Intrada Soundtrack Forum

I know that the Sony Classical release of this score was said to be the entire score to Dances with Wolves, but I don't think it was. I recently watched the extended version of the film and I know I heard some music in that version that wasn't on the soundtrack release. While the expanded soundtrack is very nice and beautiful, a release of John Barry's entire score including that which is heard in the extended version of the film would be great.

After seeing the extended version of the movie recently again, these there were my thoughts exactly! With the 25th anniversary of the score coming up in a few months, a release of the complete score (which would require a double set) would be extremely welcome. The one thing I miss about the 2004 Legacy expanded version, is that it was mastered in HDCD. (Anyone with a player incorporating a HDCD decoder, would realize the sonic splendour this entails.) Sadly a complete release won't be mastered in HDCD! (I doubt Sony will want to issue yet another edition, so it's over to the specialists.)

HDCD in and of itself does not enhance quality to a big degree. I spoke with one of the Microsoft employees who worked on the technology about it and he said that it really turned out to be not much more than marketing, and that the reconstruction of 20-bit resolution is not at all a big deal.

In fact, that Dances with Wolves release, while flagged with HDCD, does not even utilize much of HDCD's features (peak extension, low level expansion, etc.). The reason it sounds very good is because it's a quality recording and the mastering team did a fantastic job, and there is the placebo effect. Those who master in HDCD tend to put utmost care into the mastering stage.

You are mistaken, my friend. Silva Screen remastered quite a few of their earlier recordings in HDCD. In every case I've been able to compare with the earlier version, the sonics are vastly better. You are totally wrong about the Legacy expanded edition of DANCES WITH WOLVES: sonically it far surpasses the original Epic editions from the early '90's. If you don't have playback equipment with the HDCD decoder, you're not going to hear what HDCD is capable of. (And why would Reference Recordings, noted for their superior sonics, embrace HDCD if there was scarcely any difference?)

I am not at all mistaken, friendo, and neither is the Microsoft employee who actually worked on the technology after the company bought it for marketing purposes. But, you are entitled to your opinion.

I can tell you first hand that Dances with Wolves merely utilizes simple transient and dithering filters and nothing else was done with the HDCD encoding. You can do the analysis yourself with simple software like the HDCD plug-in for foobar2000.

Not all HDCD masterings are the same. The only ones with real differences, rather than thought of through blind faith and ill-conceived tests, are the ones that at least utilize the peak extend and low level expansion features for increased dynamic range.

I am well aware that Silva had long used HDCD and I have done comparisons myself. I also have many high quality recordings from other labels that are HDCD encoded, and I have had HDCD equipment for many years, mostly Denon gear.

Please, I don't need technology to tell me if a recording sounds better. My ears are adequate for that purpose. Placebo effect? It's clear Microsoft had no interest in the technology once they acquired. Why don't you ask Thomas Newman if HDCD is a fraud, because he insisted that every recording issued from his scores between 1996 and 2004 be mastered in this technology.

He and co-producer Bill Bernstein went for what had prestige at the time. It was a selling point for many "audiophiles" because of the hype created by other good marketing teams.

Some of Newman's albums, such as The Horse Whisperer, Oscar and Lucinda and Up Close & Personal if I remember correctly, actually use the meaningful peak extend feature.

HDCD was mostly a way to sell people on something "better than CD," and it technically was (mastering has advanced greatly in the past decade with things like Pro Tools) when its meaningful features were actually used for proper near 20-bit resolution. True 24-bit (as was used for DVD-Audio and now for Blu-ray Audio/downloads) stomps HDCD in quality capabilities. True 24-bit offers the increased resolution without HDCD's dithering filters which add noise within the audible band.

A lot of people, mostly those with 70-year-old ears that can't even hear frequencies above 9 KHz due to years of loud listening, do worthless, non-blinded tests and tell themselves there's a huge difference simply because the HDCD light comes on. No surprise that we see more of this, though, given the current state of affairs in our society.

Doug Fake could easily master his albums in HDCD now that the outmoded Model Two processor and its licensing has been dirt cheap, but he surely knows that today's mastering methods for normal 16-bit CD delivery surpasses that relic from the 90s.

