Print Page | Close Window

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

Printed From: Graham Slee Hifi System Components
Category: Digital Audio
Forum Name: Music for digital repro
Forum Description: Your kind of music in digital format
URL: https://www.hifisystemcomponents.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1434
Printed Date: 29 Mar 2024 at 2:23pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: HD greedsters - it ain't rock'n'roll old chum
Posted By: Graham Slee
Subject: HD greedsters - it ain't rock'n'roll old chum
Date 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 !


-------------
That none should be able to buy or sell without a smartphone and the knowledge in how to use apps



Replies:
Posted By: Fatmangolf
Date Posted: 20 May 2012 at 6:24pm
Spot on Graham.

-------------
Jon

Open mind and ears whilst owning GSP Genera, Accession M, Accession MC, Elevator EXP, Solo ULDE, Proprius amps, Cusat50 cables, Lautus digital cable, Spatia cables and links, and a Majestic DAC.


Posted By: Graham Slee
Date 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.


-------------
That none should be able to buy or sell without a smartphone and the knowledge in how to use apps


Posted By: Graham Slee
Date 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.


-------------
That none should be able to buy or sell without a smartphone and the knowledge in how to use apps


Posted By: jrhughes
Date 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.


Posted By: tg [RIP]
Date 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".)



Posted By: Graham Slee
Date 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?


-------------
That none should be able to buy or sell without a smartphone and the knowledge in how to use apps


Posted By: morris_minor
Date Posted: 21 May 2012 at 9:42am
Originally posted by Graham Slee Graham Slee wrote:

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.
Thanks for the info on this site, Graham. As I'm into classical and obscure jazz (Big smile) this is a good site for me if not my bank balance. . . . LOL


-------------
Bob

Majestic DAC/pre-amp
Accession MC/Enigma, Accession MM, Reflex M, Elevator EXP, Era Gold V
Solo ULDE, Novo, Lautus USB and digital, Libran balanced, CuSat50
2 x Proprius + Spatia/Spatia Links


Posted By: morris_minor
Date Posted: 21 May 2012 at 9:51am
Originally posted by Graham Slee Graham Slee wrote:


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.
I don't think this is right. PCM audio is regularly recorded up to 192, and the DXD format for SACD is 352.8kHz.

Mind you my source for this is wikipedia Wink

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_recording#Techniques_to_record_to_commercial_media - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_recording#Techniques_to_record_to_commercial_media

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_eXtreme_Definition - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_eXtreme_Definition


-------------
Bob

Majestic DAC/pre-amp
Accession MC/Enigma, Accession MM, Reflex M, Elevator EXP, Era Gold V
Solo ULDE, Novo, Lautus USB and digital, Libran balanced, CuSat50
2 x Proprius + Spatia/Spatia Links


Posted By: tg [RIP]
Date Posted: 21 May 2012 at 10:58am

Quote Therefore, for 96kHz to be the standard (or even 192kHz and higher), the studio really has to record to analogue

I am not an industry insider, but I would assume that it would be perfectly feasible (and probably the case for "in studio" recording) that the master would be made directly on a DAW (Digital Audio Workstation) - this is the way I have seen musicians doing it in home studios and I am aware of some quite awesome mix/clock/IO interface cards for DAW use from people like RME and Lynx.

In fact, with the amount of processing power and storage available on modern up-spec laptops and some of the very portable multichannel, all singing, all dancing interfaces available, like the Motu 828  http://www.motu.com/products/motuaudio/828mk3 - http://www.motu.com/products/motuaudio/828mk3 it would be quite feasible to record from a multiple mic setup on location at whatever sample rate your interface ADC can handle.

Rechecking, the ADAT machines (8 channel multitrack digital recorders) apparently had 20 bit and 44.1 or 48 KHz sample rates in their later incarnations.  DAT tape being only 16 bit.

With all that, there are artists and studios who either prefer or "feature" the use of analogue recording equipment, often using valve amped microphones and recorders.  Water Lily acoustics being one such.  T de P of EAR has done (and perhaps still does) a lot of refurbishment of valve recording equipment for specialist studios from what I recall reading.



Posted By: Graham Slee
Date Posted: 21 May 2012 at 12:26pm
What I meant was to record to tape it would need to be analogue and digitized afterwards...

or, DAT would limit it to 48kHz.

I believe you to be correct in that more bits and higher sampling frequencies are available using a DAW.

I'm trying to get to the bones of what is feasible from a customer's perspective and what constraints the customer is under. This is why I'm putting myself in the customer's position...

What I'm finding is that right now there are problems in obtaining HD/hi-res music to download, not for classical or obscure jazz fans, but for the rock and pop genres which many a million customer finds more palatable.

Now if there are hundreds of reels of high quality analogue master tape, then it can be digitized to say 96/24, and vast numbers of 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's etc music could be made available for computer audio.

