SHM-CD Vs Regular CD Experiment, Which Sounds Best

[@ratspam7655]

Very useful video, thank you but while we can’t listen to the audio for ourselves I think the conclusion has to be the following: 1) bit are bits and have been since the inception of the CD and the Red Book Spec. If the bits are the same, the same player will output the exact same audio. 2) Any SHM CD that sounds different is a result of the mix being different and bits being different. Audacity won’t show the differences: only a hex editor will.

[@stevenkoski228]

I’m a 66yr old audiophile, & heard/bought a few of each types of CDs, each being heralded as the best digital technology available. I listen to rock, fusion & jazz, & through time have bought their remastered versions, but the format wasn’t changed. Remasters discs have portions that have better balance & focus at times, but no recognizable improvement in clarity. SHM was developed by JVC, & are only exclusively released by them. They’re also remastered by their brilliant engineers, who unlike Steve Wilson will remain unknown to most of us. Unlike HDCD & SACD which require a dedicated player, SHM plays on a standard one. When I first heard my SHM CD I could immediately notice the improvements, the veil of earlier versions was eliminated, the clarity was most obvious. The best part was how the engineers corrected/eliminated every issue I had with earlier versions. I was hearing nuances I never heard before, being clearly defined. In the end I was Gobsmacked! Prices have dropped recently, enough to where even non-HiFi types can enjoy their favorites, & will certainly hear the improvements.

[@rocker11281]

Then the benefit comes from the remastering, not from the format. SHM is only better for jitter correction. You will only have problems with that by using a very cheap or an extrernal DAC. Most audiophiles use external DACs, so they have to eliminate failure caused by their improvement by using very read stable discs. It's close to snake oil. If there is the same mastering on a normal CD and SHM-CD you will get the same out of files ripped from that CDs. Else just use a good CD-Player with an good internal DAC (e.G. Yamaha Natural Sound) to get good and fast jitter correction on normal CDs.

[@tarkus9633]

@@rocker11281 i did a bit a different job than Andrew shows us about 2 years ago;. i compared ripped shm-flac posted tracks on usenet with the original cd's in my collection plus the ones which were earlier posted as non SHM remasters. my experience was that the SHM CDs were clearly better. Now that I read your comment I'm starting to doubt whether these SHM CDs were remasters or not. I can't get back to that specific moment when i compared them. Then the question automatically pops up:: are SHM CDs usually inherently remasters especially when theses are older releases. The McCartney's Andrew shows us are new cd's (so ofc non-remasters)

[@astrosjer822]

The Japanese still support physical media more than UK or US fans. That is sad. SHM-CD’s have been claimed by the Japanese to be superior quality for years. US record companies never gave the format a chance 😢

[@markplank5929]

You answered my questions concerning this, very educational. ( I am awaiting a copy from a friend that lives in Japan).

[@alan4441]

Great comparison Andrew. Thanks 🙏

[@canadianflyguy]

GREAT DYLAN SHIRT! LOVE IT!

[@marcdavis8842]

SHM's totaly come into their own with much older recordings. I have a fairly large amount of Japanese CD Pressings and in general majority of the time they trump their standard commercial counterparts. I have Jethro Tull, Ten Years After, Rolling Stones, Small Faces, The Beatles, Queen, King Crimson they all in my opinion sound far better sonic wise. Not to mention the Japanese Pressings both CD and Vinyl their packaging is dead drop gorgeous.

[@LorenzoNW]

Have you tried Auric Illuminator on your CDs?

[@yolielin4143]

The packaging and extras are simply gorgeous and worth the $$!

[@davestryjak6042]

Totally agree with you one of the stand outs for me is Led Zeppelin's Physical Graffiti sounds great on SHM

[@rocker11281]

It's in the mastering, not in the material of the CD. I have som DCC Gold Masters, which are on normal CDs and they sound georgous. It's because they're mastered with high dynamics.

[@rocker11281]

@@LorenzoNW Now you're digging deep into that snake oil rabbit hole. 😀

[@dalewilliams8001]

Thank you for this info, Andrew Dixon. It is something I've been wondering about.

[@PeKe999]

Hi Andrew, Totally agree with your rating. It goes for a lot of SHM-Cd's. In general they have a warmer sound. The difference is better audible on Egypt Sation. Take care, stay safe, Ps Deep Deep Feeling is on it's way being the song I like most on III.

[@AndrewDixonMusic]

Cheers Pe, I didn't get the Egypt Station SHM, I think I'm right in remembering it didn't have bonus tracks (or certainly not any I didn't get elsewhere) which must be why I didn't get it. I tend to be vinyl only for ES anyway, sounds great on a bit of black plastic!

