Blu-spec CD is not a new audio format says Sony, it's just CD made to sound much bett

[The News Bot]

Blu-spec CD is not a new audio format. Contrary to web reports that surfaced following a Japanese press release issued by Sony Music Entertainment in November, this soon-to-be-released audiophile interpretation of the red book CD standard is not yet another attempt to create proprietary standards.

More it's a compact disc made using  read more »

[David Mackenzie]

Interesting stuff, but I thought most problems with the audio on CD were down to bad mastering rather than flaws with the optical pickup system.

Perhaps they intend to push for better mastering to back up these moves (such as they did with some SuperBit DVD titles; which tended to only be horizontally prefiltered rather than affected in both horizontal and vertical directions).

Good on them for pushing for improvements either way.

[Marky P]

It is good to see that someone still cares about sound quality. I think it's a great shame that SACD or DVD-A didn't succeed but it would be great if Blu-Ray audio discs could take over where SACD/DVD-A left off.

[eric pisch]

Seams a bit of a red herring to me, CD is digital, kind of reminds me about the great HDMI cable debate (ie £1 leads work just as well as £99 ones do). If it reads the 1s and 0s it reads them.

There argument seams to based on interference from the extra use of the electronics from potential jitter correction. I cant see it interfering with a digital signal so it must be some other part of the players electronics that's picking up the interference, and it would have to be a pretty crap player to pick up interference like this really.

I bet money on blind testing on normal kit no one can tell the difference

[mikim]

What he said

I suppose it is always good to see improvements in manufacturing. As long as it doesn't cost us more money of course

[IPaintSara]

How many more supposedly audiophile formats are there going to be? SACD/DVDA sound better to me but SHMCD didn't sound any different to me except when different masters were used. As I'm a sucker I'm going to pick up a couple, Miles Davis Kind Of Blue which I've heard so many times I should be able to spot any difference and ELO's Out Of The Blue which I didn't think sounded very good on its last release. Amazon.jp have them at around £18 each

[Trollslayer]

CD samples are 16 bit (yep, 16 bit) - maybe on the newer formats it is 24 bit?

[David Mackenzie]

That wouldn't be possible without breaking compatibility with older players, would it?

[eric pisch]

Originally Posted by David Mackenzie

That wouldn't be possible without breaking compatibility with older players, would it?

from my understanding its exactly the same standard, just the holes are a little neater. Still 0s and 1s

[Jeffa256]

The problem about cd mastering came in in early 1998 when optical mastering went through the low budget range and has continued ever since. In the early 1980's when cd's were new they were not only thicker but were endowed with a decent 4mm mask both top and bottom. (yes thats why some of the old cd's won't fit in the rack.
Sony have come up with an interesting way whereby you can master any format to any codec range without having to change disc format. The Dye is thicker and tighter than the previous helpings so more information can be crammed into a smaller space without worrying about degradation. How many of your old cds have you had to bin because they have become unplayable. I know of quite a few.
I still remember when the famous philips special was introduced on Tomorrows world on BBC in 1982. I believe they drove a car over it and it still played. How many of you would try that with a modern CD or even a DVD.
Lower cost means lower quality. Which is like everything, if you are willing to spend good money on the original I say we should expect something more.