The only problem I can see with all this is the download time. Audiophiles could all become divorcees (or stay single) by using up all their annual leave sitting in front of a computer waiting for each track to download at a rate of 30 minutes to 5 hours per track...Ouch


-------------
That none should be able to buy or sell without a smartphone and the knowledge in how to use apps


Posted By: ServerBaboon
Date Posted: 21 May 2012 at 2:23pm
What speed is your broadband?

What you get today isn't possibly what you wil get next year, if you have a Virgin fibre link then you probably have a 30MB download speed.

I have downloaded a couple of items (still nothing to play natively on though) and they weren't too bad.

There does seem to be issues in getting Hi Res stuff, have you tried Linn and Naim?



-------------
Steve

-------------

Various bits of GSP Kit ..well two so far, unless you count the cables that is.


Posted By: Fatmangolf
Date Posted: 21 May 2012 at 5:31pm
I agree with SB. I buy classical 96/24 and 192/24 FLACs from Linn and it's fairly quick (5 mins per album) downloading on Virgin fibrelink as long as I'm not using iPlayer HD or Sky Anytime+ and my neighbours aren't either.
 


-------------
Jon

Open mind and ears whilst owning GSP Genera, Accession M, Accession MC, Elevator EXP, Solo ULDE, Proprius amps, Cusat50 cables, Lautus digital cable, Spatia cables and links, and a Majestic DAC.


Posted By: Graham Slee
Date Posted: 21 May 2012 at 7:19pm
Originally posted by ServerBaboon ServerBaboon wrote:

...have you tried Linn and Naim?


Not my "cup of tea".

I have managed to download:

Steely Dan: Gaucho
Bob Marley... : Legend ...
Kate Bush: 50 Words for Snow (still downloading)
Peter Gabriel: Half Blood
Peter Gabriel: Scratch My Back

I think I need assistance with the DVD. What do I open it with?




-------------
That none should be able to buy or sell without a smartphone and the knowledge in how to use apps


Posted By: Graham Slee
Date Posted: 21 May 2012 at 8:37pm
As David Price reported this month: "Paradoxically, many of us concluded that the only accessible hi-res music source around right now is vinyl...."

But vinyl only has a dynamic range of 12 bits!

However, it does have a sampling rate of infinityHz.

And it's funny how I just want to add some compression to these 24 bit downloads... I can't hear the really quiet parts for room noises, and the loudest parts can be heard across town!

Perhaps 12 bits is all we really need.


-------------
That none should be able to buy or sell without a smartphone and the knowledge in how to use apps


Posted By: Fatmangolf
Date Posted: 21 May 2012 at 8:48pm
Agreed. Whilst I hate clipping and brickwall limiting, it sounds loud and suits some music. Despite the limited dynamic range I think you can turn a vinyl record up without it becoming unpleasant or too loud.


-------------
Jon

Open mind and ears whilst owning GSP Genera, Accession M, Accession MC, Elevator EXP, Solo ULDE, Proprius amps, Cusat50 cables, Lautus digital cable, Spatia cables and links, and a Majestic DAC.


Posted By: Fatmangolf
Date Posted: 21 May 2012 at 11:27pm
Originally posted by Graham Slee Graham Slee wrote:

Originally posted by ServerBaboon ServerBaboon wrote:

...have you tried Linn and Naim?


Not my "cup of tea".

I think I need assistance with the DVD. What do I open it with?

Yes, the HD choices lean towards classical.
 
What does the DVD have written on it please? It may be DVD-Audio or Dolby Digital or DTS, those will need a DVD player with the decoders built in. Sorry if I have misunderstood or just stated the obvious to you!
 
Jon


-------------
Jon

Open mind and ears whilst owning GSP Genera, Accession M, Accession MC, Elevator EXP, Solo ULDE, Proprius amps, Cusat50 cables, Lautus digital cable, Spatia cables and links, and a Majestic DAC.


Posted By: Graham Slee
Date Posted: 22 May 2012 at 9:14am
Although a question for ServerBaboon (who sent me a disc containing samples) I think you're right and I'll have to shove it through the DVD player which has S/PDIF out.

-------------
That none should be able to buy or sell without a smartphone and the knowledge in how to use apps


Posted By: morris_minor
Date Posted: 22 May 2012 at 10:20am
There's a nifty little program called http://www.dvdae.com/ - DVD audio extractor which does what it says on the tin . . Wink

I've used to get PCM tracks off DVD-Audio discs as well as DVD video.




-------------
Bob

Majestic DAC/pre-amp
Accession MC/Enigma, Accession MM, Reflex M, Elevator EXP, Era Gold V
Solo ULDE, Novo, Lautus USB and digital, Libran balanced, CuSat50
2 x Proprius + Spatia/Spatia Links


Posted By: ServerBaboon
Date Posted: 22 May 2012 at 12:16pm
Originally posted by Graham Slee Graham Slee wrote:

Originally posted by ServerBaboon ServerBaboon wrote:

...have you tried Linn and Naim?


I think I need assistance with the DVD. What do I open it with?

 

Should be just able to browse it, copy the files one folder is flac, one folder is wav.

Sorry I should have said these are just some files to play on a computer.