[@professorabronsius]

Very nice comparison! Muchas gracias from Chile 🇨🇱

[@TheNorliss]

Good vid, mate. You've reached the exact conclusion that I expected i.e. that the improved construction of the SHM helps in the real-time playback of a CD player but is basically to no advantage when you're doing a proper bit-perfect rip in EAC or dBpoweramp.

[@AndrewDixonMusic]

That's a good way of saying it, probably better than how I put it!

[@cartoonworld1000]

The only thing that makes the difference for when you're ripping is the mastering and if the remaster is really good or if they just reissue a previously released album without remastering.

[@jasontheoldmillennial7197]

Interesting experiment.

[@milesv5352]

You’re right, With most consumer grade stereos, you probably won’t hear a difference. Once you get into better hi-fi, you will.

[@pepparchips7609]

Thanks for this video. I will order the Japan CD too, also the bonus tracks is a plus .

[@spiritualarchitect4276]

That "McCartney 3" cover shows that Paul is STILL playing the "Paul is Dead" gimmick. Look at that album cover @0:10. What you see is a DIE. Your are NOT looking at a DICE. It takes 2 DIE to make Dice. But there are not 2, only one. And the DIE does not show the number 4. So symbolically that cover reads "McCartney DIE", with 3 black spots for the other 3 Beatles. It's the most OBVIOUS "Paul is Dead" cover since "Anthology 3". On the "Let It Be" cover - released AFTER the Manson murders exposed the "Paul is Dead" scenario - Paul is the one who looks different. Paul is the only one not surrounded by white. Paul is surrounded by brown (dirt), because Paul is the one who is supposed to be dead. On "Anthology 3", that same Paul photo is stripped away to reveal the younger, original Paul, the one that was supposed to have died. "Anthology 3" from 1996 and "McCartney 3" from 2020 prove that Paul is the one promoting the "Paul Is Dead" hoax.

[@robintownrobintown]

And just as you upload a video, your package arrives at my door!

[@AndrewDixonMusic]

Wow, posted on Christmas Eve!

[@hope76]

I love the cd

[@strose2002]

Enjoyed the video. Usually buy the SHM pressing, plus it had the bonus tracks. I'm at the age that if there's a sonund difference, it's my ears!

[@Peter56Persson]

Great video, very interesting Thank You!

[@NoMoreHeroesPunkPostPunk]

Thanks, Andrew. I also use the same two programs that you mentioned in this video. Good job, Sir!

[@elvisjordan5137]

I started in the Radio industry & as a Pro musician in 1985 & already into audiophile recording equipment constantly aspiring to perfection in music reproduction even prior to the initial introduction of CDs in the mid 80's in which I was 1 of the 1st to debut on Radio Stations. At that time cassette tapes were far more popular than LPs which I absolutely hated bcuz the sound quality was inferior on those prerecorded cassettes. I did my own transfers of virgin LPs straight to High Bias or Metal Cassettes with Dolby or to Reel to Reel at highest speed which was even yet far superior. When CDs 1st emerged & near impossible to find anywhere I was super excited due to the hype in ALL Stereo/Audiophile mags. I imm did a side by side comparison of same CDs to vinyl...& was blown away! Blown away that the supposed superior CDs were absolute CRAP compared to my same vinyl LPs! This was NOT supposed to be true bcuz on paper & in 100% of the mags then they told me CDs were SO MUCH better quality! I told everyone I knew at the time non of which had CDs yet that this supposed New technology was total CRAP! So...it took 3 decades to be redeemed FINALLY that I indeed was CORRECT way back in the 80's!lol Since then I've never stopped searching for perfection in the sound of Music. I'm no longer always as up to date on technology now...but I did occasionally by accident several yrs ago buy SHM-CDs not even knowing what they were at 1st. In fact...originally I thought they were simply Japanese bootlegs in the beginning.lol But...just like in the mid 1980's my ears did NOT lie! Not even knowing what SHM meant I immediately could HEAR improved sound reproduction! I have bought several different Artists & genres & ALL the SHM-CDs have sounded better than their standard equivalent CDs. I especially noticed bass frequencies seem fuller & more natural as do the high frequencies. I would say it sounds warmer, much more natural & less shrill. It's like comparing chocolates. U might think it's all the same...but put expensive chocolates next to a Hershey bar & compare...& U immediately taste a HUGE difference!! The expensive premium chocolate blows away the cheap stuff! My pt is ur ears will NEVER lie to U just like ur taste buds won't either! No matter what is written on paper....ur ears or eyes (in video) will ALWAYS be the TRUE test! High quality headphones or speakers of course as always just like ur HD TV will reveal the differences. I'm always a skeptic in everything. In this case I can say SHM-CDs do improve sound quality. So there's a professional opinion from a life-long Musician & Radio Broadcaster.

