[WillAdams]

Early CDs were labeled as to the processes used, a 3 letter code As and Ds, so:

AAD == Analog recording, Analog mastering, Digital media

ADD == Analog recording, Digitally re-mastered, Digital Media

DDD == Digital recording, Digitally re-mastered, Digital Media

This is known as a SPARS Code: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPARS_code

Your dad's friends should have imported from Japan --- they were big on Jazz, and a lot of my Jazz CDs have spines labeled in Japanese on one side and English on the other.

[steve1977]

Close, but not quite.

The first letter was the recorder used for initial recording, say a Studer A800 as an example of an analog multitrack or DASH as an example of a digital one).

The second letter was the recorder for the mixdown, i.e. usually some 2-channel system like an analog ATR-102 or Studer A80 or a digital DAT.

The third letter was the recorder for the master, which for CD by definition was always digital. In the early days usually a Sony U-matic, which funnily enough was an analog video tape format which got reused for digital audio (and is the reason for the odd 44.1 kHz sampling rate of the CD).

Edit:

The code was actually always considered a bit meaningless.

For example, you could record on a digital DASH, but mix on an analog SSL console and print the mix to a digital recorder. That would have been a DDD CD.

On the other hand, you could record on an analog A820, mix on a digital Studer desk, print the mix on an analog A80 and that would have been a AAD CD.

So, two codes indicating "pure" digital or "pure" analog, even though both processes used both technologies.

Or record on a ADAT and mix on a Yamaha 02/R, which would have been DDD but probably sounded worse than the AAD recorded on a Studer analog tape ;)

[dylan604]

> Sony U-matic

3/4" tape and was the only tape format that had the take up reel on the left.

[Projectiboga]

Late 80s or early 90s there was also a DAD type, which often sounded really good.

From that Wiki link-

In practice, DAD was very rare, as many companies (especially the well-known classical music labels) used digital tape recorders (which were not prohibitively more expensive than analog tape recorders) during the editing or mixing stage.

[WillAdams]

I don't know if I have such a CD --- do you have an example which is noted as sound markedly better than other editions? (I'd especially be interested in a DAD disc which sounds better than an updated DDD disc)

[BoingBoomTschak]

Why did you write "re-mastered" instead of simply "mastered" for ADD/DDD?

[WillAdams]

Because most of my CDs are older and had previously been released as pure analog, so that's how I think of them, and that's where my experience is --- fair point though, putting parentheses around (re-) would have been better.