-------------
Steve

-------------

Various bits of GSP Kit ..well two so far, unless you count the cables that is.


Posted By: suede
Date Posted: 22 May 2012 at 2:58pm
Hi Graham
I've seen a lot of King Crimson DVD audio discs out on ebay. Good prices as well at around £15 each. I don't know if you're into King Crimson but I thought you might be.
I've heard some of these DVD-audio releases and they've sounded great IMO.

Best wishes
Johan


Posted By: Graham Slee
Date Posted: 22 May 2012 at 6:12pm
Originally posted by suede suede wrote:

Hi Graham
I've seen a lot of King Crimson DVD audio discs out on ebay. Good prices as well at around £15 each. I don't know if you're into King Crimson but I thought you might be.
I've heard some of these DVD-audio releases and they've sounded great IMO.

Best wishes
Johan


Thanks. I like King Crimson Smile


-------------
That none should be able to buy or sell without a smartphone and the knowledge in how to use apps


Posted By: garygillespie
Date Posted: 23 May 2012 at 12:23am
Originally posted by Graham Slee Graham Slee wrote:

"you can't have it because you live in the UK"


This doesn't have anything to do with quality of music, but figured I would talk a little about it.

I buy a lot of house music on line, from some of these sites
traxsource.com, junodownload.com, beatport.com, ect....
Some times when I try to buy a song I'll get that same type of territory restriction message.

I guess what happened was PRS (Performing Right Society) was the first licensing company
that went after everyone, then other other companies followed suit.

PRS was going to sue all the digital websites, because the record labels only have rights to
sale the music in their country. 

So they went after Itunes first, so all the other smaller websites and Amazon was hoping
Itunes would fight them, since it's not the websites fault the labels didn't straighten that
stuff out first.  But Itunes gave in and settled out of court, so all the other websites had
to do the same thing, because there is no way the could afford a legal battle with PRS.

So due to PRS being a greedster, some sites had to shut down, and it makes it harder
for us to get music.

here is a pdf of some legal jargon I found.
http://law.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=6513&context=expresso



Posted By: suede
Date Posted: 23 May 2012 at 3:25am
Come to think of it, I didn't like the DVD-audio remaster I've heard of Red very much but I suspect maybe it's the original production that's lacking there. Can't tell since I've only ever heard digital remasters of that one and they've all sounded sort of hollow and just plain off. But all the pre-Red high res remastered albums I've heard have been good.  The DVD's are 5.1 I think but should have stereo content on them as well. Maybe it's good to double check that fact though if you're going to buy a disc. I'd hate to have fooled you into spending money in vain on useless surround fanciness only. Ouch


Posted By: Graham Slee
Date Posted: 23 May 2012 at 5:43am
Originally posted by garygillespie garygillespie wrote:


So due to PRS being a greedster, some sites had to shut down, and it makes it harder
for us to get music.


They even came after me...why? We have a radio in the workshop so we have to pay a license fee now. Then the PPL did the same! I asked them what about the music we play for testing but that's OK, but we have to pay for listening to the radio - background music - and even if someone brings in an iPod with earphones to listen to whilst working...even though the broadcaster is paying royalties! We have to pay them too, because we're a business.


-------------
That none should be able to buy or sell without a smartphone and the knowledge in how to use apps


Posted By: garygillespie
Date Posted: 23 May 2012 at 7:53pm

They are going to far.
So I if you have Pandora Internet Radio, or Sirius Satellite Radio or something like that would they charge you a fee?

Here is a http://www.dailytech.com/British+Copyright+Org+Threatens+Singing+Store+Employee+Then+Apologizes/article16592.htm - Link to where they we're going to sue a lady for singing a song, but they backed off because of the bad publicity.



Posted By: suede
Date Posted: 24 May 2012 at 11:47am
Originally posted by garygillespie garygillespie wrote:


They are going to far.
So I if you have Pandora Internet Radio, or Sirius Satellite Radio or something like that would they charge you a fee?

Here is a http://www.dailytech.com/British+Copyright+Org+Threatens+Singing+Store+Employee+Then+Apologizes/article16592.htm - Link to where they we're going to sue a lady for singing a song, but they backed off because of the bad publicity.


Wow, what a great world we live in where we need permisson from big corporations and their lobby groups just to sing if we should feel like it.
However from the immense cringiness of the picture I guess I'd rather have a pass on her particular performance


Posted By: Graham Slee
Date Posted: 24 May 2012 at 1:55pm
I wouldn't mind paying license fees if they actually resulted in something better for us all, but just like the road fund license, we end up with potholes!

-------------
That none should be able to buy or sell without a smartphone and the knowledge in how to use apps


Posted By: BackinBlack
Date Posted: 24 May 2012 at 7:01pm
I have successfully downloaded some HiRes files from HDtracks, it does seem to depend on the artist/label as to whether non US customers can download, only tried with PayPal. I understood that availability "out of region" has more to do with the record companies restricting distributors to their own regions and not take business from distributors in other regions, much as is done with films.

