anyone has bought the HD files ? worth it ?

[www.linnrecords.com]

[www.qobuz.com]

"we know it's a bit late but we hope you don't mind if we stay"



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-11-30 16:20 by toomuchforme.

here is the bluray in 24/96 khz .. ?

[www.ebay.co.uk]

"we know it's a bit late but we hope you don't mind if we stay"

Apparently it's still the compressed/brickwalled versions so unless you have fancy equipment it's probably not worth it...actually even if you do it probably isn't as in blind tests experts generally can't tell the difference between the CD and SACD/HD versions...Having said that maybe I can help, feel free to send me a PM ;-)

--------------
IORR Links : Essential Studio Outtakes CDs : Audio - History of Rarest Outtakes : Audio



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-11-30 16:48 by gotdablouse.

For the ABKCO tracks it's worth it. They're made from the 2002 DSD remasters and really sound better in HD. But all these tracks were already available on HDTracks on their respective original albums.

As for UMG tracks (from Brown Sugar to One More Shot), they have the same level of compression as the CD and you will notice barely no difference. Also it's worth noting that tracks from 1989 on were originally recorded on digital devices in CD quality at best (except maybe for the two new tracks). Needless to say these tracks will not sound better in higher resolution...
Finally some tracks that were recorded on analog equipment and should be available in full high resolution actually appear to be upsampled version from 44.1kHz sources (ie CD quality)!

For Led Zeppelin fans, Celebration Day HD release is also very doubtful as it looks like an upsampled version from 44.1kHz source.


edit : I'm talking about the HD download version. Don't know about the blu-ray release, but my guess is they are exactly the same.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-11-30 17:17 by kowalski.

I bought some hd tracks of abkco but was not convinced

"we know it's a bit late but we hope you don't mind if we stay"

Quote
toomuchforme
I bought some hd tracks of abkco but was not convinced

Me neither actually. Though I can hear the difference, they don't sound as good as the SACD's.

I would be a bit wary of marketing hype as regards HD audio.

There is an interesting article about why listening to music in theoretically higher quality than a CD is overkill.

[xiphmont.livejournal.com]

There is a very good website called Hydrogenaudio.

[www.hydrogenaudio.org]

Many software developers who specialise in audio hang out there. They use scientific listening tests to test audio technology. What becomes clear is that where audio is concerned there is a very big placebo effect. In other words, people often believe that they can tell the difference when in fact they cannot.

[wiki.hydrogenaudio.org]

It is as if subconsciously your brain tells you that "you paid a fortune for this and the marketing man told you how superior it is so it must sound better".

Let's not be kidded into believing that just because Blu Ray and HD audio have appeared that all of a sudden the ordinary CD sounds shoddy. It is worth remembering how enthusiastic legendary conductors such as Leonard Bernstein and Herbert von Karajan were about the sound quality of CDs - I'm sure if it was good enough for them with their exceptional hearing then it is good enough for me too.

Worth remembering too that ordinary CDs are easy to rip onto your computer/phone/tablet/media player etc. Blu Rays and other formats usually have copy protection systems on them that can make it inconvenient if not impossible to transfer or backup your music - worth bearing in mind.

Forget about tech audio tests and trust your ears. On ABKCO tracks I can easily hear the difference.
Bass and highs sound more detailed and you get a thicker sound very close to the vinyl sound (though still not on par).
Also another advantage of High Rez files is frequencies above 20kHz are not cut off like on CD's. Which means you get everything that was on the original recording.

However when tracks are mastered very "hot" (a lot of compression and everything brought upfront), like UMG remasters that are used on the second half of GRRR! compilation, you will barely notice any difference.
High Rez is really made for respectfully mastered tracks, so that you can enjoy full dynamic range of the original recording.

Quote
kowalski
Forget about tech audio tests and trust your ears. On ABKCO tracks I can easily hear the difference.
Bass and highs sound more detailed and you get a thicker sound very close to the vinyl sound (though still not on par).
Also another advantage of High Rez files is frequencies above 20kHz are not cut off like on CD's. Which means you get everything that was on the original recording.

However when tracks are mastered very "hot" (a lot of compression and everything brought upfront), like UMG remasters that are used on the second half of GRRR! compilation, you will barely notice any difference.
High Rez is really made for respectfully mastered tracks, so that you can enjoy full dynamic range of the original recording.

ABCKO track are better for it. Aftermath sound amazing on high resolution.

