Redbook: only 1/4 of the master tape???


I've been listening to SACD exclusively for a few months and have just gone back to some CD listening. It was more disappointing than I had expected, and my Marantz SA-14 ver.2 has quite good CD playback. I read on another site that redbook CD can only hold so much of the master tape, no matter what the resolution, and that the information must be compressed, (too polite a word--I would say condensed), to almost 1 out of every 4 samples to fit on the old format. Is this true, and if so; why even buy a better resolving CD player ($$$) when it can only lavish quality on basically a skeletal representation of the master tape?
jdaniel18ee
I do not know what you read or from where but it sounds like nonsense to me.
Here's something related from Telarc:

"Telarc's first digital recordings utilized the Soundstream recording system which is based on a sampling rate of 50kHz, compared to a standard compact disc, which has a sampling rate of 44.1kHz. The higher rate of the Soundstream system offers an extended frequency response (up to 25kHz) and increased detail. To produce the original compact disc, the Soundstream signal had to be converted from 50kHz to 44.1kHz, a process that inherently causes a loss of quality not only by lowering the frequency response, but also by the complex mathematical process needed to derive 44.1kHz from 50kHz. Until recently, no digital system has had the capability to capture the full quality the Soundstream process had to offer."

I understand that digital records have gotten much better since the old Soundstreams. So a good modern recording at 24-bit/96kHz is even more drastically compressed to fit the Redbook? Seems like the only thing truly "dead" to me much of the information from the master tape. Unless....
The 1/4 of master tape stuff is nonsense. I do agree with you that information is lost at every transfer stage. It just isn't a 4 to 1 reduction. You're also misusing the term compression.
I agree with the above that it is nonsense to claim a 1:4 loss. I make own recordings of choral/orchestral music so I know the master tapes before they leave the studio for the CD fabrication. I often do comparisons of master and CD and with a real high end CD rig the results are very satisfying. The better the original recording/master the better the CD: so that 1:4 thing sounds to me like another attempt to push SACD or whatever format into a market which doesn't need it.
Redbook is 44,100 samples per second.

First of all, understand the performance being recorded literally has no sampling. Rather there is a continuous stream of music, lets call it infinite (zillions) of samples per second.

If the master tape is digital, recorded at a higher resolution than the early generation digital recorders, then the sampling rate might be 96K (~1/2) or 192K (~1/4) or 2.7M (DSD).

No matter what the master tape is, redbook has been and will continue to be a 44.1K media. So I ask, what does it matter what the original master resolution is as long as it is high enough to get 44.1K min onto the CD?

So the real question is not what the master was, it is what other formats than redbook CD will sound like if we can get that higher sampling rate to a different media such as SACD or DVD-A etc.