Showing posts with label Vinyl. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Vinyl. Show all posts

Monday, March 26, 2012

The ten best sounding scores of all time


Finally, my last best-of list! Somehow I´m glad that this is finally finished... believe it or not: it took quite some time to write those lists. All the time in my head was this nagging feeling that some people won´t like the choices I finally selected. But I´ve said it from the beginning that I´d only present my personal, subjective picks and won´t copy another list with the usual candidates. No one should forget that this blog is for my personal enjoyment only, call it my "expression of egocentricity" if you like. Of course I enjoy to be recognized and I find relief in the fact that some people seem to regard my blog helpful in some way. However, it´s still surprising to me that it continues to attract the attention it gets every day considering the geeky stuff I´m writing about, not many people are interested in things they usually don´t relate to. Having said that, I don´t express myself very well, sometimes I fail at explaining where I want to go with my articles. One reason is that I´m not a native speaker (sometimes I bang my head on the table because the easiest expression has escaped my head while at other times I can´t remember the german word for an english expression), another reason is that I tend to view things from a rather simple black/white perspective. It´s so easy to get lost in one's own limited view of the world - that's one of the reasons why I took the avatar of Mrs. Dietrich: she was a true globetrotter, fluent in several languages, surrounding herself with the intellectual and artistic elite of her time while staying true to her roots. Sure, she had many flaws. But  to me she still serves as a great example of integrity, courage and open mindedness. Sometimes this example isn´t vivid enough though.

Several weeks ago I published an article about DBTs, science, engineers, mathematicians and statistics, an article I was initially very proud of. In reality however it was an abomination. I tackled themes I didn´t really understand and I myself used the very instruments I was trying to attack, it was nothing more than a badly written hack job aimed at people who couldn´t do anything about it. Additional problems were that it wasn´t new, needlessly cynical, badly researched - and all the while during writing I had delusions of grandeur! I needed my best mate to realize that the monster I created shouldn´t be in this world (I know, I love being dramatic!). This mate is a curious fella because he has a certain way of telling me directly to my face "That sucks!" and then goes on explaining why. He possesses an enormous amount of aquired knowledge in combination with a vast intellect which enables him to pick apart my reasoning. Believe me, sometimes it can be quite daunting and on more then one occasion he did hurt my feelings - but only because I do have  a problem of accepting criticism directed at me (the roots for that can be found in my occasional difficulties with self confidence). He is a very empathic person (something I lack myself) and he´s one of the few people who knows me inside out. I also think he respects what I´m doing even though he rarely tells me so (just as I have problems telling people "You were good") So he really doesn´t want to hurt my feelings, I´m still glad though that he occasionally does, as for example on my DBT article. I wouldn´t have realized my error if he would have behaved too diplomatic! Of course this is a thinly veiled 'Thank you' and I don´t really know why I´m writing all of this, I wanted to write something about scores, sound, the usual stuff. It´s just that I want him to be proud of me, I´m so glad that I´m surrounded by people like him and my boyfriend who constantly advise me to better myself. And after reading all of this I fear that he will forever taunt me :D

How do I get back to filmscores now? Life-changing experiences perhaps? My biggest passion alongside electronic stuff? Wow... how ingenious. If I think about it... I actually have several strong memories related to movie scores. I remember being in cinema with my mom at the age of seven, we were watching "The Secret of Nimh". It´s one of my most vivid positive memories from my childhood: during the climax of the movie when Mrs. Brisby has to watch her children suffer inside a stone that is sinking into the mud she touches an amulet given to her on an earlier occasion by Nicodemus, the leader of the rats. The amulet becomes powerful by "realizing" Mrs. Brisby's strong will to save her children. By sheer will power and with the help of this amulet she moves the stone out of the mud to safety, saving her children. Of course this scene is accompanied by music, music written by Jerry Goldsmith and up to that point I´ve never heard more heavenly, beautiful and spine tingling sounds. I forgot all around me and started crying helplessly, even now I´m on the brink of crying just by the memory of it. Back then I felt that I had never witnessed anything more wonderful in my entire life. And I´m not exaggerating this time. It took me until 1993 to find out that Jerry Goldsmith composed the score, a period when I already loved his music and I suddenly realized that it was only fitting that my favourite composer was responsible for one of my strongest childhood memories. 

Since 1982 I have constantly (unconsciously at first) been looking for this strange combination of somehow sad, awe inspiring and goosebumps inducing music. I have not been disappointed so far: another memory of mine is the first time I watched "Poltergeist" on TV. My parents weren´t home, I was alone and I smoked my first cigarettes out of curiousity. I was eleven, terrified and mesmerized by this strange combination of horror mixed with emotions. Again, the music was for a large part responsible for it - and back then I thought John Williams had composed it, at eleven I already made the connection that Spielberg always goes hand in hand with Williams. But no, it was Jerry Goldsmith again. There are of course certain other scores being responsible for still holding their respective movies dear to my heart: "The last Unicorn" or "The Neverending Story" (the Doldinger score), both very lovely, admittedly kitschy scores. But oh, they are so achingly beautiful... The latter movie is part of another memory: several years ago my best friend (the one above) and I were driving in a car, I did the driving. It had been a rainy day and the streets were wet. While we were driving we listened to "Bastian's happy Flight" from the Doldinger score of "The Neverending Story". When we approached a sharp bend the tires lost their grip on the wet street and the car suddenly started spinning without control. An accident could have happened then but the car "only" spun for 360° and finally came to a standstill, perfectly in line with the street again. Cars behind us were simply driving around us as if nothing had happened, it indeed had been a 'happy Flight'.

These are just some of the more important reasons why I have been adoring and enjoying so many scores since the age of 15. Filmscores are so different to classical music, sometimes they are showcasing so much talent and creativity that it´s breathtaking. To round up the discussion about art vs. commercialism of my last article I´ll say that scores can lead you through several genres, composing styles and eras of classical music in just five minutes - and you won´t even recognize it because the composer is adapting those only for inspiration into his own compositorial style, all the while fitting the demands of the movie and at the same time composing a complete work ready for the concert hall. Despite the public opinion that they are just commercial embellishment many scores showcase that they can be removed from the context of the movie they are written for so that they are able to emerge as a true and unique form of art. Think about the monumental work Howard Shore has done for the Lord-of-the-Rings movies, he had to create over ten hours of music! The amount of notes is virtually unimaginable yet he still managed to orchestrate and conduct on its own besides creating a work of excellent quality. It´s only fitting that it has been turned into a symphony that gets played with regular orchestras, even though they may sneer at it. Scoring a movie truly is an underrated and genuine form of art, it starts as an instrument for creating movies but if it´s good it´s able to cross the lines to be recognized forever.


In hindsight of what´s written above there´s no better release to start my last best-of list than this one. A classically trained conductor (and composer of its own) leading an orchestra used to perform "serious" music only. On this release here they tackled master composer Bernard Herrmann, known for his many scores for famous movies directed by Alfred Hitchcock. The result of this seemingly strange marriage are works for the silverscreen interpreted with a comparatively "classical" approach - and it works. While many fans of the originals despise this release as being "too slow" or "too boring" this indeed is the prerogative of a conductor who interprets the work with his orchestra. It´s his own subjective view on a particular work and I for one love Mr. Salonen's view because he gives something else to these excerpts, a little something extra I´ve rarely heard from Bernard Herrmann: emotions. Of course, they were always there but hidden under the stark and rigid conducting style of the composer. The sound quality of this recording shows 'extras' too: the sonic colour is breathtaking. Dynamics, crispness, bass, colour and staging are perfect, just perfect, resulting in a release that is without flaw. Highly recommended!