Quote
kowalski
Also another advantage of High Rez files is frequencies above 20kHz are not cut off like on CD's. Which means you get everything that was on the original recording.

Is the SACD included in 20kHz? AND How much of that 20kHz are we actually hearng?

Quote
nick

Quote
kowalski
Also another advantage of High Rez files is frequencies above 20kHz are not cut off like on CD's. Which means you get everything that was on the original recording.

Is the SACD included in 20kHz? AND How much of that 20kHz are we actually hearng?

I am an engineer at an Audio company and trust me Humans can't hear anything above 20Khz in fact by the time you are in your teens you most likely can't hear anything much above 15Khz.

Theoretically when you are born you have 20Hz-20Khz hearing but it goes down fast from there...by the time you are 50 you will be lucky to hear above 10-12Khz so all these claims about frequency response extending above 20Khz is nonsense as you just can't hear it.........

Quote
kowalski

As for UMG tracks (from Brown Sugar to One More Shot), they have the same level of compression as the CD and you will notice barely no difference. A
Finally some tracks that were recorded on analog equipment and should be available in full high resolution actually appear to be upsampled version from 44.1kHz sources (ie CD quality)!
edit : I'm talking about the HD download version. Don't know about the blu-ray release, but my guess is they are exactly the same.

mhmm... at least a lot of the after ABCKO-recors were released as very expensive newly reamstered fantastic sounding SACDs by UMG in Japan. I hoped that they would use those versions at least for the Blu ray.

Quote
Stoneswolf

Quote
kowalski

As for UMG tracks (from Brown Sugar to One More Shot), they have the same level of compression as the CD and you will notice barely no difference. A
Finally some tracks that were recorded on analog equipment and should be available in full high resolution actually appear to be upsampled version from 44.1kHz sources (ie CD quality)!
edit : I'm talking about the HD download version. Don't know about the blu-ray release, but my guess is they are exactly the same.

mhmm... at least a lot of the after ABCKO-recors were released as very expensive newly reamstered fantastic sounding SACDs by UMG in Japan. I hoped that they would use those versions at least for the Blu ray.

I doubt they would use those SACD as they were made by Universal Japan for Japan market only. They sound spectacular but they lack a proper mastering IMO. From what I understand they're merely a flat transfer from the original tapes.

I agree oldschool but if you listen to some 24/96 it is smooth, detailed. Like robert plant Raising sand. Gaucho too.

"we know it's a bit late but we hope you don't mind if we stay"

Quote
oldschool

Theoretically when you are born you have 20Hz-20Khz hearing but it goes down fast from there...by the time you are 50 you will be lucky to hear above 10-12Khz so all these claims about frequency response extending above 20Khz is nonsense as you just can't hear it.........

Okay but here's another way to put it. If you scan a photo at 100 dpi and you then print it you'll get an ugly result. If you scan the same document at 2400dpi and you print it I guarantee you you'll see the difference.
100 dpi is mp3 format 2400 dpi is HD.

Put differently make a A/D transfer of one hour of music. If you use a bitrate desgined for mp3 you'll get end up with a file that say 80 Mo in size.
If you transfer the same hour to HD/Pono format your file will be several Gb in size.
Don't tell me they'll sound the same... or you'll tell me then that DVD and Bluray look the same...

Quote
kowalski
I doubt they would use those SACD as they were made by Universal Japan for Japan market only. They sound spectacular but they lack a proper mastering IMO. From what I understand they're merely a flat transfer from the original tapes.

Most albums are better off without any mastering moves, although there are exceptions.

Quote
FreeBird

Quote
kowalski
I doubt they would use those SACD as they were made by Universal Japan for Japan market only. They sound spectacular but they lack a proper mastering IMO. From what I understand they're merely a flat transfer from the original tapes.

Most albums are better off without any mastering moves, although there are exceptions.

Maybe I'm too used to the various mastered (or over mastered versions) already available...

Quote
oldschool

Quote
nick

Quote
kowalski
Also another advantage of High Rez files is frequencies above 20kHz are not cut off like on CD's. Which means you get everything that was on the original recording.

Is the SACD included in 20kHz? AND How much of that 20kHz are we actually hearng?

I am an engineer at an Audio company and trust me Humans can't hear anything above 20Khz in fact by the time you are in your teens you most likely can't hear anything much above 15Khz.

