would be 10-12 bits and 40 Khz sample rate. So according to Nyquist and others (and I understand that there are also other factors like A/Ds, filters etc), putting the original analog or remastered audio from these artists into a much larger dynamic bucket (96 kHz/24-bits or even 192 kHz) doesn't give you anything that you didn't already have on the analog original. Does it mean that the sound of the analog master can be brought home...yes, of course. But this is fundamentally different than recording the artists using high definition audio equipment originally.

That was my point is trying to differentiate the sound on most BD titles (movies or music)...the source is NOT actually HD, according to my definition. Of course, the sound of vinyl or analog may be something that you prefer...it's a matter of personal taste. And I love the sound of vinyl and analog.

But I prefer HD surround mixes done in acoustically rich rooms with everyone playing and singing at the same time. Our recordings are very different than the commercial albums that you know...but they are worth a listen.

Thank you so much for posting your reply without the usual rants that I get from analog/vinyl advocates. Either I'm getting better with my responses and arguments or you've thought about this too. I'm all for getting beyond the CD...that's why AIX Records has never released a compact disc.

I've been a music lover, audiophile, audio engineer and producer for a very long time (over 30 years) and I appreciate the qualities that make music recordings great from all eras. But I've discovered a way to deliver a music performance that eclipses everything I've heard before...and now I can do it with video.

As for making the disc function without a video monitor, I haven't worried very much about that. If you have a BD player dedicated to audio only, you're way ahead of me. Of course, there is a button the remote control that turns off the video feed if you prefer.