For a long time now I have been assuming that some composers are more interested in a well captured sound than others. One of these composers is John Williams. While his earlier work from the '70s and '80s does not always sound well his more recently released compositions range among the best sounding orchestra recordings available. It´s impossible to pick just one work and declare it to be the best, they all are almost perfect. To name but a few: "Hook", "Jurassic Park" (even with its exaggerated treble), "Schindler's List", "Minority Report", "Harry Potter & The Prisoner of Azkaban" or his more recent "Tintin" score all have a lush, defined, dynamic, spacious and colourful sound. They simply are pure joy which might have to do with the circumstance that Mr. Williams takes his time to compose and to record. Unlike other composers he usually requires six months time for one score and while greatness can be achieved in just three to four weeks by others ("King Kong", James Newton Howard or "Air Force One", Jerry Goldsmith) he always seems to be just slightly more careful, adding layer after layer of variations, harmony and complex rhythms. The engineers he uses seem to know what he requires - and most of the time they deliver.



You probably own a wonderful sounding score yourself already: "Titanic". If I remember correctly over 30 million CDs have been sold over the years, it´s an impressive and rare number for a score. It was composed by James Horner and it earned him a well deserved Academy Award but probably very few people know that it also sounds close to perfection. Bob Katz, himself a highly respected engineer, knows about it, some years ago he stated that it´s one of the best mastered CDs out there. But one shouldn´t stop with this example of Horner's composing style even though it serves as some kind of "Best-of" for Horner's music itself. There are just so many other scores by him that sound very well: "Apocalypto", "Flightplan", "A Beautiful Mind" (even though it has been mixed odd) or "Avatar". Hm, if I think about it you might want to forget the last one. Sure, it was written to accompany the most successful movie of all times but it really is a boring, cheap and uninspired score. You see, over the last 20 years or so James Horner has been accused of being too ecclectic, he literally "steals" (which goes way beyond of being "inspired" or "paying hommage to") music by others (not so often) and himself (everytime). The main theme for "Aliens" for example turns up again in "Clear & Present Danger". You can bet your life on it that a theme for one movie might turn up in another completely unrelated one resulting in the public accusation of laziness which has been surrounding James Horner lately. If you´re still willing to accept this you are in for sonic ride for most of his later scores (since the mid 90s) come close of being the epitome of sonic perfection. Compared to John Williams above they do not sound as well but the differences are so tiny that these scores still sound better than 95% of everything else.



If you´re into electronic music this release from Trent Reznor & Atticus Ross is for you. Trent Reznor initially started out as an industrial rock singer/songwriter, his band Nine Inch Nails is quite famous. That  background might be one of the reasons that there are many people out there who are deriding this work as being uninspired and boring, "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" has been attacked for bordering on being a collection of noises and soundscapes only. Well, there actually doesn´t exist a reason for denouncing it other then not being able to fit everyones' taste. It even has a strong connection to "Star Trek" (for a yet unknown reason), one piece is called "Bird of Prey" while another piece quotes the Borg-Theme Jerry Goldsmith composed for "Star Trek: First Contact" (one possible reason could be the quote from the movie that "Borg" sounds swedish; Stieg Larsson, the author for TGWTDT came from Sweden too which would render the theme-quote an in-joke). The sound is a beast of its own because it will prey on your ears, it´s just pristine. This score doesn´t use a classical orchestra - but that doesn´t mean that it cannot sound well. Samples of real recordings are mixed with synthesizers, sequencers and signal processors are manipulated with extreme attention to detail and a fine ear for subleties while the overarching sonic concept never strays out of sight, creating a balanced soundscape with many highlights. I don´t know how Reznor/Ross achieved this but it´s evident that you sometimes won´t need a classically trained composer to support a movie, create an artistic work and to produce sublime musical soundscapes. If I have one criticism it´s that this score is an example of the Loudness War, it has distorted 0 dBFS peaks responsible for a slightly smeared image. Otherwise it´s perfect so get out and buy the 3-CD edition, it´s quite cheap.



In 1981 Jerry Goldsmith composed the score to a now obscure movie called "Night Crossing" which described the flight of two families from East Germany to West Germany with a huge balloon. It seems that Mr. Goldsmith has been inspired by this movie to compose one of his most passionate works because the music is complex, dynamic, emotional, intelligent and quite breathtaking (even though used a tacky accordeon for describing German rural life). The sound quality of this release is equally perfect because it´s noisefree, not distorted, extremely dynamic, crisp with lovely sonic colour and perfect staging (it could use a bit more energy at the lower mids though which somehow results in a slightly flat imaging). Surprising really because it´s 31 years old, yet it still holds up extremely well. Engineering was done by Eric Tomlinson and it´s one of those cases where he succeeded in getting a perfect sound. Sadly, this score isn´t available anymore, the last time it has seen a (limited) release was in 1994 by Intrada. I only have a copy a friend made for me but - as is often the case with me on rare OOP releases - I very much would like to have an original CD since I love to read a booklet in combination with a pressed medium instead of a CD-R. So I really hope that the recent Disney/Intrada pairing will pay off and that it´ll be released again, they won´t need to remaster it because it´s already almost pristine. 



With his epos Kevin Costner singlehandedly resurrected a genre that was believed to be a rotting corpse. Courtesy of the marvellous photography the movie presented vast vistas and dramatic pictures, marrying these with an enganging love story and a well done description of how the native American people once suffered. Not one composer would have been better suited to score this picture than John Barry. Mr. Barry can of course be described as "Bond, James Bond" for he is the one composer responsible for shaping an entire genre. While the Bond style wouldn´t have been well suited for this movie he already had developed a secondary style throughout the '70s that used an extremely slow and elegant pace with big brass and cinemascope sized emotions, all glued together by jazz harmonics & rhythms and loaded with his trademark simple composition style. If one work by a composer could be described as being the crowning achievement of a long career it would be this. Another wondrous achievement always was and is the sound of the CD: it perfectly fits the music and the movie. The scores' sonics are extremely articulate, airy and dynamic combined with fullness and details that must be witnessed to be believed. This score is over 20 years old and still sounds like it has been recorded tomorrow. Of course you can criticise it for being too wide and too reverb laden - but if it would be any other way it wouldn´t fit the music. The sound is so well captured that it has been re-released many times, always on the newest audiophile medium: in 1995 on a Gold-CD with additional music, in 2001 as an SACD and finally in 2004 in remastered and expanded form. If possible however you should try to seek out the original version or the Gold-CD because the 2004 version has been remastered with too much emphasis on bass and treble. Don´t get me wrong, it still sounds good but the newest release has lost one of the most appealing aspects of the score: the balanced frequency response. This one is highly recommended even if the music sometimes will prompt you to fall asleep over it. Before I forget: the cover you can see above isn´t the original cover. That one looked boring so I took an alternate that has been created by the wonderful Luis Roja.



Ah yes, this movie... I won´t talk about it. I like it but it has many flaws and describing them would go beyond the scope of this article. The music however is perfect - as is the sound. There might be some energy missing at the mids but other than that it´s well captured. Treble is extremely gentle, yet extremely detailed and airy. Bass is full and deep but never bloated and the slightly recessed mids are largely responsible for the laid-back sound. On weak systems it can appear to sound too liquid but that´s only because those systems destroy the very delicate textures. The staging is lovely too, it´s wide, deep and perfectly balanced. I cannot listen to this recording on my old Technics SL-XP 300, with that CD player it sounds like shit. So this is not only a marvellous score by James Newton Howard, it´s also able to serve as a Test-CD.



Sadly not many scores by Christopher Young sound as well as this one. If they would however they´d be even more engaging. Mr. Young is primarily known for composing music for horror movies, he composed the music for "Hellraiser", "Species", "Copycat" and "The Grudge". But scoring for horror movies isn´t the only reference, he also composed music for big budget movies like "Spiderman 3" and "The Core". At one thing he excels though: writing for strictly dramatic movies, as a prominent example I´d like to mention "The Shipping News". The knack for emotions might be one of the reasons enabling him to compose horror scores that are perfumed with an underlying melancholia that´s hard to grasp. This melancholic horror is perfectly captured here with the "Excorcism of Emily Rose" which also showcases his talent to use the styles of Penderecki, Kilar, Lutoslawski and Górecki. The latter fact renders him one of the most modern and advanced composers in Hollywood. Of course he doesn´t simply copy them, the wonderful artist that he is incorporates them into his own style. Result: one moment you´re in sheer terror, goosebumps are chasing goosebumps while the next moment you are immensely depressed, melancholic and feel the weight of the world on your shoulders. Mr. Young always is an emotional rollercoaster ride on his better scores - thankfully the sound of this one isn´t for it will make you truly happy. It does have some high frequency sinuses which can be quite distracting but otherwise staging is lovely, the size and placement of instruments stays consistent throughout, the occasional synthesizers are sounding organic and perfectly blended into the orchestra. Sometimes it´s a soundscape not unlike the one described above with "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo", this time created with an orchestra though. You really should seek out "Emily Rose" before it´s too late, the CD has already started to disappear from stores. It´s really a shame because it´s such a wonderful little gem from an underrated composer.