[@AndrewDixonMusic]

Thank you, that was an interesting read! When I read the start that you were an expert in the industry, I thought "oh no, he's going to rip me to shreds here!" so I was relieved to be vindicated by the end :-)

[@ingarchris]

Thanks Elvis, SHM-CD and Blu-spec CD2 (Japan) perfect for me :^)

[@masterbluesrockguitar4966]

Hi, I'm a mixing and mastering engineer and I want to say that a digital print on a cd is exactly the same as the mastered version before printing. There are ways to test that and actually it is what we expect from the printing factory. Now with Japanese SHM versions I have had an experience with the Steely Dan remasters some time ago and I would swear that there was some reverb added to them. At least this is how I would reach such a result. This would also agree with the "openess" in the sound that you describe. Does anybody know if there is some slight tinkering with the sound in these versions because a different coating as they claim shouldn't affect an otherwise perfect copy of what the artist, the producer and all the other engineers struggled to achieve. Thank you very much

[@AndrewDixonMusic]

Hi, I'm pretty sure that in this particular case there has been no tinkering, otherwise my test to find differences in the digital info between the 2 files wouldn't have returned zero differences, as the reverb would surely have altered the 1s and 0s in the data? There may well be other releases though where it is the case that some kind of effect has been applied to a version, of course like what happened with The Beatles US albums in the 60s where plenty of reverb was added.

[@masterbluesrockguitar4966]

@@AndrewDixonMusic So, what you are saying is that the files when ripped are exactly the same but when played back, the coating enables the cd player to read and playback the info slightly better. One way to make sure that the digital ripped files are indeed the same is to flip the phase on one of the two when they are perfectly aligned one under the other on your computer. If they are the same, the flipped phase cancels any sound coming out of the speakers. Complete silence, no sound at all. As to how files "look" or measured as information is not proof that they are identical. A wav file of complete silence measures the same information as a file with music of the same length. And if there has been very little tinkering, the files would for sure look identical. So, to be perfectly sure they are identical, you should do this null test of phase inverting, but beware: "perfectly aligned" is the key phrase here. Different prints can move the file back and forth fraction of a milisecond. So, you have to zoom in and move the file accordingly. I admire your dedication of doing an auditory test and a video for that. My point is if it is ethical of further tinkering with the sound further on (if they are indeed doing that). But I'm guessing that this is the case because over the years these prints have earned their dedicated market. Also, different coating on the cd should mean less errors during playback and better preservation through time, not "better" sound. In my mind, the only question is wether they have authorisation to do that or not. I don't know anything about the Beatles albums in the 60's but back then, mastering was a completely different thing. Thank you for the conversation!

[@AndrewDixonMusic]

@@masterbluesrockguitar4966 Thanks for the detailed reply. Just to confirm, in my test I did as you suggest, I imported both files to Audacity, used "invert" on one of them which I believe switches the phase, then did a mix and render of the 2 tracks, and the files combined cancelled each other out to leave zero data.

[@Songwritersbehindthecurtain]

Music 🎼 🎵 🎶 question 🙋‍♂️ I bought foo fighters there is nothing left to lose album and the back cover says 3:58 on the back cover of the album but when I put it on my mom’s cd 💿 player it shows 3:55 are full second and half second are the same or are they different from each other and which runtime do you think 💭 that is correctly based upon runtime and are both runtime that I mentioned count?

[@mrpeterson81]

Interesting result - who knew?! I gave up on CDs and went to 24-bit files, and now SACD, but i'm finding i'm now buying SHM-CDs just to get physical copies of some classical content - thankfully Japan and Korea is keeping the physical audio media market alive despite where streaming takes the mainstream. I'm guessing your Blu-ray is plugged into that DAC below, but a high end transport may give a different result again?

[@cheng96818]

I believe theres differences between japanese, american, german or other cd’s or vinyl pressings. The only difference is, you can probably tell if you have an awesome high end stereo system. Also maybe if you have a good set of ears. But no difference if you have a standard audio home equipment

[@briancampbell7712]

Hi my friend...great review that is spot on for what is becoming more and more relevant...the re-popularity of CD's is growing more and more... the story especially for myself because I'm now using a Denon dvd sacd SX1 limited cd player...was only sold inside Japan...so I'm going stupid learning more and more of the original vs shm, mf, sacd and many other Japanese mastered copies...it takes an education...and this is becoming the new money making industry... we need to educate ourselves to obtain the best quality sound and not waste money...from my experience, I find many originals sounding better than all these high price different and newer formats of SACD & SHM, MF and many others... i'm sure that there's some of the more expensive versions may be better than some originals but not in all cases

[@trupax2210]

Useful!

