New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - HD greedsters - it ain't rock'n'roll old chum
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Welcome to the Graham Slee Audio Products Owners Club

 

Open to all owners plus those contemplating the purchase of a Graham Slee audio product wishing to use our loaner program: join here
Subscribe to our newsletter here (Rules on posting can be found here)


HD greedsters - it ain't rock'n'roll old chum

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 6>
Author
Graham Slee View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar
Telling it as it is

Joined: 11 Jan 2008
Location: South Yorkshire
Status: Offline
Points: 8652
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Graham Slee Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: HD greedsters - it ain't rock'n'roll old chum
    Posted: 20 May 2012 at 4:46pm
I just thought up a new insult for greedy people: "greedsters" (or for twitter #greedsters)

I would now like to apply the new word (in my vocabulary that is) greedsters to the killjoys who make it impossible in the UK to download any HD music worth playing.

I tried HD tracks and clicked the buy button on Eric Clapton's Love Songs and... HD 96/24 download but was told "you can't have it because you live in the UK"

Same goes on Qobus for Yes Fragile in HD96/24.

And that's all I could find worth trying alongside vinyl albums I have/have had and remember, to be able to do listening tests on my 192/24 DAC prototype.

There must be money involved here!

So, the greedsters stopped play! Censored Angry !
Not simple enough for Google-Bot to understand...
Back to Top
Fatmangolf View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar

Joined: 23 Dec 2009
Location: Middlesbrough
Status: Offline
Points: 5169
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Fatmangolf Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 May 2012 at 6:24pm
Spot on Graham.
Jon

Open mind and ears, whilst owning GSP Genera, Accession, Elevator EXP, Solo ULDE, Proprius amps, Cusat50 cables, Lautus digital cable, Spatia cables and links, and a Majestic DAC.
Back to Top
Graham Slee View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar
Telling it as it is

Joined: 11 Jan 2008
Location: South Yorkshire
Status: Offline
Points: 8652
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Graham Slee Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 May 2012 at 7:22pm
I did find something however...

By paying a subscription to Bowers and Wilkins I have been able to download (or should I say I'm in the midst of downloading - takes a long-long time) two "new release" Peter Gabriel Albums in 24bit/48kHz FLAC - the highest res available.

I don't mind paying £33.95 for two albums in studio definition, and I get the option of choosing two more albums every month... whether I'll like them or not is another matter, but I spent a whole lot more on vinyl with Britannia record club a couple of decades ago. So hats off to B&W - at least I'm downloading better than MP3 or CD quality - in the UK.

But if 48/24 is studio master quality then what is 96/24? If the studio "machinery" employed by Peter Gabriel and the London Symphony Orchestra is 48kHz, and let's face it they'd know best wouldn't they? Then why all the fuss over 96kHz? Wouldn't a 96kHz version have simply been up-sampled from 48kHz? I'm looking for answers here.
Not simple enough for Google-Bot to understand...
Back to Top
Graham Slee View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar
Telling it as it is

Joined: 11 Jan 2008
Location: South Yorkshire
Status: Offline
Points: 8652
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Graham Slee Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 May 2012 at 8:28pm
I've now found HIGHRESAUDIO in Germany and since they took my money I expect to be able to download using their HRA downloader the album I bought. This time it's a 96/24: "Legend - The Definitive Remasters" from Bob Marley and The Wailers.

The moral of this story seems to be if you've an age to spare and are willing to go through "hell", you can obtain a few "rock/pop" albums, but there ain't much to choose from unless you're into classical, folk or jazz mainly from obscure artists.
Not simple enough for Google-Bot to understand...
Back to Top
jrhughes View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 24 Mar 2010
Location: Hampshire
Status: Offline
Points: 141
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jrhughes Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 May 2012 at 8:44pm
My B&W SoS membership lapsed a couple of months ago, but I think I'll renew it. It's not all to my taste, but there are albums that certainly make it worthwhile. It's all recorded and mastered beautifully, with none of the typical brick-walling that the record company engineers think will mean more sales because the louder the better (no-one will hear the distortion/compression/lack of dynamics because the whole music buying population uses iThing with "BassBoomers by DJ Deafness" earplugs - don't they?). In the last decade or so this loudness war has produced some walls of sound that could have been showcases for the CD format but are, instead, fatiguing to the ear. I think it's about time "remastered" meant quieter with more dynamics, not louder! But I rant and digress...

I have only downloaded 16/44.1 ALAC so far from SoS because it fits with all of my current digital rips, but through my DAC/Solo/HD800 or K702 it's all stunning. The B&W site states:

FLAC: Studio master sound quality (24-bit 48KHz)
These are the highest quality files we offer and are identical to the studio master. 

which would suggest, to me, that there's little point in anything higher. On the other hand, Hi-Fi News is on a mission to expose up-sampled "high res" music files and regularly show that most examples are, eg., true original 96kHz recordings or, say, 192 kHz samples from analogue masters.
Back to Top
tg View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 19 Jan 2008
Location: Sydney
Status: Offline
Points: 1817
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tg Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 May 2012 at 3:02am

Quote But if 48/24 is studio master quality then what is 96/24?

AFAIK - the maximum for DAT tape is 24/48KHz, so if a studio is recording to DAT, then that would be a "studio master".  

Higher resolution "studio masters" would require direct to disc recording (computer HDD not the vinyl "direct to disc".)

Back to Top
Graham Slee View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar
Telling it as it is

Joined: 11 Jan 2008
Location: South Yorkshire
Status: Offline
Points: 8652
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Graham Slee Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 May 2012 at 9:30am
Thanks tg. I need to have a full grasp of this information and outside this user group nobody else seems to want to come clean, either that or they don't know.

So, 96kHz and higher is a direct to hard drive thing. Digital tape's maximum sampling is 48kHz.

Now this, gleaned from Kate Bush's website, is starting to make sense: "Kate mixes all of her audio on to 1/2 inch tape at 30ips. The analogue tape is then digitally mastered using 24bits at 96KHz." So it's analogue to digital, the digits being 96kHz. I'll download it!

Therefore, for 96kHz to be the standard (or even 192kHz and higher), the studio really has to record to analogue and then digitize. If it doesn't, then anything 96kHz is up sampled.

Now, I note "audiophile" sound cards, the ones with SPDIF are difficult to obtain (that's what we've found recently), so the trend is over to USB, but that also carries system sounds, which can be turned-off, but what about system noises? My next question should belong to "digital chat" and I'll post it there: what about Ethernet?
Not simple enough for Google-Bot to understand...
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 6>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.125 seconds.