The score to the first Star Trek movie by Jerry Goldsmith is a legend. It´s commonly mentioned alongside scores like "Lawrence of Arabia", "Star Wars", "Titanic", "E.T." and it´s a shame that it wasn´t awarded an Academy Award. It by far surpasses the quality of the movie and its brassy title march was made famous by its use in the TV series "The Next Generation". The post production of the movie (and subsequently the music) was hurried and stressfull. The first theme Goldsmith composed was rejected by director Robert Wise to be too grand and operatic, sounding like "sailing ships". So J.G. came up with the theme we all know and love, a theme that has been performed by many orchestras in the world ever since. And even though the composing was done with little available time the final work is one fine piece of music. It marries a huge orchestra with synthesized elements, an organ and some unusual other instruments (the "Blaster Beam") and it was responsible for shaping the musical world of the entire Star Trek genre. It´s a wonder that the sound holds up very well when keeping the ennerving production circumstances in mind: engineering was done by Bruce Botnick and the resulting sound is wonderful. Dynamics are explosive, there´s an abundance of crispness that rarely gets harsh and a sometimes thundering base combined with an extremely precise and sharp image of the instruments while the ambience that surrounds them is lush. Yes, there is some noise and sometimes it can become a tad harsh but these are only occasional problems that shouldn´t hinder you to seek this score out for it should be on every cupboard.



Another score by Jerry Goldsmith composed for an obscure film that was directed by a director who later singlehandedly wrecked the Star Trek genre with the movie "Star Trek: Nemesis". A flop too, "U.S. Marshals" served as the sequel to the wonderful "The Fugitive" and while the second movie basically was a carbon copy of the first one it still failed to engage audiences and critics alike. The music has its fair share of detractors too, many Goldsmith fans hate it because it´s generally considerd to be too rhythmically complex and devoid of any good theme. I for one always loved it, this score proves that it won´t need a good theme and grand harmony to produce a good piece of music. The sound is lovely too, it was engineered by Bruce Botnick again (19 years after the score directly above) and while it has a very audible sine at higher frequencies it´s nevertheless detailed, crisp, lush and incredibly dynamic. Ambience tends to be too dry at times but that produces the positive side effect that you can pinpoint the instruments embedded in the virtual stage. Very recommended!



The ten worst sounding scores of all time


This is my penultimate best-of (or 'worst-of') list and it will concern itself with movie scores, commonly called soundtracks. For all my readers who don´t know what these are: scores are these strange things sounding remotely like music accompanying scenes of the movie you´re watching. I´m not talking about some songs where some guy sings something that´s somehow related to the movie (the feeling of the scene), no, I´m talking about music specifically created for those scenes only. Most of the time movies have a musical score so that certain scenes can be enhanced, weakened, juxtaposed, whatever you like. Filmmusic composers come in at the last moment of the movies' creation process, one often quoted statement describes it best in my opinion: "A filmmusic composer is the last writer on a movie". It´s important to understand that the job of a score composer is extremely important and difficult, he/she can affect the final statement of certain scenes in a movie tremendously. While the importance of scoring is common knowledge in the movie industry there are many people all over the world who sneer at filmscores, these people often state that scores are just tapestry and wouldn´t exist on their own. In Germany for example it´s quite normal to deride filmscores, in the eyes of us sometimes arrogant Germans scores are not "art" - they are written for a movie which itself is nothing more than entertainment. The truth however lies somewhere in the middle: yes, a movie is a form of commercialized entertainment and yes, a filmmusic composer indeed is an artist. This is of course a discussion hundreds of years old, Mozart or Beethoven can be equally accused of being commercial (they made a living with their music). 

It´s important to understand this clash because it is one of the reasons why filmscores fail to sound as well as many classical recordings. Yes, I know, a score is not classical music. Many people actually get this wrong; while filmmusic may use one instrument of the classical repertoire (an orchestra) it still doesn´t belong to that genre. Filmmusic also uses many different styles ranging from romanticism, baroque, post modernism, serialism, pop, jazz etc. and it must do so because it has to be recognizable and not too challenging so that the audience can still get the message. So, because filmmusic isn´t regarded as pure art and is created mainly for enhancing the commercialized dramatic narrative (the movie) and also because it is sometimes produced with limited amounts of time and money it can sound horrible as a result. I can only imagine what this means to the engineer responsible for the sound of the score: immense stress. Regarding that it´s no wonder that filmscores rarely sound perfect - still most of them sound decent; not very good but good enough for daily enjoyment. A proof to the talent of most of the engineers having to work under stressful, ever changing and demanding situations where money and time are on short supply. Some examples are so awful however that I´ll start my last two lists with the worst sounding scores of all time, it´ll be fun, I promise you. Oh, and score fans? Gimme a break, you may not like what you´re going to read but as I´ve written in all the other articles: this is just my personal opinion, nothing more.


I´ll start my list with a score by celebrated, multiple Academy Award winner John Williams. He did most of the movies of Steven Spielberg and George Lucas, he probably is the most successful score composer of all time, even "normal" people celebrate him (not only nerds like me). His score to "The Empire strikes back" has been a constant challenge for fans during the last 30 years or so. When it was first released it wasn´t complete (a score rarely is), when it was released in complete form by RCA Records in 1997 it sounded just awful. The latter version is the one you can see above and - by God - it´s one of the most hideous examples of sound ever preserved on CD. To make this release possible several different sources had to be used, sometimes they were in a very bad condition because of improper storage and sometimes they were mixed awkwardly. Several tracks were subsequently remixed by a person who obviously never mixed an orchestral recording before or didn´t have the correct information of how to place certain instruments with the result that some instruments of the orchestra are changing their place during the CDs' runtime. Even worse is that the original sound balance by engineer Eric Tomlinson was lost, resulting in a harsh, distorted, flat and compact sounding experience. It comes close to the sound of fingernails on a blackboard: deep bass is absent, highest frequencies responsible for "air" are nonexistent and the rest inbetween is either too loud, constricted or distorted. Until an improved version is to be released sometime in the future this release has to be avoided by all means. Believe me, I have tried to "remaster" it for myself but I´ve failed miserably two times, it simply cannot be done. Oh, and the 2004 Sony re-release is the same (despite the moniker "DSD remastered" on its back cover).



This is a truly great score, an achievement that catapulted James Horner to the A-list of composers working for Hollywood. The sound is frightfully distorted when the amplitude gets higher and looses resolution when it gets lower. This is an example of a recording made without much money and also another example of a recording engineered for vinyl. The release you can see here is the remastered and expanded version, released in 2009 by FSM, expertly remixed by Mike Mattessino. The new mix actually improves the sound somewhat but I assume that Mr. Mattessino couldn´t do something about the atrocious recorded sound without destroying too much of the initial material. Really a shame because the music is so good, it shows all the characteristics James Horner uses to this day in the best way possible.



