Crushing some Japanese CD shops I came across an interesting new thing: the SHM-CD format. As I understand the SHM-CD is JVC development based on a manufacturing process of LCD displays. SHM-CD uses polycarbonate plastic that improves characteristic of disc’s surface, which presumably improves audio quality.  Allegedly the SHM-CDs are readable at regular CD player.

I never dealt with it or heard the SHM-CD but it looks like Universal re-release some of Crème de la Crème of their catalog in SHM-CD formats. All further explanations that I have seen are in Japanese. Japanese folks, please can you shade more light about SHM-CD?

Did anybody actually heard the thing and can testify about the sound quality of the thing compare to regular CD? I would be specifically interesting with people who use CEC TL-0 transport.

http://www.cdjapan.co.jp/detailview.html?KEY=UCCG-9710

The  ‘NL’ domain looks like a Netherlandian  and article presumably tell about the SHM-CD… So, does anyone speaks Dutch?  Any volunteers to tell what it is all about?

http://www.hifi.nl/artikel/1921/SHM-CD:_geluidsdrager.html

I found many reports on SHM-CD sound on Japanese blog sites.  Most of them comment very favorably on SHM-CD, clear, better resolution, livelier, etc.  Some mentions different balance compared to the CD version, many comments SHM-CD sound louder than CD.  Almost all of them are comparison reports on Rock/Jazz releases.  One guy reports the comparison between SHM-CD and CD version of Klieber's Beethoven 5th and says what they did is just to increase the volume level so that it feels like you hear more details, but because of that, the orchestral tutti became to suffer from compression.

On HMV site, they mention which years' remastering are used in SHM-CD but only on Rock albums.  According to that record, SHM-CD are not newly remastered but previously remastered version just pressed with the new plastic material.

Yoshi 

yoshi wrote:

One guy reports the comparison between SHM-CD and CD version of Klieber's Beethoven 5th and says what they did is just to increase the volume level so that it feels like you hear more details, but because of that, the orchestral tutti became to suffer from compression.

Thanks, Yoshi, it was very predictable, I really hate when they do it. As I also say any technology in the hands of barbarian produce a barbarian result and the problems with audio are in 99% are the problems with people not with the machineries.  So, if the SHM-CD is a more superior media then we still have no ways to found it out the truth as some Moron in studio with his diploma and electrician, taste of Neanderthal and brain of pterodactyl decided to do “mastering” for the SHM-CD release. Their idiotic desire for stressing loudness is well know:

http://www.romythecat.com/Forums/ShowPost.aspx?postID=5267#5267

In the end we might do not know if the SHM-CD has any true advancement. I have to admit that some CD toys  coming from Japan are very good (The NESPA Optical Finalizer was very good tool, I keep unit it) but who can say anything about technology if there is a moronic proxy-mind of an idiot sound-electrician between good intentions of designers and us, the listeners

Maarten wrote:

I will compare them, and I will also rip both the normal CD's and the SHM ones, to see if they are identical at the bit level.

Maarten,

I am afraid that bit level comparing would be absolutely worthless exercise, similar to the blind testing what I generally do not support. If you look for “more objective then objective” assessment of the SHM then you might try to run 3D spectrum view and loudness distribution from the SHM and from the regular CD, presumably that they uses the same masters (that we have no evidence).

If you read my sites then you know that I am against the “reviewing” as a concept, anyhow here is for you a food for thoughts…  The new SHM disks are different type of plastic and there is a very high possibility that you specific CD transport would have favoritism toward the SHM or to CD.  My CD transport (TL0) does have reference to one material does over other and this preference is different than with other transports I had tried. 

Sorry, but I was planning to do the bit level comparison to check if the same masters have been used. I'm only accepting that the material makes a difference if the bits are the same!

Maarten

I got one SHM-CD disk a few months back, right after I post the initial article, and I hate it.  The SHM-CD technology might be worthy but unfortunately from that specific SHM-CD disk that I have purchased (Kubelik’s Dvorak) was absolutely imposable to extend any credit to SHM-CD. It appeared to me that the Kubelik’s Dvorak was not just the SHM-CD version of the CD version but a completely new re-mastering. This new re-mastering turned out to be just horrible. I have listen an couple minutes of the fist movement and I never had any inters to head the rest of that CD. So, I do not know if I need to attribute the bad sound SHM-CD technology or to the bad re-mastering. Me, being me, attribute the crappy sound of the CD to the idiots-people who made that CD. If it was done by idiots then it is irrelevant what technology they used as in the end any technology in hands of barbarian would eventually produce barbarian results.

Rgs, The caT

whether this is due to remastering or the technology itself. Same story is about MFSL or XRCD releases for example. I am not able to listen to some XRCDs as it is painful in ears, but I like MFSL CDs as they sound comfortably. However, I feel that there is some colorations in MFSL releases added during mastering process.
Nobody will tell us the truth. That is why I mostly focus on the result of the whole process, i.e. how much the format acceptable to my ears.

Romy the Cat wrote:

BTW, generally at my site I encourage people do not refer to what “others say” but expires own observations on the subjects.