# Opera Blu-Ray CD Audio - Worth It?



## adriesba (Dec 30, 2019)

Alright, this is something I've been wanting to get for a long time:

View attachment 133267


My question is, is the blu-ray audio release worth getting?

View attachment 133268


Some of these blu-ray discs can get quite expensive. This particular album isn't too bad though price-wise. But will I hear the difference in the audio? Assuming I have a blu-ray player and good but not ultra-high-end equipment, is the blu-ray audio that much better?

Also, with this album in particular, are the regular CDs remastered also, or is it just the blu-ray? I have the blu-ray release of the Solti _Tannhäuser _on Decca. It specifies that the CDs are remastered also, but this DG release does not specify this on the back of the case. I don't think I've done a really good comparison with my blu-ray discs that I have for one thing.


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

Yes, I think it is worth it. The Blu-Ray audio is noticebly better than the CD version (you get both on the second set above). Also note that the CDs have been remastered and so even the CDs in the second set are better than the first.

If you don't have the recording it is worth getting the remastered CD/blu-ray version.

N.


----------



## adriesba (Dec 30, 2019)

The Conte said:


> Yes, I think it is worth it. The Blu-Ray audio is noticebly better than the CD version (you get both on the second set above). Also note that the CDs have been remastered and so even the CDs in the second set are better than the first.
> 
> If you don't have the recording it is worth getting the remastered CD/blu-ray version.
> 
> N.


One reviewer on Amazon didn't seem to think the set was remastered at all from the previous release. Others seemed enthusiastic but didn't say much about the remastering, at least from what I saw. I don't have the recording at all, so I don't have anything to compare to.


----------



## adriesba (Dec 30, 2019)

Here is the review I was referring to. He talks about some stuff I don't understand, but he doesn't think that the set was remastered, and he also doesn't think the blu-ray audio makes a difference. Is he correct? Could anyone explain what the stuff he is talking about means? It might also be helpful to read the comments on the review.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-...ef=cm_cr_dp_d_rvw_ttl?ie=UTF8&ASIN=B06XH6J98K


----------



## annaw (May 4, 2019)

(Nevermind this, didn't see the last post)


----------



## adriesba (Dec 30, 2019)

Maybe I could ask the members over on the HIFI section.


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

adriesba said:


> One reviewer on Amazon didn't seem to think the set was remastered at all from the previous release. Others seemed enthusiastic but didn't say much about the remastering, at least from what I saw. I don't have the recording at all, so I don't have anything to compare to.


I haven't read the review yet, but the reviewer is wrong. The set was definitely remastered, I compared the previous CD release with first the new CD remaster and then the Blu-ray. There is a difference in sound quality between the previous CD (your first set) and the new remaster and then the Blu-ray has even greater clarity and detail than the new CD remaster.

N.


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

adriesba said:


> Here is the review I was referring to. He talks about some stuff I don't understand, but he doesn't think that the set was remastered, and he also doesn't think the blu-ray audio makes a difference. Is he correct? Could anyone explain what the stuff he is talking about means? It might also be helpful to read the comments on the review.
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-...ef=cm_cr_dp_d_rvw_ttl?ie=UTF8&ASIN=B06XH6J98K


I don't fully understand the technical 24bit/16bit he mentions. It supposedly means that you can hear more detail when a recording is made in 24bit rather than 16. However, what isn't clear is if converting to 24bit from 16 when the recording was made in 16 works. I don't know. I compare recordings and go with what sounds better to my ear. Sometimes I disagree with others about the sound quality of different editions of the same recording and usually they have a vested interest (they work or are associated with a particular label).

N.


----------



## DarkAngel (Aug 11, 2010)

adriesba said:


> Here is the review I was referring to. He talks about some stuff I don't understand, but he doesn't think that the set was remastered, and he also doesn't think the blu-ray audio makes a difference. Is he correct? Could anyone explain what the stuff he is talking about means? It might also be helpful to read the comments on the review.
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-...ef=cm_cr_dp_d_rvw_ttl?ie=UTF8&ASIN=B06XH6J98K


Two disc playback formats included in this series of releases, CD & Blu Ray audio.....

CD audio format by design can only play back 16/44 resolution data stream, even if master is higher resolution it must be down sampled to 16/44 to play on CD player......keep in mind 16/44 is over 3X more data than highest 320 mp3 stream

Blu Ray audio format by design can play higher 24/96 resolution over 3x more data than CD, must play on blu ray capable disc player

Many people take advantage 24/96 and higher resolutions by using streaming services (tidal, Amazon HD etc) that do not use a disc player and instead send data stream directly to a DAC for decoding and pass on to your music system

*****************************************************

You must carefully check this blu ray/CD series, the CD discs sometimes use previous remaster, and sometimes a new remaster was made just for this series, expanded deluxe booklet is very nice.....obviously diminishing returns come to play and many people would be hard pressed to hear difference between 16/44 and 24/96 music resolution (also qulaity of audio gear also comes into play)


----------



## adriesba (Dec 30, 2019)

There is also a CD release with this cover:

View attachment 133403


I assume the "Originals" release in my first post is the newer one and remastered.