Regarding licence fees for listening to radio or recorded music and road fund license, doesn't matter what it's called or the premise for the charge; it's just another form of tax!
I note from the PPL website:
"The organisation is committed to delivering a first-class service to all its customers. PPL does not retain a profit for itself - after running costs, all revenue is distributed to its record company and performer members."
I wonder what percentage actually gets to the artists?


Posted By: Fatmangolf
Date Posted: 30 May 2012 at 9:56pm
Thanks BackinBlack

-------------
Jon

Open mind and ears whilst owning GSP Genera, Accession M, Accession MC, Elevator EXP, Solo ULDE, Proprius amps, Cusat50 cables, Lautus digital cable, Spatia cables and links, and a Majestic DAC.


Posted By: Fredric
Date Posted: 30 Jan 2013 at 2:22pm
I'm a bit late to the game here, but 2l's test bench: http://www.2l.no/hires/index.html - http://www.2l.no/hires/index.html have quite a few free 24/192kHz FLAC files.

And for those reluctant to click the link, yes they have a few original DXD files as well, clocking in at 1GB for about 9 and a half minutes of sound.


Posted By: Fatmangolf
Date Posted: 30 Jan 2013 at 8:10pm
Thanks Fredric.


-------------
Jon

Open mind and ears whilst owning GSP Genera, Accession M, Accession MC, Elevator EXP, Solo ULDE, Proprius amps, Cusat50 cables, Lautus digital cable, Spatia cables and links, and a Majestic DAC.


Posted By: Humboldt
Date Posted: 19 Aug 2013 at 9:40am
I was reading through some older threads to see if there was something interesting I had missed, and found this debate about high res files. Interesting to read since I understand the argument about high res files now points into very different conclusions.  


Posted By: Justin122
Date Posted: 20 Feb 2015 at 12:52pm
ALl I know is that it sounds much better...


Posted By: Graham Slee
Date Posted: 20 Feb 2015 at 2:50pm
Originally posted by Justin122 Justin122 wrote:

ALl I know is that it sounds much better...


Than what?


-------------
That none should be able to buy or sell without a smartphone and the knowledge in how to use apps


Posted By: morris_minor
Date Posted: 20 Feb 2015 at 3:18pm
Originally posted by Justin122 Justin122 wrote:

ALl I know is that it sounds much better...
Hi Justin, and welcome to the forum.

Would you care to pop over to the new members' corner to introduce yourself . . . 


-------------
Bob

Majestic DAC/pre-amp
Accession MC/Enigma, Accession MM, Reflex M, Elevator EXP, Era Gold V
Solo ULDE, Novo, Lautus USB and digital, Libran balanced, CuSat50
2 x Proprius + Spatia/Spatia Links


Posted By: discrete badger
Date Posted: 16 Feb 2020 at 1:41pm
I have some of my own, slightly puzzling, recent observations to add to this old chestnut!

I'm very new to all this hi-res digi stuff. For years and years I was happy with 44.1/16, mostly via ripped flacs, played back via some very good upsampling DACs. I understand enough of the maths behind digital audio to be convinced that nothing more than the above is theoretically necessary, that anything below 22.05 can be reconstructed perfectly (modulo the deleterious effects of the brick-wall digital filter, etc etc). My adventures with SACD - I have a small collection - never led anywhere, due mostly to the huge limitations imposed on the signal path by the copy-protection scheme. So I was pretty sceptical of hi-res digi.

But - as you can guess - there's a big but coming: I was recently introduced to Tidal and Qobuz, and now have subscriptions. My findings are as follows:

For a given recording, I can discern no difference between the CD, the ripped flac, and the CD-quality streaming option of Tidal and Qobuz. Spotify at any quality setting is far, far below, SQ-wise, and so I choose not to listen to it any more.

I am unable to try the hi-res option in Tidal, due to the requirement for MQA, which is, to say the very least, controversial both in its lossy implementation and revenue-generating model.

With Qobuz I am able to try all of the lossless PCM hi-res options up to 96/24. Helpfully, one of my all-time favourite albums, The Division Bell, is available both in 44.1/16 and 96/24, and as I have known it intimately for 27 years it makes for a very interesting object of study. 

Those who are familiar with it will possibly agree that the 44.1/16 masters are very fine-sounding, even state-of-the-art for a recording of the era. What's surprising, therefore, is just how much better the 96/24 sounds. It is not a mood-dependent, subtle thing, but a completely obvious and reproducible effect. In this context, I should mention that, currently, in chez badger, treble is arriving via a pair of excellent beryllium tweeters, which leave no detail unearthed. But the same effect is clearly evident on the HD250II + Solo UL or Voyager.

It's most noticeable on Nick Mason's cymbals and hi-hat, which have much greater clarity and body, and seemed to be freed from a layer of high-frequency "hash", but every single other aspect also sounds better. There is a much greater sense of space, realism, depth, smoothness, and flowing musicality. It is just so much better, and I fear I will never be able to enjoy the 44.1/16 again.