[@WOA76]

thank you very much not only do you have cool Beatles ralted stufff I lrean something I been wondering about for ages Thank you so much

[@WeepingRichard]

Wow! I live in Japan and I prefer the imported versions because the booklets are in English. (And design too). But I think I should try and buy the Japanese one I guess. It also has bonus tracks! Thanks for another great video!

[@gaia5761]

and don’t forget about the calendar 😍

[@cartoonworld1000]

Bro if I was living in Japan, I'd buy all the Japanese release versions of albums. I also love that obi strip, it's so aesthetically pleasing

[@yolielin4143]

@@cartoonworld1000 Me too. I always try to score the Japanese version, because of the obi, which is designed as an integral part of the album. Plus the lyrics booklet, sometimes the American version doesn't even have!!

[@crazy4beatles]

Finally, I've always wondered about this. A potential follow-up video. Maybe compare the two versions from a CD released 10-15 years ago? I'm assuming the other pro of the japanese version is that the materials hold up better, but is any loss in physical quality of the disc noticeable after 10-15 years?

[@AndrewDixonMusic]

If I ever happen to get hold of an old SHM CD I may well consider doing that!

[@michaellaverty1844]

Interesting 🤔 Nice Dylan shirt.

[@marianochvro]

Very nice and accurate review. However, the difference between the 2 materials are not poly vs aluminum. Both are poly but the SHM has a special formula which makes its injection to the mold more precise. Hence a CD player can read it better

[@alanbatty3825]

Interesting video, thank you for posting. I have about a hundred SHMCD's and have been buying them since about 2000 - obviously I would not have got so many if I didn't think them worth it. That said, your review is of a digitally recorded source, and SHMCD, great though it is, does less for new recordings than for old analogue master tapes. For example, of all the CD issues I have heard, which is a few, the SHMCD of the original "Band On The Run" album mix sounds best on SHMCD (in my view). Anyway - thank you for posting.

[@martinrobinson6587]

Hi andrew great video mate 👍. Where did you get the SHD CD from please do you have a link thanks martin.

[@AndrewDixonMusic]

Cheers Martin, here you go! www.cdjapan.co.jp/searches?term.media_format=&q=mccartney+iii

[@martinrobinson6587]

@@AndrewDixonMusic thanks andrew your a gentleman 👍

[@AndrewDixonMusic]

Looks like it no longer includes the poster/calendar (the bottom poster you'll see on my door in this video)

[@jefffan171]

This was a great experiment and well worth the thumbs up. Is there a video or beginner guide to using EAC? I've downloaded it but have yet to look at its functions for a exact FLAC rip of the disc. Outstanding work and I welcome your views on EAC

[@AndrewDixonMusic]

EAC is the best I've used, though I rip to ALAC rather than FLAC so my instructions won't be much use. I'm certain that Google will find plenty of matches for ripping EAC to FLAC

[@CoasterMan13Official]

Freac is pretty good if you wanna go the open source route

[@kianwelsh4451]

i only bought the japanese version because of the 4 bonus tracks, also do you think there will be a deluxe cd edition for McCartney 3 like there was for Egypt Station?

[@AndrewDixonMusic]

Not heard anything one way or the other on that so I think your guess is as good as mine at the moment! (and I don't see it as guaranteed)

[@billycain9890]

I bought three shm CDs Led Zeppelin kiss and AC DC I could tell the difference the shm CDs had a bit more clear sound and the bass lines you could hear a little clearer to. not a huge difference but enough difference to make it more enjoyable.

[@AndrewDixonMusic]

Were they the same masterings as the versions you were comparing to?

[@billycain9890]

@@AndrewDixonMusic I was comparing the shm CDs to the remastered CDs I guess the best way I will compare it is it's like watching a regular TV show on TV and then watching it in high definition TV which is slightly better.

[@BeatleJohn813]

Evening Andrew , It has just been announced that a 50th Anniversary half speed master of Paul Mccarthy Ram is been released on 14th May .

[@mikecronis]

There could be some sound engineering performed during the finalization stage of these SHMs, something to enhance it a tiny bit, or they're using master-tapes and remastering them using different equipment? Regardless, they're also using 50Hz in Japan and as a guitarist, I can attest Marshall Amps sound a bit better at 50Hz for various, nearly subliminal reasons.

[@CarlosRojasOficial]

I have a question: If I play an SHM-CD in my computer (just play to listen, not copy), will I get the benefit of the full sound as if I play it on a regular CD player?