These four score shall serve as an example for recordings that have been remastered badly. "The Great Train Robbery" by Jerry Goldsmith had been released already in remastered, remixed and expanded form in 2004 and none other than Bruce Botnick did the new mix. Many fans of the score (and of the old LP released in 1979) always hated that expanded version because of a supposedly bad sound. Bruce Botnick had been working with Mr. Goldsmith from 1979 until 2004 (when Jerry Goldsmith sadly passed away) so he was constantly exposed to the sonic wishes of the composer. These were calling in later years for the sound to be "wetter, wetter, wetter" (as Mr. Mattessino so nicely told me) and so he remixed the Eric Tomlinson engineered score according to the newest sonic taste of the maestro. The result was a surprisingly fresh and up-to-date sounding release by Varèse Sarabande. But then there are fans who cannot forgive a more modern approach. For the past seven years they have been constantly crying out loud to "fix this mess", they complained that the timpani and the overall sound were too muted. In reality however it sounded like a modern recording, able to display an orchestra as one singular unit and not as parts seemingly recorded in seperate booths. Anyway, in 2011 the fans got their wish: the score was re-released by Intrada, newly remixed, remastered and expanded. With this latest release the sound is back to its old, vinyl-y self: compact, explosive but harsh with the orchestra sounding like seperate units. Bass that was present on the 2004 version is gone as is the lovely bloom courtesy of Mr. Tomlinsons original engineering. Very disappointing.

"Raiders of the lost Ark" was re-released in remastered form by DCC Records in 1995, a now defunct label. Originally the engineering was done by Eric Tomlinson (again) while the remastering job was done by Steve Hoffman, a man regarded as God by his many fans. He even might be well suited - when it comes to soul, rock and other releases from many decades before (-> don´t sound well). He cannot make anything worse with these recordings in my opinion. His fans may disagree but I can tell you that he appears to have no idea of the sound of an orchestra. His remaster of one of the greatest scores of all times sounds too compact with too much emphasis on treble. The result is an often piercing, shrill sound that lacks a solid "base" in combination with constricted staging. While it´s common practice to master music to fit ones' sonic taste it just didn´t work on this example here where Mr. Hoffman added his beloved euphonic colour with a tube equipped pre-amplifier (as he always does), resulting in already crisp high frequency details being exaggerated beyond enjoyment. The most recent remaster released by Concorde Music in 2008 is the superior one even though they applied some light dynamic compression and got the speed of some tracks wrong. But that´s still the one you should buy.

"Supergirl" not only failed at the cinema, it also fails soundwise on the release from 1993 by Silva Screen Records. The music itself is really good, critics have sometimes called it the single redeeming aspect of the movie. It offers a brassy, extremely engaging title theme, a robust theme for the villain and a sweet love theme. The synthesizer integration is well excecuted here (Mr. Goldsmith loved to pepper his orchestral scores with synthetic elements) and the original sound was gorgeous too - Eric Tomlinson again. So it´s even more baffling to me how a person can turn a sound that was lovely to begin with into this... well, hideous thing. Actually it´s no surprise: the remastering engineer has just one orchestral mastering credit: this one. Most of the time he masters hard rock, punk and other "loud" stuff. Sadly it shows here: the music is way too aggressive, reverb sounds like metal, bass is absent. The presence area is extremely loud while the treble area usually pronounced by Mr. Tomlinson has been reduced. In the end you get a screeching and screeming mess where instruments are either too loud or too big and the orchestra seems much too small or too wide.

"The Fugitive" is an oscar nominated score by James Newton Howard, well worth your time. The saxophone is played by none other than Wayne Shorter. The original release from 1993 already had a strange problem: channels had been switched during mastering. The expanded re-release from La La Land records (2009) corrected this but introduced a new malady: dynamic compression. While the older release will rock your house with dynamic hits of the orchestra the newer one won´t do so because it sounds timid and it misses deep bass. This release seems to have been done with old grandmas in mind!



A movie for the younger and predominantly male generation of movie goers, a movie that will proudly swell your balls to the size of melons if you belong to this group, a movie with a mediocre score by Alan Silvestri. Dumb and stupid is also the sound of this Varèse Sarabende released CD: it has been brickwall limited; it may appeal on the radio where it´ll certainly grab your attention playing alongside such dignitaries as Gaga or Katie Perry. C´mon, a score on the radio?? Who decided that an orchestral score would need that? What the heck were these people thinking, how could Patricia Sullivan-Fourstar master like this? But wait, this wouldn´t even be the worst aspect of this mess wouldn´t it have been mastered from lossy compressed mp3 files. Yes, you´ve read it right: the first half was mastered from 48 kHz mp3 with a data rate of 192 kBit/s. A bug? A feature? No one can tell. Varèse Sarabande said back then that they never look at the frequency spectrum, they observe only by ear. You know what? I actually have been avoiding scores from Varèse during the last years. I´m really glad now that I realized that!



A very famous and experimental score, released in 1968, composed by Jerry Goldsmith for a film by Franklin J. Schaffner.With this score Mr. Goldsmith effectively brought Alex North's dissonant and percussive style then foreign to casual movie goers to bigger attention. The music strongly divides fans' opinion of Goldsmith's work with no shades of grey inbetween. The sound however is for sure disliked by everyone for it is devoid of treble (replaced by noise) and has a great amount of energy at the presence area which makes it aggressive and muddied at the same time. While this is not unusual for music recorded at those times it still fares worse compared to other scores produced back then. It wouldn´t be that bad if everything would sound like playing through a blanket but some instruments (or should I say kitchen appliances?) indeed are crisp and generally very well recorded. So why wasn´t everything else matched during the remix and the subsequent mastering? An unused chance - disappointing.



This score by James Newton Howard for a movie with lovely Angelina Jolie playing a secret agent was a - successful - attempt to cash in on the Bourne-franchise - and it does show in the score. It even copies some "Zimmerisms" ("composing" characteristics of Hans Zimmer) and it improves them as a result. "Chase accross DC" is a particular highlight of the score. Wouldn´t there be this - how can I put this politely? - awful sound... this release seems to be engineered to sound impressive on the very mediocre iPod headphones, it´s able to counteract their bass- and treble weak sound. On a home stereo this ostensibly results in an bass heavy and shrill sound, colour has been drained in favor of a built-in loudness switch you usually find on your amplifier - that obviously cannot be switched off in this case because it has been engineered into the sound itself. To be fair, it actually seems to be recorded well which will be revealed only if you´d attempt trying to correct this - but even then you´d have to do something about the dynamic artifacts created by the brickwall limiting. Yes, this score is just another prime example of the Loudness War. Shawn Murphy, how could someone like you - who normally is wonderfully talented and tasteful - produce something like that?



Yet again, another example of the Loudness War. Oh, and please excuse the non-original cover, I couldn´t find a better one because the original cover is too small and not very sophisticated. This beautiful score suffers in many ways from its sound: this release appears to have been mastered with a crowd in mind that usually buys mainstream pop music. It sounds constricted, very dry (curious for a christmas-themed movie), some instruments sound more like static. Plus: a Loudness switch has been engineered into the sound again in combination with brickwall limiting - ReplayGain tells me it is 7 dB too loud (!). Hence this increase of Loudness destroys the sound of the orchestra and its dynamics. Subtleties of the orchestras` performers are lost on this recording with the effect that the music isn´t presented as good as it really is. It´s disappointing really; the process of mastering should never affect the message of the music. To add insult to injury this wasn´t even released on CD but as a lossy download only. I bought my version at Amazon.de and while it has a comparatively high bitrate of 256 kBit/s it still is lossy with almost all frequencies missing above 16 kHz (which I still can perceive). I hope Intrada will rectify all shortcomings soon in view of their recent partnership with Disney for this score to shine properly.



This actually isn´t that bad, frequency response is relatively balanced. It´s just brickwall limited and much too wide, someone has been pushing the "widen the stereofield" button to greedily. Probably to improve the already dry and constricted sound of the original. Strings are too far on the left, brass is on the far right with virtually no sound in the center. The staging is so wide that it has to be heard to be believed. Another Varèse Sarabende disappointment.