The improvement is not just limited to 96/24. Plenty of "hi-res" albums are at 48/24, and the improvement in these over 44.1/16 is comparable. Perhaps even more surprising - there are a lot of "hi-res" albums at just 44.1/24, which carry quite a chunk of the audible improvement of 96/24.

My observations do not concur with what's predicted by the theory. If anything, it's the sample rate that should have the greatest effect - moving the artifacts of brick-wall filtering high beyond audibility. The sample bit depth should have no effect other than further lowering the already inaudible noise floor. But this is not what appears to happen - it seems that the bit depth increase to 24, alone, is hugely beneficial. 

Could it be just the removal of the downsampling step (24-16) in the 44.1/16 mastering process? But that doesn't make sense either. Dither can, in theory, restore the random noise floor at any bit depth provided there is enough dynamic range remaining for the programme material.

I am at a loss to explain why this is happening, but it is happening.


Posted By: Graham Slee
Date Posted: 17 Feb 2020 at 9:54am
The sound will depend on the conversion provision. Software is only doing what hardware might conceivably achieve. Everything is adusted somewhere. Comparisons are comparisons.

In other words, each method has its own "slant", no matter how subtle, and often unintended because it is there to make something else work. There can never be a truly flat playing field. There are too many factors involved.


-------------
That none should be able to buy or sell without a smartphone and the knowledge in how to use apps


Posted By: Aussie Mick
Date Posted: 17 Feb 2020 at 10:01am
I’ve become totally unconcerned by why some versions sound better than others. I find my favorite and I listen. Music is the best. 
Mick.


-------------
Rega RP8 - Apheta 2 - Accession MC Enigma PS -Solo ULDE (Focal Utopia) - PS Audio M700 - Fical Kanta No2


Posted By: kgilroy
Date Posted: 17 Feb 2020 at 1:27pm
This hi-res discussion can become a bit like going down the proverbial rabbit hole. I have DSD files, 96/24, 88/24, 192/24, 44/16 and have come to the conclusion that it all comes down to the mastering engineer and what they think sounds good.
Goes without saying that the recording has to be good to start with.

-------------
Keith

Marantz TT-15S1, Maestro V2, Accession MM, Icon Audio Stereo 40 Mk lll, Wharfedale Jade 3.

Mac Mini, BitPerfect, Dynaudio Xeo2

Marantz SA-15S1, Apple TV, Cambridge CXA60, B&W DM2000, REL Sub


Posted By: patientot
Date Posted: 17 Feb 2020 at 7:29pm
Originally posted by kgilroy kgilroy wrote:

This hi-res discussion can become a bit like going down the proverbial rabbit hole. I have DSD files, 96/24, 88/24, 192/24, 44/16 and have come to the conclusion that it all comes down to the mastering engineer and what they think sounds good.
Goes without saying that the recording has to be good to start with.

Pretty much my conclusion as well. I may have mentioned this before but awhile back I experimented with some pure/native DSD files (e.g. music actually recorded in DSD and not converted to anything else afterwards). Generally these are only available as classical solo instruments as it's not that easy to edit or mix music in DSD without converting to PCM first. 

Conclusion: although the files sounded very nice and I do not regret purchasing the albums, there is nothing at all special about the DSD format, at least where 2 channel audio is concerned. I could easily convert the files to PCM and would probably not be able to tell the difference in blind test, nor do I think anyone else could with repeatable, controlled blind testing. 

The only reason I would buy DSD files in the future would be due to special mastering not available on another format. 

Oh, and one thing that really rubbed me the wrong way about DSD was a download store's advertising offer of "upsampled" 512 DSD rate files (at an additional charge of course). Never mind the fact that the source material was often recorded at a lower rate like 256 or 128 DSD, and that these rates already capture audio information well beyond the threshold of human hearing!LOL


-------------
SL-1200 MK7 (modified) + Reflex M + PSU-1 used with AT150-40ML, AT VM95ML, Stanton 680mkII + Ogura, and Shure M35X cartridges.


Posted By: discrete badger
Date Posted: 18 Feb 2020 at 7:13am
Originally posted by Graham Slee Graham Slee wrote:

The sound will depend on the conversion provision. Software is only doing what hardware might conceivably achieve. Everything is adusted somewhere. Comparisons are comparisons.

In other words, each method has its own "slant", no matter how subtle, and often unintended because it is there to make something else work. There can never be a truly flat playing field. There are too many factors involved.

This point of view makes a lot of rational sense, and it certainly matches my experience for the same album CD vs LP; where some are much better on LP, and some are much better on CD.

However, the following is my observation so far: Having gone through between 20 and 30 familiar recordings and compared the hi-res with the plain 44.1/16, the hi-res is always the better of the two, in terms of perceived SQ. If the above PoV were the only factor at work, then one might expect only some to sound better. As another intruiging data point, for TDB, playing back the 96/24 stream at 44.1/16, such that it is forced to be downsampled in the streamer, reproduces the 44.1/16 sound exactly!




