Diana Krall, The Look of Love, HD Tracks

[AudioDoctor]

the red lines in the first screen shot indicate clipping.

 

perhaps I was expecting too much from redbook CD files as this is my basis for comparison. A 24/192 download of Haydn.

 

 

 

Notice there is no clipping and the bottom spectrum seems much cleaner, but as I think about it, that could be due to the greater headroom that hi-res offers. I bet if I limited that window to 22khz, it would look pretty similar.

 

 

[Downrange]

Yes. My point would be that anything that is 60 plus db down is essentially inaudible, even at perceptible audio frequencies, and it pretty meaningless at ultrasonic frequencies, except as an indicator of some process noise of some kind. What we see in MANY ultrasonic spectra are various artifacts of sampling/filtering, or, as in the case of the subject recording, possibly console mixing. At any rate, I say enjoy the music! Sounds wonderful.

It's easy to get lost in the engineering side of all this, especially when one doesn't really have the answers, and/or relies on presumed, self-appointed "experts."

 

[nemick]

I'm not altogether sure that anyone is getting too lost in the engineering of all this and certainly the end result, the music, is what matters. That said, my understanding of the purpose of this thread is to enable potential purchasers to see what they would be buying before they buy it! The vendors have made claims that haven't always been entirely accurate.

 

If some posters on here come across as "self appointed experts", I would rather see their attempts at understanding what these graphs represent than being totally in the dark. The forum is for the "Objective & Subjective" evaluation of various HI-Rez downloads, so what would be the point in the forum if folks can't express an opinion, right or wrong, on what they think graphs represent?

 

[Downrange]

Just a little, not bad.

 

Edit: it's rare to see any clipping, but I don't see this as particularly relevant. What some people may dislike are the choices made in most of Krall's recordings to emphasize sibilance to foster, presumably, intimacy. This is a stylistic choice, and opinions will vary.

What is, in my view, not debatable, is the audio quality of this particular download, which is outstanding.

 

Those of us who cut our audio teeth on magnetic tape got used to running things just a little "hot," as most formulations could take +3-6 db, and one wanted to keep as much dynamic range as possible

 

 

 

 

[Downrange]

Sure, absolutely. It's wide open.

 

Some of us just need to come in from time to time to provide counterpoint, shall we say? This thread was shaping up to be a "hit piece" on a very good download, that has now been shown to be unwarranted.

 

[nemick]

I am all for a counterpoint or rebuttal of any point of view. The questions though, in this instance, are these. Is the Hi-Rez download of the album in question sufficiently better than the CD version to justify one spending the additional cash for it? Is it really a Hi-Rez version or just an upsample of the CD? If these questions have been answered, and I suspect they have, then the thread has fulfilled it's purpose. The latter question wouldn't really even arise if some vendors had not previously sold albums that were not what they claimed them to be. The first question is obviously subjective and I for one think this album sounds terrific. I have no idea if it sounds better than the original CD though.

 

I already purchased the download so the question is moot for me. Others, however, might feel that some of the information here can help them make a somewhat more informed purchasing decision.

 

[Downrange]

Yes. Especially if the CD has that much clipping (see audio Doctor's post)

 

Yes. It's a real "hi rez" download, as proven by the ultrasonic content right up to 48khz...

 

Today, I've listened to selections from all five HDTracks DLs I have of Krall, and they are very similar. Spectra are also similar, although the (discussed ultrasonic) noise peaks were unique to TLOL. Listening, though, they are all great. It would be hard to rank order them.

 

Most real 24 bit DLs are going to blow away most CD. Hi-Res from CD looks like the CD plots AudioDr posted - truncated "brick-wall" style at 22khz...

 

[PeterSt]

I have this in redbook, so I made some plots...

this does not look good.

 

You must have some remaster at hand. Mine looks fine.

 

 

[PeterSt]

What I see...

There are two bands of ultrasonic noise that commence (only and exactly) when Diana is "miked up" for the vocals. They are completely absent during the instrumental introduction, and gradually fade down at the end.

 

Oh ? Well I don't know how you look at these plots, but I see them from start to end throughout as soon as some level is there (see picture in the OP).

 

Maybe I don't understand what you mean ?

 

 

[goldsdad]

 

Click to enlarge

 

 

 

Click to enlarge

 

 

 

Click to enlarge

 

 

 

 

[AudioDoctor]

it is just a CD purchased off the shelf at my local record shop. The only clue it gives to its provenance is where it mentions that it was "Recorded and mixed by Al Schmitt"

 

[Downrange]

Well, maybe not.

 

Look above the post you quoted (of mine).

 

See the file attached (fullwindow001), which is a spectral analysis of the entire song.

 

Notice the two bands of noise we have been discussing here begin at "mike up." I can actually play this entire song using Audacity, follow the moving line cursor, and it's 100 per cent correlated with Krall's vocals beginning at about 11 seconds in, just after the intro, which doesn't have the noise bands. The poster immediately after confirmed the same thing.

 

 

 

 

 

[PeterSt]

But would it be correct to say that it is not correlated to her voice but only to this "mike up" then ? (answer : yes :-)

What I got from you at first is that it only was there when she is singing ...

 

There are two bands of ultrasonic noise that commence (only and exactly) when Diana is "miked up" for the vocals. They are completely absent during the instrumental introduction, and gradually fade down at the end.

 

... which you clearly did not say.

Apologies.