Ultimate HiQuality CD plus K2 HD Pro Mastering Anyone?

[pablolie]

I just got three collectionist CDs from Japan, and they all proudly declare that technology (see attached).

I never heard of this stuff, and they sound like normal CDs to me... I have found the usual hype on the net, but any opinions in this forum?

 

[Timcognito]

I used to collect these but what I found is that most started with some very well recorded music and use of the masters so they are bound to sound good and usually do. Weather they are better than the first addition, well many are from the pre-digital era, so maybe represent the best digital version. They still command a premium price on ebay. There always is the "ones and zeros" argument. I have come to believe quality starts at the front end and there very little to do to enhance it on the backend.

 

[Timcognito]

History of K2 | JVCKENWOOD Corporation

www.jvckenwood.com

K2 HD Music - Positive Feedback

Lawrence Listens to Some K2 HD Music

positive-feedback.com

High Fidelity

www.highfidelity.pl

 

[GXAlan]

The old K2 mastering was about burning more precise quality pits by having jitter reduction, which theoretically made it easier for CDs to play.

The current K2 mastering is SOTA for physical CDs.

K2HD MASTERING+(Plus)SERIES ｜ FLAIR

Project of Producing Advanced AudioCD Developed By FLAIR

victorstudio.jp

K2HD tries to add extra detail based upon machine learning to remaster old recordings to high res for distribution digitally.

K2HD PRO MASTERING ｜ FLAIR

Highly-Advanced Mastering Technology Developed By FLAIR

victorstudio.jp

This is a bit less clear in value although I do like Sony’s version of DSEE HX AI which is based upon comparing high res masters to 16/44 as a training dataset and then applying it to 16/44 content with no high res master.

Victor Flair has SOTA audio rooms. They were early adopters of Genelec.

KAZUSHIGE YAMAZAKI ｜ ENGINEERS ｜ FLAIR

victorstudio.jp

 

[ＪｎＬ]

Interesting...

 

[tmtomh]

As noted above, K2HD is about manufacturing a good-quality glass master. UHQCD is similar except for the end-product CDs themselves: some kind of polymer that's said to result in a more optically sharp and precise play side than the conventional polycarbonate coating.

I'm all for high-quality precision manufacturing of CDs, but it's still digital audio so if you have a non-K2, non UHQR version of the same CD, made from the same original digital source, it's going to sound identical to the K2/UHQCD version as long as the regular CD has no actual manufacturing/pressing defects.

 

[DWPress]

We used to collect Japanese vinyl releases because of better pressings. I've no clue how this could improve CD playability - the ones I purchased new in 1985 still play fine. Though they were ripped to a HD quite awhile ago they had a lot of rough use early on and then later in cars....

 

[GXAlan]

I'm all for high-quality precision manufacturing of CDs, but it's still digital audio so if you have a non-K2, non UHQR version of the same CD, made from the same original digital source, it's going to sound identical to the K2/UHQCD version as long as the regular CD has no actual manufacturing/pressing defects.

Bolded because this is one of the reasons why XRCD32 is different. An XRCD CD might have the same original DIGITAL source (at the recording/final master level) but XRCD has its own different algorithm for dithering and noise-shaping down to 16/44. Different doesn't always equal better -- but it does explain why a rip of a XRCD disc MIGHT be different than a rip of a non-XRCD disc.

Of course, a bit-perfect rip of the XRCD disc will sound identical when played on the disc or as a file. But the only way to have a legal rip of an XRCD disc is to own the physical media…

Korg AudioGate software has a few different dithering options as well. The Marantz SA-10 also has a few different noise shaping and dithering options.

 

[tmtomh]

Bolded because this is one of the reasons why XRCD32 is different. An XRCD CD might have the same original DIGITAL source (at the recording/final master level) but XRCD has its own different algorithm for dithering and noise-shaping down to 16/44. Different doesn't always equal better -- but it does explain why a rip of a XRCD disc MIGHT be different than a rip of a non-XRCD disc.

Of course, a bit-perfect rip of the XRCD disc will sound identical when played on the disc or as a file. But the only way to have a legal rip of an XRCD disc is to own the physical media…

Korg AudioGate software has a few different dithering options as well. The Marantz SA-10 also has a few different noise shaping and dithering options.

Understood - I was talking about K2, not XRCD. But yes, XRCD is a dithering and noise-shaping system - and I believe also a downsampling algorithm too. It's analogous to Sony's Super Bit Mapping. But K2 is to my knowledge a hardware process about manufacturing the glass master, not a software process about creating the redbook digital source file.

 

[GXAlan]

Understood - I was talking about K2, not XRCD. But yes, XRCD is a dithering and noise-shaping system - and I believe also a downsampling algorithm too. It's analogous to Sony's Super Bit Mapping. But K2 is to my knowledge a hardware process about manufacturing the glass master, not a software process about creating the redbook digital source file.

It’s tricky. K2 is the jitter reduction tech. XRCD is label that CDs mastered using the K2 process were called.

K2 TECHNOLOGY | JVCKENWOOD Corporation

www.jvckenwood.com

The only K2 DACs I know of are the Reimyo stuff and the vintage JVC AVRs, with the THX Ultra models being the flagship. (RX-DP10/15/20).