Theoretically when you are born you have 20Hz-20Khz hearing but it goes down fast from there...by the time you are 50 you will be lucky to hear above 10-12Khz so all these claims about frequency response extending above 20Khz is nonsense as you just can't hear it.........

I hear what you're saying...I dunno, still sounds pretty old school.

Quote

"I am an engineer at an Audio company and trust me Humans can't hear anything above 20Khz in fact by the time you are in your teens you most likely can't hear anything much above 15Khz."

My dog is not going to like this when I tell him I'm not wasting money on these formats.

Quote
GravityBoy

Quote

"I am an engineer at an Audio company and trust me Humans can't hear anything above 20Khz in fact by the time you are in your teens you most likely can't hear anything much above 15Khz."

My dog is not going to like this when I tell him I'm not wasting money on these formats.

he's a purist isn't he? A bit obnoxious for my liking.

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
GravityBoy

Quote

"I am an engineer at an Audio company and trust me Humans can't hear anything above 20Khz in fact by the time you are in your teens you most likely can't hear anything much above 15Khz."

My dog is not going to like this when I tell him I'm not wasting money on these formats.

he's a purist isn't he? A bit obnoxious for my liking.

He's a little shitsu.

How does this all compare to my SACD's from 2002 that register a 176Khz rating instead of 44.1khz when I put them into my player.

I'm a little confused, i'm thinking that 24/96 is less than the 2002 SACD's at 176, am I right??

Thank you gotdablouse
I made a try with Doom and gloom in 44/16 and 88/24.
I hear no difference... maybe it would be different if that was 192/24 file ?
Test made with Linn Akurate DS / Naim supercap, naim 250.2 amp, Naim pre-amp 252.

"we know it's a bit late but we hope you don't mind if we stay"

Thanks for the great authoritative advice guys. I've got an SACD player but I think I'll hold off until/iff they bring the post ABCKO material out on 5.1.

I doubt that will ever happen, but since you have an SACD player you should treat yourself to the phenomenal SFTD disc with its discrete 5.1 mix as well as remixes.

@toomuchforme - thanks for confirming, CD quality us really hard to improve on...

Quote
GravityBoy

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
GravityBoy

Quote

"I am an engineer at an Audio company and trust me Humans can't hear anything above 20Khz in fact by the time you are in your teens you most likely can't hear anything much above 15Khz."

My dog is not going to like this when I tell him I'm not wasting money on these formats.

he's a purist isn't he? A bit obnoxious for my liking.

He's a little shitsu.

true, true

Quote
toomuchforme
Thank you gotdablouse
I made a try with Doom and gloom in 44/16 and 88/24.
I hear no difference... maybe it would be different if that was 192/24 file ?
Test made with Linn Akurate DS / Naim supercap, naim 250.2 amp, Naim pre-amp 252.

To me there's a very light difference with the 88/24 version of D&G being a little bit smoother and less harsh sounding than the CD version. But I can really hear the difference only when listening with headphones. Nothing outstanding though.

By the way very nice audio equipment, toomuchforme!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-12-03 03:27 by kowalski.

More infos on GRRR! blu-ray release here : [www.superdeluxeedition.com]

Quote

There is no video at all – this is an audio-only release – but the music is offered in three different audio formats:

2.0 PCM 24-bit/96Khz
2.0 DTS-HD Master Audio 24-bit/96KHz
2.0 Dolby True HD 24-bit/96KHz

Yes Kowalski. With this equipment it is sometimes difficult to hear some differences. But when one is really bad you hear it too

"we know it's a bit late but we hope you don't mind if we stay"

Quote
dcba

Quote
oldschool

Theoretically when you are born you have 20Hz-20Khz hearing but it goes down fast from there...by the time you are 50 you will be lucky to hear above 10-12Khz so all these claims about frequency response extending above 20Khz is nonsense as you just can't hear it.........

Okay but here's another way to put it. If you scan a photo at 100 dpi and you then print it you'll get an ugly result. If you scan the same document at 2400dpi and you print it I guarantee you you'll see the difference.
100 dpi is mp3 format 2400 dpi is HD.

Put differently make a A/D transfer of one hour of music. If you use a bitrate desgined for mp3 you'll get end up with a file that say 80 Mo in size.
If you transfer the same hour to HD/Pono format your file will be several Gb in size.
Don't tell me they'll sound the same... or you'll tell me then that DVD and Bluray look the same...

Where in my post did I say a higher bit rate was not better? All I was stating is that extending the frequency response above 20Khz provided no audible benefit.