Posted By: discrete badger
Date Posted: 18 Feb 2020 at 7:28am
Originally posted by Aussie Mick Aussie Mick wrote:

I’ve become totally unconcerned by why some versions sound better than others. I find my favorite and I listen. Music is the best. 
Mick.

It is indeed all about the music; and I've lived this maxim, having not bought a piece of audio equipment for nearly a decade, and been simply enjoying my home speaker system and my home (Solo UL powered) and portable (Voyager powered) headphone rigs.

But the recent experiences with hi-res have suggested to me that I have been missing out on some of the music. This is not just an "it sounds nicer" statement of sound quality woolliness, although it does sound nicer. 

It is more objective than that : there are inner parts in some pieces of music which I simply haven't heard before, and if they were included by the composer/artist, then they have a part to play in the music, and should be heard.

I should have investigated this a long time ago. Likewise, I should never have tolerated lossy OGG rips of my CD collection - another cause of major missing out. But storage was much more expensive back then.


Posted By: Graham Slee
Date Posted: 18 Feb 2020 at 8:32am
There are indeed "inner parts," and I have been trying to encourage others to discover them for the past 21 years Wink

-------------
That none should be able to buy or sell without a smartphone and the knowledge in how to use apps


Posted By: kgilroy
Date Posted: 19 Feb 2020 at 5:53pm
Originally posted by patientot patientot wrote:

Originally posted by kgilroy kgilroy wrote:

This hi-res discussion can become a bit like going down the proverbial rabbit hole. I have DSD files, 96/24, 88/24, 192/24, 44/16 and have come to the conclusion that it all comes down to the mastering engineer and what they think sounds good.
Goes without saying that the recording has to be good to start with.


Pretty much my conclusion as well. I may have mentioned this before but awhile back I experimented with some pure/native DSD files (e.g. music actually recorded in DSD and not converted to anything else afterwards). Generally these are only available as classical solo instruments as it's not that easy to edit or mix music in DSD without converting to PCM first. 

Conclusion: although the files sounded very nice and I do not regret purchasing the albums, there is nothing at all special about the DSD format, at least where 2 channel audio is concerned. I could easily convert the files to PCM and would probably not be able to tell the difference in blind test, nor do I think anyone else could with repeatable, controlled blind testing. 

The only reason I would buy DSD files in the future would be due to special mastering not available on another format. 

Oh, and one thing that really rubbed me the wrong way about DSD was a download store's advertising offer of "upsampled" 512 DSD rate files (at an additional charge of course). Never mind the fact that the source material was often recorded at a lower rate like 256 or 128 DSD, and that these rates already capture audio information well beyond the threshold of human hearing!LOL

It seems that we have very similar experiences. I have become agnostic about PCM vs DSD although you can find lots of discussion online about the merits of both. I don’t own a DSD Dac so I convert to PCM on my computer.
With regards to CD’s I only buy if that is the only way to get a particular piece of music with one exception. The XRCD24 Blue Note discs I have are very detailed and exciting to listen to which tends to support my view that it is not so much the sampling frequency/bit depth but the way the music is mastered to the medium that most determines sound quality.

-------------
Keith

Marantz TT-15S1, Maestro V2, Accession MM, Icon Audio Stereo 40 Mk lll, Wharfedale Jade 3.

Mac Mini, BitPerfect, Dynaudio Xeo2

Marantz SA-15S1, Apple TV, Cambridge CXA60, B&W DM2000, REL Sub


Posted By: patientot
Date Posted: 19 Feb 2020 at 6:28pm
Originally posted by kgilroy kgilroy wrote:


It seems that we have very similar experiences. I have become agnostic about PCM vs DSD although you can find lots of discussion online about the merits of both. I don’t own a DSD Dac so I convert to PCM on my computer.
With regards to CD’s I only buy if that is the only way to get a particular piece of music with one exception. The XRCD24 Blue Note discs I have are very detailed and exciting to listen to which tends to support my view that it is not so much the sampling frequency/bit depth but the way the music is mastered to the medium that most determines sound quality.

Right, lots of camps online re: what they prefer. I do have a few different DACs that will play DSD without converting to PCM - two use an ESS chip, the other one is AKM. No difference that's audible. I mainly bought the DSD albums out of pure curiosity. 

I don't have any of those XRCD BN releases but I do have other older BN CDs that sound quite nice (old McMaster, Connoisseur Series, Japan TOCP, etc.). Often the mastering presentation is different across different versions if I have more than one. Certainly most mastering engineers have their own preferences and way of doing things and they are not always working with the same exact tapes either.  


-------------
SL-1200 MK7 (modified) + Reflex M + PSU-1 used with AT150-40ML, AT VM95ML, Stanton 680mkII + Ogura, and Shure M35X cartridges.