Composed by Hans Zimmer (he was contractually obligated to another project so Klaus Badelt is credited with composing duties) this score is extremely popular with mainstream audiences and Zimmer fanboys alike (who shouldn´t be regarded as experts because they usually listen to DJ Tiesto). Many people will know that Zimmer and his team produced this as a replacment score for the first composer Alan Silvestri (who was Verbinski's personal choice). To be fair, this score was produced in a very limited amount of time only because producer Jerry Bruckheimer hated the first score by Alan Silvestri, it wasn´t manly enough (it had woodwinds in it which are - we all know this - for faggots like me only (yes, he´s a homophobic)). It´s highly commendable that Badelt/Zimmer (and probably a bunch of other composers) achieved this in the short amount of time. As I now know from the wonderful book "Torn Music" there were no hard feelings between Alan Silvestri and Jerry Bruckheimer who behaved most admirably. Mr. Silvestri hadn´t written something beyond some themes and synth-mockups, even less recorded something. According to Silvestri, him and the producer parted on good terms. Zimmer and his Remote Control team had one month time to come up with this score which isn´t that bad and typical for Herr Zimmer; it´s jolly good fun. The sound however isn´t funny, it´s a nightmare. Brickwall limited again which leads to audible distortions and dynamic artifacts with the usual slighly loudness-y sound so typical for Remote Control productions. Parts of the orchestra have been replaced by 80s` synthesizers and it´s very apparent here. Hans, warum klingen deine Scores eigentlich immer so Scheiße? Mach mal was dagegen!



A good score for an even better movie. But I´m at a loss here why it sounds so bad. You know, I expect a new recording from 2011 to show how far we have advanced soundwise. Why this one disappoints is baffling to me. "The Matrix" above was too wide but this one here is the opposite, it´s too compact. From what I´ve read many scores from Michael Giacchino show a sonic soundscape like this so I have to assume that he suffers from some sort of hearing damage. Tinnitus perhaps? Otherwise this close-to-monaural sound cannot be explained: on lower frequencies the stereo field is wide enough but the higher the frequencies go the smaller the stage gets. Frequency response is relatively balanced but borders on the muffled sound typical for recordings of the '60s, violins sadly are sounding dark. All of this results in a tiny and very analogue (in a bad way) sounding score. Thankfully brickwall limiting is absent - the dynamics have been tinkered with nonetheless: pieces that are supposed to be low in amplitude have been amplified to a level close to the amount of usually very loud pieces. I´m very confused by that, I´m always at the volume knob to re-create a "normal" orchestral dynamic. It sounds as if the mastering engineer applied a per-track based ReplayGain result to the final mastering instead of a per-album based result. Erm... no; not Loudness War but uneven.



Last update: 08.06.2012

Sunday, February 05, 2012

The ten worst sounding classical recordings of all time!

Copyright by LIFE Magazine
After publishing my list of the ten best classical recordings of all time I´m now going to post the opposite: the worst sounding examples. Some of these are outright bad and I´m always wondering why the companies dare to release them. Sure, some (especially the older releases) contain impeccable performances by the orchestra and its conductor but some don´t even have a redeeming qualities like that. And I hate to say it: some recordings were made by TELARC which is - as I already stated before on numerous occasions - my most beloved label. Some people reading this newest article of mine will surely dislike me because many of these recordings are loved by many people... older people. I assume that the differences in sonic preferences are rooted in a clash of generations because I´ve noticed before that people coming from 50 years prior prefer a more forward sounding approach while I myself prefer a more balanced (or distanced if you will) sound. Please keep in mind that I don´t intend to hurt someone but on the other hand I don´t want to hide my opinion so be calm and bear with me. Anyway, the probable reason for this sound preference is that most recordings from the '50s & '60s weren´t recorded with present technology in mind, they were recorded in a way to counterbalance the flaws of vinyl. Transfer this sound to CD and you inadvertently encounter problems. I´ve said it before that I don´t care how old a recording is, with the right tools it can sound like a modern day recording. I know that this isn´t the correct way of "preserving" historic recordings but I really don´t care, I simply WANT to enjoy awesome music - and I cannot do so when it sounds horrible. So, dear companies: adapt this music to present day technology (CD or high resolution downloads) and don´t preserve the made-for-vinyl sound.



This is a very famous recording of Ravel's massive ballet "Daphnis et Chloé". Charles Munch, famous for his interpretations of French masters, conducts the Boston Symphony. This reading of Ravel's work is known for the ultimate precision and timing of the orchestra - Munch literally hastes through the score with light speed; the orchestra follows with as much precision as possible, all the while protecting the works' cohesion. The sound... is a two-faced bitch. For sure, it´s marvellous for a recording that was made in 1955 - but it isn´t when viewed from today. Surprisingly, high frequencies above 10 kHz are present as are frequencies below 100 Hz. Detail, staging and perceived dynamics therefore aren´t that much of a problem, the sonic balance is. It sounds lovely with delicate bloom on low volumes but as soon as it gets louder the balance goes way off and the bloom turns into piercing shrillness, the sound 'screams' right at you and the music transforms itself into an example of exaggerated crispness. I´ve pictured the SACD here but it´ll sadly sound bad in any version.



This rightfully is one of the most famous recordings of all time and second on my list. Furthermore, this interpretation of Carl Orff's work "Carmina Burana" is the best I know. I especially adore Gerhard Stolze as the roasting swan and Gundula Janowitz singing "In Trutina" - both are simply breathtaking. Conducting, orchestra and choir are all top-notch... but... the sound... is so disappointing in every aspect that it´s shocking. This was recorded in 1967 and is the one rendition of the work that the composer himself authorized. That´s why it is a shame that it sounds the way it does; frequencies beyond 10 kHz or below 100 Hz are almost absent. Again we have a recording that was done with vinyl and its limitations in mind so the sound is hollow, thin and without impact or punch. Articulation of the soloists suffers, the choir sounds like performing in a garage and sometimes we can even observe severe distortions. On lower levels the resolution turns into muddiness only to shatter your ear the next second when the choir screams "Oh Fortuna" with brassy shrillness. What a disappointing waste.




The second recording from the DG on my list. And again, the performance is wonderful: Herbert von Karajan recorded Beethoven's famous Symphony No. 9 three times for the DG. To this day people still argue if this version from the 1963 is the best or the one from the '70s, both were released as SACDs and the first one is the one I´ll be reviewing today. As I said, the performance is indeed wonderful: energy, precision and playfullness are gorgeous traits of this rendition. I don´t know any of the other versiosn of this recording released before since I only own the SACD - but I can say that the SACD sounds like... sorry, shit. For one it´s noisy, treble is brittle and way too agressive, deep bass seems non-existent (even though it´s present, only diminished). The older CD version is supposed to sound better so one can argue that something during the most recent remastering went badly wrong. Thankfully there is a solution: a digital, high quality Equalizer like iZotope Ozone. With it you can 'correct' the errors that were made and the resulting sound is indeed very pleasing, dynamic and balanced, almost without high frequency noise. I´ll post my configuration below - but be aware that you´ll be destroying the integrity of the material! Oh, I used the SACD layer for my "remastering", I wanted to have the best quality so that my improvements wouldn´t have quality lowering result:

My "remastering" configuration for Deutsche Grammophon 474 605-2





I don´t know what went wrong with this recording but there isn´t much center information left (if you´d play it back on a surround system). The width of this recording is immense, it sounds as if someone used a "stereo-widening" DSP effect for this recording, I´ve rarely seen a classical recording which displays a characteristic as this, it´s even more disappointing when one knows who recorded this: Michael Bishop, at that time chief engineer for TELARC, who is a remarkable engineer and one of the best around. It´s one of the first DSD-recordings done in 1999, perhaps the inexperience with the new and untested recording format played a role. The performances however are lovely, it´s in fact the only version of "Pines of Rome" by Respighi I´m able to listen too. The "Fountains of Rome" and the "Metamorphosen" are wonderful too. Thankfully the sound can be "corrected" - but be advised again that you´d be destroying the material:

TELARC CD-80505. iZotope Ozone with 70% DSP strength



Another famous recording from the DG (463 650-2). But sadly not a very good performance (despite boasting a celebrated conductor) of this well loved work from Antonin Dvorak. The recording quality is dull and lifeless, again an example of a recording made for vinyl. Staging is both flat and compact at the same time. Not worth your time (I prefer Paavo Järvi's No. 9 on TELARC - superior in every way).