[@stevebiesiada6338]

Andrew, Thank You this was very interesting I was wondering what the difference was, I ordered the Japanese cd , I’ll check it out when I get it, Andrew thank you , Your Friend , Steve

[@fwnfaa]

Nice video

[@hawkmoon369]

I have some shm cds and I can hear a clear difference which is a big improvement in bass soundstage mids highs also the shm can play at high volume, but I feel you will need a good system to get the best from shm ,I also done a blind test with 4 people and all picked the shm without knowing which was which.So I would buy shm over standard cd if it's available.

[@AndrewDixonMusic]

Interesting, thanks. Do you know for certain they're the same mastering as each other?

[@hawkmoon369]

@@AndrewDixonMusic I know they where done in Japan as far as I'm aware the mastering was remastered I must check but my system is naim 552 555ps cds3 300 power amp focal sopra 2 speakers so the system is very revealing but shm sound alot better without struggling to hear the difference.

[@rocker11281]

So the difference come from the remastering. My suggestion: Rip the SHM-CD with EAC, burn it to a CD-R as a standard Audio-CD and repeat the test. Onlyt this would be a solid base for the claims you made. SHM only means better coating and by that less errors when the laser reads the pits. Less jitter correction is needed and this is thought to improve the sound. Nothing more, nothing less.

[@TheProgrammerGuy]

HA! Who cares if it can "see" it "better"? First of all, if it couldn't 'see' it, it wouldn't play it all. The fact that it plays means it can see it. And it doesn't matter how 'well' it can see it - IT'S ONLY ONES AND ZEROS!! There's nothing more to see! If it costs more (and I'm sure it does) it is a waste of money.

[@verdeazul333]

I always rip my cd's and listen to the ripped copies, so it doesn't matter. And one of the benefits of ripping is that the program itself corrects whatever errors in the song, based on its database.

[@davidbryanbartlett4071]

Get your hands on Rickie Lee Jones Shm even blows the LP version Away / I have many Jazz Shm C.D.s & there are big difference also Toshiba BMG standard Japan c.d. is much better than American or Canadian c.d. / Of course it helps to have a very good c.d. - A.D. Transport as well.

[@BeatleJohn813]

Afternoon Andrew , how are you doing , I was wondering has there been a off the Ground archive collection release or not , something tells me there has ,but again I maybe wrong . I can't wait for an archive collection of both London Town & Back to the egg ,which I think will be next in line for a release . John

[@AndrewDixonMusic]

Hi John, No there hasn't been an archive of Off The Ground yet, I wonder if you're thinking of "The Complete Works" CD that came out in the 90s perhaps?

[@BeatleJohn813]

@@AndrewDixonMusic thanks for that confirmation that I have not missed out on off the Ground archive collection on vinyl , looking forward to when that comes , I have the the compleat works on Cd , I think it would be a fantastic idea at the end if the archive collection , that they put out a compleat archive collection box set , which I personally think would be a fantastic idea. John

[@kianwelsh4451]

Just Curious, What Do you use for editing?

[@AndrewDixonMusic]

VSDC, it does almost everything in the free version.

[@kianwelsh4451]

@@AndrewDixonMusic thanks, thinking of started videos. by the way ive just finished listening to your paul or nothing episode. really cool

[@MichHenr99]

This is so wrong. If there is any difference in the sound, it is NOT the same mix there is on them. A CD read ALL the data on the disc, and it will ALWAYS be the exact same 1s and 0s it read no matter which material you use. It is tecnically impossible for a CD to read it good or bad. I am educated in repairing CD players and knows exactly how it works and I am telling you all that this is impossible. He is either thinking that he is hearing something, or it is not the same mix put on those CDs. It is not because of the materials.

[@danender5555]

Well, I used to think that if CD is a collection and combination of zeros and ones, each player should reproduce the same disc exactly the same, because zero will be always zero and one will be always one. But it does not work like that.

[@gil3289]

So how else does it work?

[@danender5555]

@@gil3289 The answer is: DAC. Some people buy only a CD transfer machine only so they precisely stream data into their DAC which is responsible for the final result.

[@CoasterMan13Official]

It does work like that. Your ears are lying to you.