You can be as patronizing as you like about HDCD (and I'm not 70 years old). Since I'm a notoriously non-technical person, I cannot comment on your assertions. Please note it's estimated that between 3,000 and 4,000 titles were allegedly mastered in HDCD. I haven't heard all of them. But what I have heard on my equipment clearly presents a different aural reality: a greater separation, more precise tonal detail especially at pianissimo levels, and more "air" around the instruments, and better attack. This doesn't mean that CDs not mastered in HDCD are worthless (and I don't recall suggesting that). But let me put this proposition to members: if any own the 4 disc anthology THE MUSIC OF JOHN WILLIAMS: 40 YEARS OF FILM MUSIC from 2003 (released by Silva Screen through its offshoot label Prime Time), please let me know if you can hear any differences between some of the tracks. Although this was packaged as HDCD, this was misleading, as quite a few of the tracks are not mastered as such. I can hear the difference, and I'm not imagining it. I listen at fairly uninhibited levels. My equipment may not be the best around (Threshold FET 10 hl pre-amp, Theatra DS Pro Progeny digital signal processor, Music Labs monoblock power amp and Rotel RCD 1072 CD player) but it certainly delivers what I expect from music. And as superb as the Tadlow CD of EL CID from 2008 was, it still would have sounded even better if James Fitzpatrick had not abandoned HDCD after his release of THE PRIVATE LIFE OF SHERLOCK HOLMES. We can go on indefinitely about this, you are not going to change my mind.

I did not mean to patronize you personally, though I can certainly see how one would feel that way after re-reading my post. My comment was more about what I see from certain "audiophiles" who do things like buy $10,000 cables because they think there's a marked difference.

I as well have noticed that some Silva albums have tracks with HDCD and others without. Anyone doing comparisons should note that there will be up to about a 6dB difference in volume if those HDCD tracks use the peak extend feature. Aside from the fact that they are different tracks and different recordings, a comparison must compensate for that volume difference if the feature is used. To further complicate matters, some tracks might have different gain offsets triggered for the HDCD decoder.

The last processor that mastering engineers used to encode in HDCD is the Pacific Microsonics Model Two that I mentioned earlier, and its A/D converters and filters are long in the tooth when compared to what's available today. Transfers and editing can now be done entirely in the 32-bit domain, and dithering down to 16-bit CD quality is much more accurate with an abundance of ultra high quality filters to choose from. Modern algorithms and computer processing power far exceed the DSPs in that HDCD encoding hardware. Less resolution is lost in the process and the waveforms of the final product can easily be as true to the source as possible.

But, enough technical talk and happy listening. It is ultimately about simply enjoying the music. I happened to listen to the Silva HDCD of The A-Team recording earlier today.

Thanks for the conciliatory note. I'm prepared to accept your technical explanations but my subjective response to HDCD remains undiminished. It should be remembered that HDCD would not have improved by very much the sonics of Intrada's complete score edition of THE DEEP. While not quite as disappointing I was very frustrated by the recent complete edition of THE BLACK HOLE. (And I say this without glee; Intrada almost always delivers the goods.) On my system I personally can hear very little difference between the much vaunted K2 HD process and previous editions (although I admit my point of comparison has been the Brubeck TIME OUT and the Miles Davis KIND OF BLUE, which were previously brought out by Legacy). If there is a complete edition of DANCES WITH WOLVES (and assuming it has a similar high quality source as the 2004 Legacy version) I'm sure it will sound superb even without HDCD. I should also mention that I use an audio expander which supposedly decompresses the signal. This may sound like voodoo hi-fi, and it was sold to me by a free-lance technician in Sydney. Whether it's valid or not, it makes an extraordinary difference with playback. Anyone wishing to contact this individual can try dddes@bigpond.com . (His name is Des, but after 10 years I wouldn't be surprised if he can't be contacted at this address.) Sonically one of the most disappointing re-recordings I've heard is for Morricone's DANGER: DIABOLIK.

One of my favorite score!!

Another dream sees the light of day! Thank you La-La Land, with a total playing time of 140 minutes. And what marvellous cover art!