On this recording (TELARC CD-80681) nothing fits: sound & performance are surprisingly uneven. The latter is especially lackluster, I´ve never heard a more uninvolving version of Tchaikovsky's 6th symphony. Here it should have been called "Ennuyeux" instead of "Pathétique". The sound quality is uninvolving too: the music sounds as if having a severe cold. The frequency reading reveals a deep "hole" at frequencies from 5.000 to 12.000 Hz and a "bump" at 15.000 Hz which results in a recording that sounds dull, lifeless, muddy and grainy - all at the same time. I don´t know how engineer Michael Bishop did this; maybe by placing the microphones in a peculiar way or by something else unkown to me, the result however is not enjoyable. BTW, he used this sound signature for quite some time with recordings of the Cincinnati Symphony / Pops Orchestra, though most of the time not as extreme as here and with clearly superior results. Maybe he wanted to reduce the reverb laden sound of earlier TELARC recordings or had some other goal unknown to me... anyway, on this recording he exaggerated whatever he was planning to do and the result saddens me deeply.



This SACD (TELARC SACD-60703, engineered by Robert Friedrich) shows the same sonic signature as the Järvi-recording above. Dull, lifeless and grainy. The SACD-layer reduces the grainyness somewhat but the dull sound remains - as if someone had put a woolen blanket over your loudspeakers. Equally disappointing is that this Boléro isn´t one of the best. For sure, this work is not worth the attention it normally receives (even Ravel thought so himself) but this tepid rendition is not recommended even if you like it or want to procreate to it. Timing is way off, the - usually perfect - orchestra is surprisingly uninspired. If it would be slow I´d understand at least partially why it´s so boring ('slow' was typical for the late Erich Kunzel) but it´s not. The best (and the longest Boléro) was conducted by Simon Rattle on an ok-sounding CD (EMI) which prooves that you can be slow and suspenseful at the same time. The other performances on this disc aren´t very good too although not as bad as the Boléro. Another disappointment.




Actually, the sound on this CD is lovely - if there wouldn´t be the vanishing right channel. When the music gets lower in amplitude the right channel almost disappears and disintegrates into distortions. When the orchestra gets louder the right channel comes back with full force - very disturbing. The performances are a mixed bag too: "La Valse" is uneven and flashy, the "Boléro" is ok but uninvolving while the "Rapsodie Espagnole" and the "Valses nobles et sentimentales" are simply gorgeous. The sound generally is fairly bass heavy which on occasion tends to distract from the works' careful orchestration; it also results in a rather tacky sounding "La Valse", it almost destroys the mixture of French / Spanish atmosphere so carefully fleshed out by Maurice Ravel. Especially disappointing when one considers that staging, precision, bloom and dynamics are perfectly captured and consistent - but only if the right channel decides to be present of course.





This CD actually isn´t that bad performance- and soundwise - if there wouldn´t be a unnerving amount of clicks and pops present in the recording. Engineered again by the wonderful Michael Bishop, this release shows the warm sound signature of the Bishop / Cincinnati pairing, only this time not as extreme as on the aforementionend releases. Still, besides sounding like a vinyl record this CD (TELARC CD-80683) showcases an overly warm sonic balance together with instruments noticeably varying size and place. As a result the staging is unnatural and every instrument seems to be blown up to huge proportions - but not at all times because it changes constantly which turns this release in combination with the clicks and pops into another disappointing experience.





I feel like I´m going to commit a crime now: this recording was awarded the prestigious Grand Prix du Disque by the French Académie Charles Cros in 1989. The sound would be marvellous if there wouldn´t be the aggressive high frequencies. This recording engineered for CD indeed sounds like the early CD players: harsh, strident and cold. It shows everything TELARC is famous for: precision, staging, timing, dynamics, wonderful timbre - but this time with an unpleasant and very disturbing amount of high frequency activity that almost sounds like distortions on the brink of becoming obvious. The performances however are remarkably perfect (if uplifting patriotic music is your thing). It´s a shame really because this recording could have been so well sounding, everything is there - but at the same time everything is exaggerated. I can only listen to it for a few minutes, after that time I have to turn it off because I´m getting a headache and my ears start to ring.

Concluding this little article I´d like to say that this time I won´t recommend buying these CDs - except you know exactly what you´re doing. In that case you´ll be listening to sometimes wonderful performances combined with disappointing sound quality. Sometimes the ills of these recordings can be "corrected" by simple means, most of the times they cannot. Personally I find it curious that the output quality of just one engineer (Michael Bishop) sometimes varies by this amount. He did so many wonderful recordings for TELARC (many are on my Best-of list) and then he also did the ones described here. Thankfully the pristine ones outnumber the not so perfect ones. It still tells me one thing: Never trust a famous name, even if you normally - like me - love his or her work. In any case, these releases are not recommended if you care about sound quality; therefore I´m giving these recordings my cold shoulder.

Friday, January 06, 2012

Creative Labs Soundblaster X-Fi HD USB / Digital Music Premium HD - is it any good? - A review



Please note that the following review is a major rewrite of the original article where I ended up recommending this soundcard. I cannot do so anymore - to find out why you have to read it again. There´s an alternative for the X-Fi HD USB: the FiiO E07K 'Andes'. It doesn´t feature an RIAA amp and cannot record - but it´s equipped with true 44.1 kHz playback and it sounds just perfect with headphones from 16-150 Ohm.

Since originally posting this article on January 6, 2012 exactly one year has passed and in the meantime I haven´t been inactive when it comes to research concerning the X-Fi HD USB / Digital Music Premium HD. Why would I alter an already written article siginificantly? You know, bloggers consider this to be bad form because it´s not exactly an example of transparency. Secondly it´s unfair to people who might´ve bought this card because of myself recommending it. Point is, during the year that has passed I´ve accumulated some additional information and experience I cannot ignore which will lead me to alter my conclusion considerably. My original conclusion was like this: "...especially for this price - this is a well designed and very good sounding interface with a lot of available connections and features (...) Recording quality is good, playback quality even better, the headphone output is strong enough for most available headphones with impedances from 16-150 Ohms on every system, build quality is well done, design is nice... I cannot wish to have more for the money. Guys, this thing is ridiculously cheap considering its price, it´s a true bargain. I never liked my X-Fi eXtreme Music... but oh, I love this one!" In the end of this now rewritten review you will bear witness to a changed opinion of mine. Yes, I´m ashamed to admit that I seem to have been wrong about many things with this card - I could have gone the easy route and kept my mouth shut. Instead I wanted to be as honest with you as I can be, I would not be able to forgive myself for keeping the truth from you. BTW, this occasion also provided the opportunity to make new and hopefully improved photos. YAY!!

Creative Labs Soundblaster X-Fi HD USB / Digital Music Premium HD
I acquired this little inexpensive gadget only because I´d found out with my then new Sennheiser HD-448 that the headphone output of my Lenovo SL-510 sucks. While this wasn´t obvious with my Superlux it became irritating soon with the very balanced Sennheiser because of missing treble and flat stageing. In the end I decided to buy another soundcard which turned out to be the X-Fi HD USB. True, I could have used my E-MU 0202 USB instead but its headphone output has a high output impedance (22 Ohms) and is pretty weak. Since the new Soundblaster was intended to be used soleley at our second appartement with one of my headphones it was of vital importance for it to contain a strong enough headphone output with low output impedance. For amplifying headphones the card uses the 4556 op-amp by JRC, this amp has been on the market for almost 30 years and it´s still a decent thing considering its price because it has a low output impedance (of just 1 Ohm) in combination with low distortions... that is if it´s treated right. For communication via USB the external card uses the CA0189 from Creative, the high quality D/A-converter is an AK4396VF from Asahi-Kasei while the CS5351 from Cirrus-Logic is responsible for A/D-conversion. But this card has something that distinguishes it from many other USB interfaces: it contains an RIAA amp, enabling you to connect your turntable to this interface directly without the need of an additional pre-amp. I thought that this particular feature might come in handy should I have the desire to capture vinyl. As it turned out during the last year I have not captured one single LP yet (except for testing); it probably has something to do with my strong dislike for this obnoxious and dreaded medium. Well, it doesn´t matter since this feature will not disappear suddenly, won´t it? To my own surprise I have instead used another aspect of this card quite extensively: its digital optical output made it possible to record music onto MiniDisc in high quality.