[@matthewv789]

(I apologize for this being meandering and maybe occasionally accusatory. I think there is an explanation and you’re not crazy, but are nevertheless wrong in your thesis, but it took me a while to arrive at it, and I don’t feel like rewriting everything.) I can always tell when people who don’t really deeply understand computers or digital audio are talking about digital audio... Cd data is either one or zero, nothing in between. If it reads it wrong it’s entirely wrong. But it also has error-correcting codes, so it can correct single-bit errors, and thus whole chunks of bits are either correct, or incorrect. Furthermore, they use buffers to fill up data read from the disc before it is actually decoded and D/A converted, and if it’s losing a substantial enough amount of data that it can’t correct with reed-Solomon, the play head is probably going to try to re-seek and re-read that portion of the disc while music is still playing from the buffer. You might hear extra seek activity if that happens. But that takes quite a lot, and isn’t that common unless the cd is scratched or dirty. Portable CD players especially can tolerate massive jarring, throwing the read head off entirely, and still re-seek to re-read the data before the buffer runs out. And if all of that fails, you’ve got big enough problems that it’s probably going to have an audible glitch like a click or burst of noise or distortion, or else it’s going to skip, repeat, or stop playing altogether. There is no scenario where a CD player could have persistent subtle (and not obviously terrible-sounding) changes such as you describe hearing, that’s just not how they work. Besides which, if a cd was having that many read errors that it didn’t correct, those errors would show up in audacity, and data cd-rom discs would have an awful lot of trouble delivering you software that MUST be 100% bit correct to even work. But in reality even cheap cd-rom drives work fine and can read data 100% correctly with every bit intact a lot faster than real time. (It sure doesn’t take 74 minutes to read the contents of a cd-rom.) What I mean is, with even a fairly short buffer there’s plenty of time for the CD player to go back and get all the correct data, just like your data drive does. Of course a special extra-expensive Japanese audiophile cd is very likely to have been remastered, in which case the trivial and expected knob-twiddling of the mastering engineer would obviously account for precisely the changes you describe. In audacity only infinitesimal remnants would remain as differences between the two discs at a very low amplitude, often only a db or a fraction of a db, and certainly not anything you could see by visually comparing the waveforms side by side. So either you were misinterpreting the differences audacity was showing, or else your ears and imagination were randomly “hearing” differences that weren’t there. It all boils down to whether the cd was remastered, in which case your interpretation of the waveform differences is wrong, or wasn’t remastered, in which case your ears are wrong, but the possibility that it could be because the regular CD was being persistently misread in subtle ways is nil. They really, really just do not work that way. In fact, the fact that you had to raise the level of one to match the other PROVES that it indeed WAS remastered. So your ears may not be wrong after all. Maybe all they did was raise the level slightly (without any EQ, compression, or other adjustments), meaning once the levels are evened out in audacity they would completely cancel. But it is very well known that even a slight difference in volume can make a recording sound noticeably better, again in precisely the ways you mentioned. So perhaps the most likely explanation is that the only difference between them is one was remastered solely to normalize the volume to a slightly higher level, and you almost but not quite accounted for that when matching volume (or didn’t account for it at all when listening, thinking they’d be the same?), leaving one sounding slightly better than the other solely due to being very slightly louder. (And I would say it may be the label releasing these overpriced CDs does this precise step intentionally for this precise reason... to convince listeners it actually sounds subtly better for some unrelated reason...) And let me just say that Philips and Sony would have never designed a system that regularly and persistently, in cd after cd, couldn’t read the data accurately and would have an audible effect on the sound. They’re not morons, they were good engineers and audiophiles and knew precisely what they were doing. I know you tried to make a fair and accurate comparison, but the snake oil salesmen are sneaky bastards, aren’t they? (If they had any honor they wouldn’t be selling snake oil in the first place.) On the other hand, many such releases might really be remastered and actually sound better for that reason. But it’s not due to some magical coating on the disc.

[@martinsuchocki5340]

I never heard SHM-CD, but as engineer and passionate audio I don't believe in that technology. Any CD disc could be even remastered at home. All what we need is the computer, software, digital copy of music and knowledge. Even little changes, like equalising, stereo widing or leveling could make noticable differences.

[@blejzerosamigos6115]

It totally depends on your setup, I don’t think shm was meant to be played in low fi equipment there’s no point

[@AndrewDixonMusic]

Absolutely agree, if the differences are there they are way too subtle for lower end hi-fi.

[@tipsaybonez]

The massive difference is the price, my friend.

[@gil3289]

Yeah I also believe its pure marketing.

[@LorenzoNW]

The problem with your review is that you didn’t describe the stereo system you were comparing the two CDs on. So I have no context for assessing your what you heard. If you only have a mid-end system, I wouldn’t expect that you would hear much (if any) difference. By “system”, I’m referring to the entire system - components, component platforms, cables, power conditioning, and tweaks. They all make a difference, especially in higher-end, more resolving systems. And you WILL hear a significant difference between a ripped standard and SHM CD, PROVIDED the optical drive is on a good non-resonant platform, it’s plugged into a good power conditioner, you first apply Auric Illuminator, and you play back the files on a high-end stereo.

[@abijeetrs6522]

Aren't both versions super brickwalled or am i missing something?

[@MarcusMaximus909]

Interesting comparison....thanks Andrew never bought a SHM CD as I thought it might be a placebo effect.