Posted By: kgilroy
Date Posted: 20 Feb 2020 at 12:34pm
Originally posted by patientot patientot wrote:

Originally posted by kgilroy kgilroy wrote:


It seems that we have very similar experiences. I have become agnostic about PCM vs DSD although you can find lots of discussion online about the merits of both. I don’t own a DSD Dac so I convert to PCM on my computer.
With regards to CD’s I only buy if that is the only way to get a particular piece of music with one exception. The XRCD24 Blue Note discs I have are very detailed and exciting to listen to which tends to support my view that it is not so much the sampling frequency/bit depth but the way the music is mastered to the medium that most determines sound quality.


Right, lots of camps online re: what they prefer. I do have a few different DACs that will play DSD without converting to PCM - two use an ESS chip, the other one is AKM. No difference that's audible. I mainly bought the DSD albums out of pure curiosity. 

I don't have any of those XRCD BN releases but I do have other older BN CDs that sound quite nice (old McMaster, Connoisseur Series, Japan TOCP, etc.). Often the mastering presentation is different across different versions if I have more than one. Certainly most mastering engineers have their own preferences and way of doing things and they are not always working with the same exact tapes either.  


Do you know anything about these - DSD flat transfers?

https://store.acousticsounds.com/d/149032/Kenny_Burrell-Midnight_Blue-DSD_Single_Rate_28MHz64fs_Download - https://store.acousticsounds.com/d/149032/Kenny_Burrell-Midnight_Blue-DSD_Single_Rate_28MHz64fs_Download

-------------
Keith

Marantz TT-15S1, Maestro V2, Accession MM, Icon Audio Stereo 40 Mk lll, Wharfedale Jade 3.

Mac Mini, BitPerfect, Dynaudio Xeo2

Marantz SA-15S1, Apple TV, Cambridge CXA60, B&W DM2000, REL Sub


Posted By: patientot
Date Posted: 20 Feb 2020 at 10:36pm
Originally posted by kgilroy kgilroy wrote:

 
Do you know anything about these - DSD flat transfers?

https://store.acousticsounds.com/d/149032/Kenny_Burrell-Midnight_Blue-DSD_Single_Rate_28MHz64fs_Download - https://store.acousticsounds.com/d/149032/Kenny_Burrell-Midnight_Blue-DSD_Single_Rate_28MHz64fs_Download

Unfortunately no. And given the price and considering I have the MM33 LP and the old McMaster BN CD I doubt I really need it. How it sounds likely depends on the condition of the source tape used. Info in the listing is very scant. Not sure when those transfers were done. Possibly around the time of the AP SACD Blue Note campaign? I'd be curious how a flat version sounds compared to one EQ'd by a mastering engineer. Then again, not curious enough to drop $25 on this download. 


-------------
SL-1200 MK7 (modified) + Reflex M + PSU-1 used with AT150-40ML, AT VM95ML, Stanton 680mkII + Ogura, and Shure M35X cartridges.


Posted By: lfc jon
Date Posted: 20 Nov 2021 at 1:11pm
Didn't know where to put this post, so as it's HD I put it here.
As anybody heard anymore about HD Vinyl records it was supposed to be the next best thing in Vinyl, Hi-res audio in analogue and it was supposed to make producing ordinary records cheaper. I do know people were not for it as it was done digitally "but most new vinyl is now a days" It was the cheaper to produce that looking forward to. "Ha Ha" like that was going to happen.


-------------
Reflex M, Solo (both with PSU-1) CuSat50, Lautus, Spatia & Spatia links cables. Ortofon Bronze.


Posted By: ICL1P
Date Posted: 20 Nov 2021 at 1:14pm
latest news here  https://hdvinyl.org/video-scanner-lens/ - https://hdvinyl.org/video-scanner-lens/

-------------
Ifor
=====
Reflex M & ACCESSION M, CuSat50, Majestic DAC, a Proprius pair.


Posted By: Chris Firth
Date Posted: 20 Nov 2021 at 1:39pm
I like that the HD Vinyl process uses CAD, and onto a much more durable material than traditionally used.
10,000 pressing out of a stamper with no degradation is very impressive, and a complete lack of toxic chemical process in stamper production is very desirable.

https://hdvinyl.org/hd-vinyl-benefits/ - https://hdvinyl.org/hd-vinyl-benefits/


Posted By: Graham Slee
Date Posted: 20 Nov 2021 at 1:40pm
Reading about the "traditional stamper" you'd think the sound quality would be dreadful. I can assure you my old records didn't have a digital master. They must therefore sound rubbish by comparison with the digitised version. And what about all the de-essing?

What I don't "get" is if digital is so wonderful, then why go to all the trouble to make "perfect" vinyl records? The reproduction technology is still as backward as the traditional stamper, isn't it?


-------------
That none should be able to buy or sell without a smartphone and the knowledge in how to use apps


Posted By: lfc jon
Date Posted: 20 Nov 2021 at 2:03pm
Thanks All.
I do don't think we will be seeing it anytime soon.
I'm happy with the sound I'm getting from my "old way" records. AT the moment.


-------------
Reflex M, Solo (both with PSU-1) CuSat50, Lautus, Spatia & Spatia links cables. Ortofon Bronze.


