Inconsistent Hi-Res Quality

[Hailey]

Agreed. Having been burned by HDTracks once too often, I now avoid it altogether.

[Hailey]

That's a bit extreme. Some labels are consistently good. Chesky, for instance, and HDTracks is the natural place to get their productions.

 

You are probably right. But if you have consistently hit-or-miss experiences one place and consistently good experiences at another...well....

[Hailey]

Where else would you get Chesky recordings?

 

Frankly I wasn't really aware of them. I've heard the name but that's it.

[Hailey]

I must take back what I said about HDTracks. I don't know if I'm going soft in the head or what but I logged onto my account there to find out what album it was that I felt burned by, only to discover that the album I'd downloaded is one of my all-season, go-to favs, with exquisite sound.

 

So, my apologies for inpugning HDTracks unfairly.

 

 

P.S. Here's the album, btw. Cannot recommend highly enough.

 

http://www.hdtracks.com/mozart-violin-concertos

[Hailey]

What does it mean when an album such as this

 

Mahler: Symphony No. 8 | HDtracks - The World's Greatest-Sounding Music Downloads

 

is available in 176/24 & 88/24? In which format was it recorded? Why doesn't HDTracks say?

[Hailey]

Or here. This was recorded in 1958. But its available as "audiophile 96/24."

 

Le Sacre du Printemps - Audiophile Picks | HDtracks - The World's Greatest-Sounding Music Downloads

 

How does that work? Who did the remastering?

 

Sorry to come off like a crank here but why should someone pay $18 for a 60 year-old recording without any kind of "provenance," if you will?

[Hailey]

And then there's this:

 

"This album was mastered using our 2xHD proprietary system. In order to achieve the most accurate reproduction of the original recording we tailor our process specifically for each project, using a selection from our pool of state-of-the-art audiophile components and connectors. The process begins with a transfer to analog from the original 24bits/96kHz resolution master, using cutting edge D/A converters. The analog signal is then sent through a hi-end tube pre-amplifier before being recorded directly in DXD using the dCS905 A/D and the dCS Vivaldi Clock. All connections used in the process are made of OCC silver cable. DSD and 192kHz/24Bit versions are separately generated, directly from the analog signal."

 

In other words, you took a 96/24 master, converted to analogue, then reconverted that into digital and upsampled.

 

Um...why?

[Hailey]

The LSO Live recordings are often DSD masters. The relatively unusual sample rate of 176 indicates it is most likely a DSD to PCM transfer.

Ok, so what does that mean? Which one is the "real" one?

[Hailey]

Downloaded the high-res version from HDTracks. Performance and sound both, "eh." In the B/B- range.

 

Waste of money.

[Hailey]

My DAC doesn't do native DSD, though...should I have still waited?

[Hailey]

At least the evening wasn't a complete bust...

 

Dynamite audiophile Saint-Saens 3rd ("Organ")

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/showthread.php?t=29324

[Hailey]

Well, at least you might have done your own conversion and resampling. I generally prefer to play DSD as such but conversion to PCM can be quite satisfying.

 

This is a bit over my head, I'm afraid, as I am quite the hifi novice. You're saying I would convert DSD to PCM through Audirvana or...what?

 

Thanks, in advance, for your guidance here.

 

Not a great performance. Competent. As for the recording, I have not been a fan of Keith Johnson's multichannel recordings which lack the balance and the integrated ambiance that he is famous for in his stereo recordings. The RR "fresh" series is, imho, better in every instance.

 

The performance was competent. But, again, I can't recall that level of "thereness" in any large scale orchestral work.

 

Might you suggest an example of something you think surpasses it, SQ-wise?

[Hailey]

I have it and it sounds great, if that helps you. Although if in general you don't like these old recordings you may not like it. They don't sound the same as modern recordings. I'm a big fan of a lot of the late 50's classical recordings.

 

I'm also a fan of that era--RCA Living Stereo, Everest--and Bernstein, whatever his flaws, can be counted on for a vigorous interpretation.

[Hailey]

IMHO, any of the "fresh" releases from Pittsburgh are better balanced.

 

Like the Honeck Beethoven, you mean?

[Hailey]

Yes although the performances are very forceful. The Dvorak/Janacek and the Strauss discs are excellent.

 

I don't have a problem with being asked to listen to an old standby in a new way, so I really respect his effort.

 

But the quality of the recording itself I found very so-so. The last track--the finale of the 7th--I doubt almost unlistenable. Just woolly and distorted.

 

I thought it was a problem with my equipment but other recordings were fine so I'm not sure what to make of it...

[Hailey]

I tried a DSD > PCM converter for Mac OS X that you can find here: Audio Software I converted a couple of 8.6MHz .dff (64fs) downloads of Oscar Peterson recordings on HIFIStatement. It's easy enough to install the stand-alone DSDConverter (just be sure to "Allow applications from Anywhere" in System Preferences > Security & Privacy > General tab temporarily). It's a zip file that unpacks to documentation and an .app file that you drag and drop into your "Applications" folder.

 

The results are comparable to the best 24/192 downloads I bought on HDtracks - John Coltrane's Black Pearls and Miles Davis's Kind Of Blue.

 

Thanks for that tip. I'll check it out.

[Hailey]

Are you listening to this in DSD? If not, how was it converted? I have no problem with the two versions I have: DSD and DXD.

 

It's the 24/88 from HDTracks.

[Hailey]

It's the 24/88 from HDTracks.

 

Now I remember why I have an aversion to HDTracks: You really have to know what you're buying, or else you'll get played.

 

That's not sound business practice, imo, although it may work for them for a while.

 

In any event, my guess is that their business model relies on a steady stream of newbies, like myself, who don't really know what they're doing.

 

Shame on them.

[Hailey]

You CAN complain that they shouldn't call themelves "audiophile" and charge a premium, but that's a different argument. We are all free not to buy their product without hearing it first or getting a recommendation from someone who has, or finding out the provenance of the release. That's what I try to do before I buy.

 

Exactly. HDTracks misrepresents many of its offerings. Discerning, experienced audiophiles know how not to be taken in. The rest of us have to learn.