[@AndrewDixonMusic]

There's certainly something to it, but as I discovered, only under certain conditions (i.e. play the CD not a computer file)

[@docteurrobert]

I have several Beatles' albums on SHM-CD (2017), "Chaos", "Egypt Station" or "All Things Must Pass"... The differences are slight but they are there, no doubt about it. I think particularly about "Chaos" where the bass (bass guitar, kick drum...) is all along more sharp, precise and rich (+ with no slight saturation of the flute on "English tea" if I'm not wrong). Too expensive but for time to time... if I can... I do! For this album, I still hesitate haha _(but I want it for sure!)_ Ps : Silly comparison but "Chaos" SHM-CD *VS* 2018 LP reissue? The SHM-CD is clearly the winner! _(My ultimate winner to my ears and heart is still my original LP from 2005 haha)_

[@AndrewDixonMusic]

Sounds like you've had similar results to me! The Chaos 2018 vinyl is one of the worst sounding vinyl records I own, distortion everywhere!

[@docteurrobert]

@@AndrewDixonMusic Well well well... UPDATE... Today I received my McCartney III Shm-cd copy. I found it for 21 euros "new" so I couldn't resist. The sound is delicious! By the way, compare the SHM-CD (play side) with the regular version... already there we can see that the "glass master" is completely different. Have a great day Andrew.

[@AndrewDixonMusic]

@@docteurrobert Good news! Do you think the sound is more "delicious" than the regular CD, or both sound the same to you?

[@gregrappa1797]

A great video. I thank you very much. I love listening to shm-CDs with my EarPods. I feel they’re sharper and clear than the regular CDs. I love the speed effects you used and the interruption. Reminds me of the Benny Hill Show, which I loved and miss. Thanks for being phenomenal

[@AndrewDixonMusic]

Haha thanks Greg, Benny Hill what a legend!

[@gregrappa1797]

@@AndrewDixonMusic I totally agree

[@rayl7225]

The different formats are remastered differently and that alone likely accounts for most of the sonic differences among various formats. If you really want to hear a expansion of the audio spectrum try SACD, albeit this format needs a SACD-capable player.

[@AndrewDixonMusic]

Sometimes they will be different masterings, with these 2 CDs the same mastering was used.

[@gil3289]

@@AndrewDixonMusic How do you know the same mastering was used?

[@lucalone]

if it's the same mastering it sounds the same...

[@tarkus9633]

Are both SHM / SACD-cd's inherently remasters when it concerns releases from a certain year ? i mean, these McCartney's are new so remastering them is not relevant ofc

[@deadandburied7626]

Be interested to compare a 24K gold CD to a SHM CD.

[@AndrewDixonMusic]

Unfortunately I don't have any gold CDs so not something I can do at the moment!

[@danender5555]

It is nothing else but a matrix material difference. Zeros will be always zeros on aluminium, gold, platinum and uranium...

[@gil3289]

@@danender5555 Exactly.

[@matthewtodd3879]

I agree , I have sgt pepper and Abby Rd on HM cd ,apart from the ripoff price , o difference. Snake oil

[@lucalone]

it maybe sounds the same but those super high material cd's could last much longer than normal cd's! that is maybe an issue when you want to play your favorite cd's in 50 years from now .

[@AndrewDixonMusic]

Interesting, hadn't thought of that aspect, is that a thing that SHM discs last longer?

[@lucalone]

@@AndrewDixonMusic SHM stands for super high material and I've heard that they have better material quality than common compact discs.

[@monkeysmasher7628]

Probably the same thing like HDCDs. I used to have a CD player that recognized HDCDs - no idea if these were much better...

[@AndrewDixonMusic]

I don't have HD CDs but I imagine there's a genuine difference there, the music is likely in a hi res format , 24/48 or 24/96 ? (That's a guess, I've never researched them)

[@knockshinnoch1950]

@@AndrewDixonMusic I still have a Linn CD player with an HDCD chip- HDCD discs sound sensational- the depth and clarity along with an expansive sound stage- it really is night and day

[@yolielin4143]

I generally like SHM-CDs or Blu-Spec CDs, because they are remastered and produced with great care. However, I ordered a Barry White Greatest Hits SHM-CD from Japan thinking that I would enjoy the best version of "Love's Theme," which is my all time favorite song. Wrong. That CD was probably remastered from a bad, old master tape from Japan, and the SHM-CD version sounded terrible!! It was hissy, flat and muffled; worse than my $10 cheap USA version (and I paid almost $50 for that SHM-CD!). So, it is the remastering process that is more critical in manufacturing the SHM-CDs. Later on, I did find a box set of Barry White's albums all remastered from the ORIGINAL studio master tapes, and was manufactured in Hungary. The sound was unbelievable!!! I heard instruments on these regular CDs which I had never heard in any other versions before! Ultimately, it is all in the remastering. A regular CD could sound just as good.