----------



## adriesba (Dec 30, 2019)

OK. So, I think this is the first CD release, which was issued in 1988 and was not remastered:

View attachment 133404


This is the 1997 CD release which was remastered:

View attachment 133405


Now if you look closely at the back of the blu-ray release, it says "Remastering (P) 2017":

View attachment 133406


The reviewer says that in the booklet for the blu-ray release it says remastering (C) 1997 and that this means it is using the 1997 remaster. He seems to think that it would have to say remastering (C) 2017 instead of (P) 2017 in order for this to be a new remastering. Is that true?

Also, I just want to clarify, when people say that the new (2017) CDs sound better, do they mean they sound better than the 1988 CD release (first picture in this post) or better than the 1997 "Originals" release (second picture in this post)?


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

adriesba said:


> OK. So, I think this is the first CD release, which was issued in 1988 and was not remastered:
> 
> View attachment 133404
> 
> ...


Yes, that is correct, that is what the reviewer is saying. When I say the new 2017 CDs sound better, they sound better than the 1997 remaster. I've never heard the 1988 CD release.

N.


----------



## adriesba (Dec 30, 2019)

The Conte said:


> Yes, that is correct, that is what the reviewer is saying. When I say the new 2017 CDs sound better, they sound better than the 1997 remaster. I've never heard the 1988 CD release.
> 
> N.


So the booklet says (C) 1997? How can it be remastered then?


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

adriesba said:


> So the booklet says (C) 1997? How can it be remastered then?


On the back of the set I have it says, "Remastering (P) 2017" Inside the booklet there is a copyright notice for 1997, however it isn't clear what that refers to. (Next to it is another notice that says, "(C) 1966 Wieland Wagner" and will refer to the production at Bayreuth (because of the photo on the front of the set?)

In any case whether remastered or not I found the sound quality to be somewhat improved over the 1997 release, so perhaps the discs are a better pressing.

N.


----------



## adriesba (Dec 30, 2019)

I assume the (C) 1966 is because of the production picture. But it seems rather vague. Perhaps there is a difference in sound that is because of some other factors besides the remastering. I don't know. But, since you say they sound better and other reviewers on Amazon seem to think so also, I wonder if the one reviewer just doesn't have the ears to hear the difference. There were not many people (at least that I saw) that shared his opinion.


----------



## DarkAngel (Aug 11, 2010)

adriesba said:


> The reviewer says that in the booklet for the blu-ray release it says remastering (C) 1997 and that this means it is using the 1997 remaster. He seems to think that it would have to say remastering (C) 2017 instead of (P) 2017 in order for this to be a new remastering. Is that true?
> 
> Also, I just want to clarify, when people say that the new (2017) CDs sound better, do they mean they sound better than the 1988 CD release (first picture in this post) or better than the 1997 "Originals" release (second picture in this post)?


*I have this Tristan CD/Blu ray set......*
There is nowhere in the booklet or in small print on the physical CD that says it is the 1997 originals remaster, but you can assume that if it was was not a new remaster just done for this blu ray set company will use newest prior CD remaster........

I am pretty sure this Bohm DG Tristan set uses prior remaster for CD, and 2017 remaster refers to blu ray audio disc only, DG should not use misleading cover headlines which average person would read and assume CDs are new remasters (I plead guilty but know better now)

This is what you would see if CDs had new remaster along with blu ray (under gold seal)......


----------



## adriesba (Dec 30, 2019)

DarkAngel said:


> *I have this Tristan CD/Blu ray set......*
> There is nowhere in the booklet or in small print on the physical CD that says it is the 1997 originals remaster, but you can assume that if it was was not a new remaster just done for this blu ray set company will use newest prior CD remaster........
> 
> I am pretty sure this Bohm DG Tristan set uses prior remaster for CD, and 2017 remaster refers to blu ray audio disc only, this is what you would see if CDs had new remaster along with blu ray (under gold seal)......
> ...


I see what you mean. I have the blu-ray Solti _Tannhäuser _set and it shows it the same way as on that picture of the _Elektra _set. That's why I was confused. Those two are both Decca while the _Tristan und Isolde _is Deutsche Grammophon. I thought the reviewer said either in the review or in the review comments that Deutsche Grammophon just wasn't as good at telling what they did as Decca was. But I don't see how that's the case since they are both owned by Universal and have the same style packaging or whatnot. I'm thinking the reviewer just might not have the ears to hear differences.


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

adriesba said:


> I see what you mean. I have the blu-ray Solti _Tannhäuser _set and it shows it the same way as on that picture of the _Elektra _set. That's why I was confused. Those two are both Decca while the _Tristan und Isolde _is Deutsche Grammophon. I thought the reviewer said either in the review or in the review comments that Deutsche Grammophon just wasn't as good at telling what they did as Decca was. But I don't see how that's the case since they are both owned by Universal and have the same style packaging or whatnot. I'm thinking the reviewer just might not have the ears to hear differences.


That may well be the case. It's basically my word against his. Are both sets available where you are? Is there a huge difference in price, if not, then I would get the newer set.

N.


----------



## adriesba (Dec 30, 2019)

The Conte said:


> That may well be the case. It's basically my word against his. Are both sets available where you are? Is there a huge difference in price, if not, then I would get the newer set.
> 
> N.


Yes, both are available for me. The blu-ray release would cost about three times as much as what I can get the 1997 release for, but, compared to other blu-ray audio releases, this one is actually a good price.


----------