The inside of the Sound Blaster X-Fi HD USB. Not "audiophile" but high quality.
Copyright by Creative Labs.
I assume that you might have some reservations towards Creative cards; I´m aware that many people experienced problems with them - I myself never did though, every Creative card I´ve owned has been behaving as it should. Manufacturing quality and finish are decent considering the used materials (plastic). It posesses gold-plated connectors (it´s pointless for audio quality; it only avoids corrosion) and its outer shell feels nice to the touch. I especially love how smooth the volume button turns. But it´s very light and that could create problems: imagine plugging in a headphone - the card will simply slip if you don´t hold it in your hand. Setting up the card was easy, installing and upgrading didn´t produce any errors no matter where and on which PC I did it. BTW, I chose not to install the bloated software suite Creative offers, I picked the driver and the audio panel only. Fans of the DSPs typical for Creative (EAX 4.0, THX Studio Pro Crystalizer, Surround etc.) will be happy 'cause the card is equipped with them. Nonetheless they should be aware that all DSP functions are done in software and not in hardware like on the internal X-Fi cards which creates additional computing stress for an older PC or one of those low-power PCs. If you´re willing to experiment a bit, if you want to avoid installing issues or if you´d like to have the newest drivers (Creative is a bit lazy there) I can recommend a fully updated package conceived by the famous Daniel K.; get it here. The DSPs also provide an indication who the target audience for this card is: your average Joe with an interest in good sound quality for every day tasks or gaming, a lot of features and some toys to play around with. Music Professionals? This card lacks routing options, ASIO inputs for multitrack recording or XLR ports so it isn´t suited for professional music production. On the whole it feels like a small gadget able to be connected to your stereo system - that´s actually OK, Creative doesn´t hide this. Several people all around the web have reported that this card can be used as a DAC - I haven´t used it that way yet. Furthermore it still needs a running PC (in order to be powered). Well, it´s nice to have that feature.

Creative Labs Soundblaster X-Fi HD USB front
So far I´ve talked about its relative advantages and the features it offers. What about shortcomings, are there any? Indeed there are! Creative claims that this card offers an audiophile headphone amp. To determine if the JRC 4556 really is of audiophile quality we first have to make clear what the expression 'audiophile' actually means. If it means using anything out of the ordinary then this card isn´t audiophile because it uses readily available, not too costly parts. But as I´ve shown this isn´t an issue because something extremely well sounding can be produced using cheap and simple parts only. Should 'audiophile' mean engineering prowess, then the answer would be Yes/No. Recording and especially playback quality is very decent - but only if you use the line-in / line-out. The headphone output on the other hand seems to be a good example of botched engineering: Creative managed to turn a decent part with perfectly low output impedance into something with an output impedance too high for many headphones the card is actually suited for considering available voltage levels provided by the USB connection. The PCI-Express counterpart for this card, the Titanium HD, uses the same JRC 4556 IC and on that card it has a reported output impedance of 36 Ohms - way too much for IEMs, my HD-448 or my Superlux. I have to make it clear that this isn´t the fault of the IC itself; Creative seems to have added parts to save on engineering and it shows. To find out why that could create problems look at an example from an ancient portable player below:

Sony MZ-R 55 - headphone out with Triple.Fi 10 (copyright not with me)
The frequency reading of this exemplary unit above should ideally be a straight line - instead the high impedance of the MZ-R 55 headphone output creates severe frequency deviations with IEMs which WILL be audible. Since the PCB circuitry for the headphone amplifier looks similar on both Creative cards (according to others) we can safely assume that both will behave in a similar way, meaning that the X-Fi HD USB would have an equally high headphone output impedance creating the same or even stronger deviations like the ones pictured above. Yes, you´d have to say "Bye bye" to balanced sound quality. So in essence with the X-Fi HD USB you´ll have lovely audio quality using its line-out - but the headphone output will produce sonic crap should you be using it with low impedance cans susceptible to high impedance outputs. As a basic rule the headphone impedance should be 8 times higher than the output impedance of the amplifier the headphone is connected to. For the X-Fi HD USB you therefore would need a headphone with an impedance of at least 288 Ohms in order to reach balanced sound. Enter my Sennheiser HD-600 which boasts 300 Ohms... but wait, why is this gorgeous headphone so soft in volume? Because the X-Fi HD USB doesn´t offer enough power for such a demanding and power hungry creature (even though Creative advertises it that way). Which means that for the Creative Labs Soundblaster X-Fi HD USB you´d need a seperate headphone amp to unleash its full potential. Kind of defeats the purpose, don´t you think?

X-Fi HD USB headphone output and microphone input
The disadvantages don´t stop with the dreaded headphone out. Are you planning to play 44.1 / 88.2 kHz material with this card NOT using any resampling? Forget it then. The analogue in-/outputs only offer 48 / 96 kHz sampling rates. This card lacks a seperate crystal needed for 44.1 kHz-based samplerates even though the CA0189 used for USB communication is actually able to handle one of them (44.1). Which creates the second problem: the optical S/PDIF connectors can only process 44.1, 48 & 96 kHz - but they ignore 88.2. Why does all of this pose a problem? Because the good old CD uses a samplerate of 44.1 kHz, a standard the X-Fi HD USB cannot handle with its analogue outputs and inputs. Therefore a CD will always be resampled to 48 kHz or to 96 kHz (depending on what is configured in the Windows WASAPI control panel). Using 88.2 kHz files from for example HDTracks.com with the digital output of this Creative is not possible, at least not without resampling. Digital recording of 88.2 kHz material with its digital input? Don´t even think about it, the card won´t recognize it (I´ve tried). This 'fine' example of engineering seems to have been constructed 15 years ago when those samplerates indeed weren´t very common on PCs. Is this audiophile? I think you can now answer this question yourself.

Backside of the X-Fi HD USB
But now to measurments with RMAA. The first measurment I did for the original review was the commonly employed loopback from the output to the input of the same card via an RCA cable. Many computer magazines do this kind of measurment although it´s unsuitable for finding out if a soundcard behaves well. Using a loopback you for instance don´t know if it´s the output that´s noisy or the input because noise or distortions exhibited by the output are masking the possibly noise- or distortionfree input or vice versa. Therefore I´ve removed it for this updated article. Much more precise than the loopback are seperate testruns done seperately for the line-in and the line-out. So I connected the output of the Soundblaster to the input of the ASUS Xonar Essence ST and the other way round, both times using the same RCA cable. While a PC is inadequate for measuring a soundcard because of grounding issues I knew for certain that my ASUS behaves exceptionally well on it´s in/outputs (noise level of -115 dB for the output and -114 dB for the input, no distortions or jitter). To make it short I was fairly positive that it would be good enough for the purpose of exposing possible flaws of the X-Fi HD USB.