[@gil3289]

I totally agree; well said.

[@andrewfox3025]

Hi Andy. Nice little test there. Have you ever put a CD in the freezer? This is also believed to enhance the bass response and overall quality. This I think should be your next test!! ;-)

[@AndrewDixonMusic]

Hi, I never have but I've heard of people doing it and getting broken discs working again. Can only assume it's something to do with making the data easier to read (in the same way I describe an SHM as being easier to read)

[@rocker11281]

Yeah, magnetizing and painting the borders black is also said to help... 😀

[@dalewilliams8001]

Technically, a double-blind study might be more accurate. That's where someone else, besides the listener, handles and plays the CD.

[@AndrewDixonMusic]

If I could get someone else close by interested in the daft tasks I get involved with I could have done that! 😄👍

[@AndyP126]

Are you sure the SHM-CD and the regular CD used the same master?

[@AndrewDixonMusic]

Yes, definitely the same.

[@GabrielMartinez-pe6ln]

I got a Nelly Furtado one

[@etzeppy]

I suspect that any sonic differences detected are due to different mastering.

[@knockshinnoch1950]

Of course the main issue is the quality of the original master. In my experience there is a marked improvement on SHMCD, SBM & Blu Spec discs over red book. SACD & HDCD take us into a different area altogether. Anyone who doesn't hear an improvement seriously needs a hearing test.

[@ingarchris]

It´s true :^)

[@nikolatesla7983]

The brand new releases are always the same rsult in terms of audio quality. It changes a lot when japanese industry remaster old releases giving them more punch and extra attack/release on compression - and vulume. You can not do it on a brand new album so there is no difference.

[@r4d117]

Japan Compact Disc CD SHM VS CD Blu Spec

[@dannybourne_]

All wrong with the assessment. Two different mastering versions therefore sound different from each other. It's all 1 and 0 so it has nothing to do with metal or plastic layer of the disc. This is not analogue data storage.

[@steve.b.23]

SHM-CDs have an aluminium layer, as do "regular" CDs. SHM-CDs have a polycarbonate layer, as do "regular" CDs. The difference is the type of polycarbonate used in the clear layer. I gave up listening when you got the basics details wrong.

[@paulhenner8914]

YES Japanese made CDs do clearly sound better..............when compared to CDs made else where. But is it SHM or the simple a Superior Japanese manufacturing because ordinary Japanese CDs sound better to those made in other countries ! !

[@JonPickles]

They are different the Japanese one is louder

[@67Ivar]

If It´s just the volume, turn it up

[@AndrewDixonMusic]

I didn't notice any volume difference

[@JonPickles]

Loudness as in less dynamic. Mine is definitely louder although I didn’t do a wave form comparison rip.

[@JonPickles]

@@67Ivar loudness where the sound is more compressed

[@sambell385]

there’s no difference people try to reach for something in your own delusions, we just paying Japanese some more money that’s all that is, they throw the bonus tracks on there so that they can make you pay almost $40 for the CD and the sound ain’t no better, if the technology was so much better then the increase performance would be worth $37 alone without bonus tracks as a sales gimmick

[@MitchellHang]

He's right. The only thing truly-different about SHM-CD is the materials used to make the CD. Unless the mastering were slightly different, the two would sound identical. If you claim to notice any sonic differences between the two, your ears are playing tricks.

[@jhna314]

Waste of Money

[@KenValent]

Crap cd player though.

[@clunesy]

SHM is identical to standard CD, assuming its the same pressing. It's like saying you can hear the different between speakers in black and white finish. It doesn't matter what material you coat a binary disc format in. Would you say a Windows installer CD 'installs better' with the SHM coating than the normal one? Nope. It's horseshit. Just stop.

[@voshche]

funny guy try to bring to masses his subjective opinion. 😁 There are plenty apps which can check audio spectrum of CD. wave pad, audacity, Tau Analyzer, Adobe audition ....

[@AndrewDixonMusic]

I've been asked often if I could tell a difference between each of the CDs, so I did this to answer those questions. Not looking to bring anything to "the masses", just something people can watch if they decide to, nothing is forced on anyone.

[@voshche]

@@AndrewDixonMusic Good, now you have chance to confirm you perceptions on practice using mentioned apps, if you please of course

[@AndrewDixonMusic]

@@voshche I did use Audacity as part of my testing, as shown in the video.

[@voshche]

@@AndrewDixonMusic sorry i didn't watch to the end, but both are dramatically compressed