Posted By: discrete badger
Date Posted: 20 Nov 2021 at 2:09pm
Digital can still be wonderful at the same time as using new ideas to try to improve a legacy playback technology that a lot of people very much enjoy listening to. I don't see a conflict here; both have their place.



Posted By: Chris Firth
Date Posted: 20 Nov 2021 at 2:09pm
I have some pretty spectacular sounding LPs made using the traditional process too, but using CAD driven lathes for making the pressing plates makes sense, for consistency's sake if nothing else.

I have a number of recent albums that were recorded, mixed and mastered digitally, and eventually made it to vinyl release, and they bring something of their own to the table.
There is a certain je ne sais quoi they have from vinyl playback.







Posted By: Graham Slee
Date Posted: 20 Nov 2021 at 4:47pm
OK, I could understand digitally mastered vinyl before we had the equipment to reproduce digital files satisfactorily at home.

But for the last 15 years or so, we've had the ability to play digitally mastered music, without the need for all these inter-stage processes, and obtain great results - especially with the more "human" digital and analogue filters.

So why these days make vinyl records at all, unless the only master available is analogue? (I can accept that). But to add all the extra hurdles makes absolutely no sense - and, yes, I know I earn a living selling phono stages, but come on!

Oh, and don't be taken in by "non-toxic" and "eco-friendly" because you'll show your ignorance. How do you think vinyl is made? It is made using gas!!! Its manufacturing process liberates CO2 to the atmosphere - and other chemicals of which some are toxic (although, being a gardener, I like CO2 because it makes my veggies grow).

I treasure my vinyl, but since the availability of well-made digital recordings (yes, even 16 bit), and the electronics which can reproduce them really well, then my only "eco-crime" is the same as everybody's - COAL!

(I guess ex of the mining industry engineers have to be seen as cloth cap wearers and belittled, or we could make others believe in the laws of thermodynamics - their god forbid!)



-------------
That none should be able to buy or sell without a smartphone and the knowledge in how to use apps


Posted By: Graham Slee
Date Posted: 20 Nov 2021 at 5:37pm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silvering#Silver - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silvering#Silver

Mirrors - next to be banned?


-------------
That none should be able to buy or sell without a smartphone and the knowledge in how to use apps


Posted By: Graham Slee
Date Posted: 20 Nov 2021 at 7:03pm
Hands up all those in possession of a printed circuit board? Yes you! You've plenty of them, and so have I. Just wanted you to know how irresponsible you and I are in encouraging the use of (wait for it) chemicals, by buying any and all things electronic - not forgetting your coal consumption!

-------------
That none should be able to buy or sell without a smartphone and the knowledge in how to use apps


Posted By: fluddite
Date Posted: 21 Nov 2021 at 1:02am
Originally posted by Graham Slee Graham Slee wrote:

OK, I could understand digitally mastered vinyl before we had the equipment to reproduce digital files satisfactorily at home.

But for the last 15 years or so, we've had the ability to play digitally mastered music, without the need for all these inter-stage processes, and obtain great results - especially with the more "human" digital and analogue filters.

So why these days make vinyl records at all, unless the only master available is analogue? (I can accept that). But to add all the extra hurdles makes absolutely no sense - and, yes, I know I earn a living selling phono stages, but come on!

Oh, and don't be taken in by "non-toxic" and "eco-friendly" because you'll show your ignorance. How do you think vinyl is made? It is made using gas!!! Its manufacturing process liberates CO2 to the atmosphere - and other chemicals of which some are toxic (although, being a gardener, I like CO2 because it makes my veggies grow).

I treasure my vinyl, but since the availability of well-made digital recordings (yes, even 16 bit), and the electronics which can reproduce them really well, then my only "eco-crime" is the same as everybody's - COAL!

(I guess ex of the mining industry engineers have to be seen as cloth cap wearers and belittled, or we could make others believe in the laws of thermodynamics - their god forbid!)


An excellent set of arguments for only buying s/h vinyl (and indeed s/h components) given that it's already too late to do anything about the CO2 output + raw materials consumption involved. As for new vinyl - I'm aware that some of the artists involved record digitally (others are determinedly AAA), but like to persuade (kid?) myself that my allotment + the raised beds in my garden at least offset the carbon footprint involved. And nowadays I limit myself to s/h vinyl for anything non-"current" - unless it's never been on vinyl before (recent e.g. - Home by Terry Hall). We all have to live with our own hypocrisies and weaknesses, eh? Collecting LPs and listening to them (in an unheated listening room while wearing an extra layer) would seem to be one of the less harmful ones in the current Developed Western (sic.) scheme of things...


Posted By: lfc jon
Date Posted: 04 Dec 2021 at 2:02pm
To be Eco-Friendly in this modern world we have made for are self's and listen to music is "Nye on impossible" even if you listen to someone playing a musical instrument. 

-------------
Reflex M, Solo (both with PSU-1) CuSat50, Lautus, Spatia & Spatia links cables. Ortofon Bronze.



Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd. - https://www.webwiz.net