Recording (line in, 50 %): from ASUS to Soundblaster X-Fi HD, one year later,
using two different PCs, one on batteries

Playback (line out, 0 dB fs): from Soundblaster X-Fi HD to ASUS, one year later, 
using two different PCs, one on batteries - spectacular results

My latest article about USB cables made it clear that the playback part of this soundcard is perfectly engineered. During the tests for that article it transpired that I indeed had been measuring the effect of a ground loop a year ago. The result was that the old measurments did not show the possible performance of the Creative so I replaced them with the ones I did for the third article about USB cables. To the measurments: the DAC AK4396V is rated at having a noisefloor of -114 dB (min.) - Creative manages the feet of achieving fantastic -113 dB. Every measurment was done in 24/96 using 0 dB fs for both cards - except on the input of the Sound Blaster: its volume slider produced a perfect 0 dB fs input signal only at 50 % of the available recording level. Setting a recording level of 100 % I experienced severe distortions from an overloading input. That behaviour is caused by the line-in also used as an input for vinyl - the amplifier inside this card is always active. With vinyl records there also is a very noticeable gain of frequencies from 7.000 to 12.000 kHz, beyond those frequencies the band decreases sharply. This indicates capacity problems of the input when receiving vinyl signals but it isn´t a serious issue since 85% of commonly available RIAA amps behave exactly like that. Another thing: either the same line-in/vinyl amplifier of this card is used for the microphone input on the front - or a (possible) seperate microphone amplifier produces noise leaking into the line-in. The latter would demonstrate engineering errors:

Noise, line-in
The left channel is noisier on lower frequencies than the right channel; I assume the left stereo channel of the line-in probably doubles as the monaural microphone input. This is complaining on a high level because this noisefloor is OK for such a low-priced soundinterface. However, a few months ago I´ve stumbled upon an additional row of measurments on another site which revealed strong distortions. Since the loopback method was used I can´t tell if the input or the output distorts, I can only say that I myself haven´t witnessed distortions using the same method. EDIT 05.08.13: Hmm, that blog is now gone. My seperate testruns for recording and playback revealed that they are indeed higher for the input than for the output but non-threatening at all. My unit is practically distortion free though two different units of the same card measuring differently using a loopback might suggest poor quality control on Creatives' side, changed specs or measurments done wrong (happened to me too). Another typical flaw of cheap USB soundcards are high levels of jitter. Not with this card as you can see on the two pictures below:

Jitter, line-in, 24/96
Jitter, line-out, 24/96

The performance is excellent, playback as well as recording are virtually free of jitter. Because I was using a samplerate of 96 kHz for the Creative and 192 kHz for the ASUS I have effectively measured the jitter performance for both cards combined - even more impressive, isn´t it? It wasn´t that surprising since this soundcard employs the asynchronous USB transfer: instead of the PC pushing the data towards it the interface itself demands the data only when needed, it therefore is in complete control of the connection and its data transfer. On earlier USB interfaces the theoretically inferior synchronous or adaptive modes were used, occasionally prompting high jitter levels. I should however mention that asynchronous USB doesn´t automatically guarantees perfect audio, the engineers still need to be skilled to avoid jitter. Are you curious to find out for yourself which USB mode your own USB soundcard uses? In that case I can recommend the USB Decriptor Dumper from Thesycon.

X-Fi HD from above
Before I´ll tell you about audio quality I have to mention that I´ve used the X-Fi HD only in combination with the Audioquest Forest USB cable during the last year. I have written three articles about this and other (supposedly) High End cables: "Hot Vodoo: Audio differences between USB cables - yes, they do exist!" and "More USB cables - more differences", articles that proved to be highly controversial. The third and last article about USB cables "Vodoo continued: my final Statement on USB cables" mainly deals with the effects of a ground loop I have been measuring in the older articles. Also, please note that I´m able to apply my testing methodology only to the line-out but not the headphone output. It goes without saying that I did every single test not using any of the DSPs the card offers.

Sound with the line-out: The sound of this card is very good for playback. Compared to the reference files the Soundblaster X-Fi HD USB lacks a bit of high frequency gloss or 'air' which diminishes resolution and detail a bit. Bass is stronger than my reference files, that difference is small but noticeable. Speed and snap are marvellous over the whole frequency band, music indeed seem a bit 'faster'. Overall, the dynamics are exaggerated; they aren´t completely natural but riveting nonetheless, more importantly they never veer into strident territory. The stage is fascinating too: while it isn´t as wide as the reference it showcases more depth augmenting holographic impression. I found it very pleasing that the X-Fi HD USB borrows some of its characteristics from the excellent Sony D-335. The character of the original files is not retained completely, it´s partly replaced by something with a more forward sound. To put it bluntly: music is more fun coming from this card. In conclusion the line-out is not 100 % sonically invisible but for casual listening (or for almost anyone of its users) it´s perfectly suited. Yes, I think that many people will just love the sound the Creative creates (pun intended). Should you be using the stock USB cable the card was equipped with you will however encounter a flatter stage, its already exaggerated dynamic capabilities will turn from engaging to strident. You decide. Here are now my ratings for the line-out (Audioquest Forest used):

Sonic Balance:
Dynamics:
Resolution:
Stage / Ambiance:
Character:

Recording quality: the frequency deviation with vinyl signals is noticeable, causing hoarse sounding singers and too much 'air'. It´s also responsible for something best described as a brittle sound my two other RIAA amplifiers - which aren´t very good - lack. On the other hand playback of vinyl is not an exact science because of too many factors producing unreliable results. I can only say that for me the quality is good enough (I´d correct errors anyway). Recording usual line-in signals produces a slightly constricted sound, missing resolution and less dynamics. While this doesn´t sound it isn´t because the overall recording quality is decent. The noise signature of the left channel  revealed in my measurments above wasn´t audible.

Sound quality of the headphone output: Despite a way too high output impedance I have yet to encounter imbalanced sound quality with this card using headphones. I seem to have been lucky because my Sennheiser HD-448 and my Superlux HD-668B don´t have any problems with high output impedances, according to measurments on headphone.com they virtually aren´t susceptible to them. Compared to my FiiO E6 this card amplifies lower frequencies, creating more bass power as a result (without sounding bloated). Secondly, it presents music with more dynamics than it really has, making it a bit more aggressive and by that mirroring the sound of the the line-out. Can high impedance headphones like the Sennheiser HD-600 be used with it? Not the best idea, the card doesn´t have enough power for power hungry cans like these, the volume that can be reached might be too soft for some. Using the HD-600 in combination with the maximum volume setting creates distortions on transients; the headphone output cannot deliver what my HD-600 'demands'. Using it with a volume setting slightly below the maximum (90-95 %) these distortions are almost absent, yet the music lacks a bit 'body', meaning soloists have less chest. In short this combination sounds a bit thinner and slightly strident. I have not used IEMs or headphones sensitive to high output impedances with this card and I don´t intend to do so - in such cases I recommend to stay away from this card as far as possible.

Both the HD-448/449 & the HD-668B virtually aren´t susceptible to high output impdances

Concluding my revised article I can only say that the X-Fi HD USB is a mixture of good and bad. Creative claims that this soundcard is for audiophiles. Experience and research however reveal that this claim merely is wishful thinking of Creatives' marketing division and not grounded in reality. Simply put: the headphone output is crap. I´m sorry to say it as blunt as this, even when I consider that I haven´t had any problems at all. But I use headphones not affected by the high output impedance so I´m forced to ignore my own experience in this case. My point is that you, dear reader, probably don´t know if your headphones react to something like this; with this card you might think that the new and nifty cans you just bought don´t sound very well when in reality it is caused by a mismatch between the X-Fi HD USB and your headphone. You plan on using headphones with impedances higher than 250 Ohms to avoid this problem? Congratulations, you´ve just hit another obstacle because this card is too weak to power them sufficiently. Oh, you intend to play CDs in perfect quality with it? I´m sorry but this isn´t possible either because the lack of support for 44.1 kHz based samplerates forces the Windows audio engine to resample using its not very sophisticated interal resampler. You want to play the newest 88.2 kHz remaster of an ancient Rolling Stones album you just bought on HDTracks to feed it digitally to your very well engineered DAC? I´m very sorry, this is impossible too: Windows resampling kicks in again. 
This card is only for you if you can accept a loss in quality - or if you´re using 48 / 96 kHz exclusively, don´t use headphones vulnerable to high output impedance or weak output power and if you plan on correcting frequency errors produced by the RIAA amp needed for vinyl yourself with a high quality EQ. Should you find yourself in the latter description you will get decent manufacturing quality combined with a nifty looking exterior, very decent audio quality on the line-out and tons of DSPs to play with. One thing however is crystal clear: think carefully to which of the two groups you belong for this card is a disappointment in some regards. It took me a year to find out how badly this soundcard performs regarding certain aspects; I subsequently made the decision that this will be my final Creative product. For listening with headphones I can recommend the FiiO E07K 'Andes' warmly, it cannot record, nor does it feature digital in- and outputs, yet it´s impeccably neutral and able to power low impedance headphones competently.


Latest update: 11.01.2013
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

The Socials