Jump to content
IGNORED

High Resolution Downloads


Recommended Posts

I know what I'm getting from Linn Records or Reference Recordings when I order 24 bit /88.2/96/176.4/192 files. I'm getting studio master files that were recorded at these high resolutions. These two sites are very clear on the equipment and processes that they used to record their studio masters. But what about some of the other sites? How do I know if those sites are only upsampling their Redbook CD files to resell at a higher resolution? I would assume that any download from a previously issued SACD comes from a 24/88.2 or higher recording. But I learned the hard (expensive) way that many Blu-ray discs often just have 16/44.1 files and can sound awful or be a poor value if you are expecting 24/96 or better recordings. And I suspect that if these Blu-ray files were upsampled to 24/192 they would still be lacking.

 

Link to comment

I don't think we'll ever know the real deal behind many of these recording offered by other sites. It's just like buying CDs, DVD-Audio, or SACD discs. Some SACDs are rumored to be made from the 16/48 masters and the same I'm sure goes for downloads.

 

It would be too cool if all the sites detailed all the information we could actually use.

 

Founder of Audiophile Style

UPDATED: My Audio Systems -> https://audiophile.style/system

Link to comment
  • 1 month later...
  • 2 weeks later...

After I ordered the free 2L sampler I was reviewing their website and I see that they have a HiRes Download - Test Bench that invites folks to evaluate future consumer delivery formats. It seems pretty interesting and I was just wonder if anyone has participated and had any feedback or results. For instance, I interested in the stereo tracks from the Divertimenti album that show the following:

 

Stereo - WAV - DXD - 24bit/352.8kHz - 344MB

Stereo - DFF- DSD 64 - 2.8224Mbit/s - 83MB

Stereo - WAV - 24bit/96kHz - 100MB

Stereo - FLAC - 24bit/192kHz - 106MB

Stereo - FLAC - 24bit/96kHz - 51MB

Stereo - FLAC - 24bit/48kHz - 30MB

 

Link to comment

Mr. Louis,

 

Please tell us what DAC and computer you are using to play back your high res files.

 

Thank you

 

Wavelength Silver Crimson/Denominator USB DAC, Levinson 32/33H, Synergistic Research Cables and AC cables, Shunyata Hydra V-Ray II with King Cobra CX cable, Wilson Sasha WP speakers with Wilson Watch Dog Sub. Basis Debut V Vacuum turntable/ Grahm Phantom/Koetsu Jade Platinum. MacBook Pro 17\" 2.3GHz Quad Core i7, 8GB RAM, Pure Music, Decibel, Fidelia, AudioQuest Diamond USB Cable.

Link to comment
  • 2 weeks later...

I downloaded the WAV-DXD-24 bit/352.8kHz and the WAX - 24 bit/96kHz files from Divertimenti last night. They sound awesome! I really can't take full advantage of the WAV-DXD-24 bit/352.8kHz file as I have a new Mac Mini outputing to a Benchmark DAC 1 USB, so I am limited to 96kHz on USB but can go to 192kHz on the optical input. I spent an hour listening to the four downloads. I want to compare the two files to see if there is a difference.

 

Alan B

Link to comment

I downloaded a few of the 24/96 and 24/192 files this weekend but I haven't played them yet. However I got the free 2L sampler disc and I thought it was awesome. I will definitely be buying some albums from 2L, I just have to figure out what format and their website is so confusing. If 2L offers buyers the ability to buy a Hybrid SACD or BluRay disc now with the ability for a free digital download of the same disc in equal or lesser resolution, I will place my orders now. Otherwise I have much experimenting to do and unfortunately, I don't have the audio gear to take advantage of the best 2L has to offer.

 

Link to comment

Hey Alan - The Benchmark will accept 192 on the optical input, but I don't think your Mini will output over 96 on the optical output.

 

Can you check the Audio Midi settings to verify what sample rates are available to you? None of my Macs go over 96 on optical and I'd be happy if you Mini actually did go to 192.

 

Founder of Audiophile Style

UPDATED: My Audio Systems -> https://audiophile.style/system

Link to comment

...and I know that, it just slipped my mind. I should have remembered that as I have been experimenting with the midi settings. That is one BIG reason to go with a Mac Pro! BTW, has anyone been able to determine whether the Audiophile 192 card is capable of bit perfect output?

 

Alan B

Link to comment

As far as I can see about 90% of the High Resolution material in the Linn catalogue started life as 16 Bit or Analogue, so it's only the master that is actually 24 bit or whatever.

 

Whilst the appearance of full 24 bit recordings in increasing numbers is desirable, it doesn't guarantee a better sound sound. I have a 1911 recording of Sophie Tucker singing One Of These Days that was found in a dustbin in Birmingham and restored by JCBrum. Actually it had been an Edison Cylinder that had been transferred by a mechanical process to an 81 rpm record in 1926. To me, it sounds very much better than an Amy Winehouse track I was asked to play at the Bristol Hi Fi Show. There are many old but fantastic recordings of wonderful music around and we should revere them just as much and not assume that 24 Bit, which has a long way to go yet to prove its advantages, is any more important than the Music we already have.

 

Some of the 24 bit stuff I have is barely good enough to be used in a Lift.

 

Ash

 

Link to comment

I´m not sure if I´m getting this ?

 

Are you both saying that high rez files are of no importance when it comes to sound quality?

 

While I certainly agree that a lot of old,sometimes even really old, analogue material, sounds way better than most things recorded in RBCD, ie 16/44 , I can also clearly hear from SACDs and recently also on 24/96 downloads from 2L ,that all else being reasonably equal, numbers certainly seem to count!

 

Yes, there are crappy recordings made in, or falsely marketed as, hi res, sure!

 

But contrary to Ashley´s findings, my search at the Linn site showed all except a few of the classical recordings originated as masterfiles of 24/88 or 24/96 and none at 16/44.

 

Since I already own the ones I´m interested in as SACDs and also find their pricing ridiculous I haven´t bought anything from them yet.

 

Sure higher numbers as such are of course no absolute quarantee of better sound.

 

Just listen to the RBCD layer of an SACD compared to the higher res SACD layer ,and if your ears are not totally clogged , or your system really sucks ,you will hear the difference!

Provided that the actual music played and well recorded is ACOUSTIC , large scale symphonic or opera, there will be a clear advantage audible.

Maybe I should also add provided your reference point is again real live acoustic music.

 

I´m not at all surprised that with electrically amplified instruments and synthetic pop- rock material, a lot of people don´t hear any difference between RBCD and hi res !

 

The fine nuances, harmonics and dynamic range, the very things that really count when it comes to true HI FI, aren´t there in the first place with that kind of music!

So how could you expect to hear any differences?

 

 

With my new Grado GS 1000s , not only do the advantages of hi res stand out even clearer than before.

 

The limitations of RBCD also became even more evident.

 

Further listening via the portable little battery powered headphone amp also from Grado has revealed it to be not the equal of my still better Musical Fidelity headphone amp.

It can sound a touch overbright at times and is a bit lacking in the extreme bass.

But it is certainly good enough for travel.

 

And my former reference headphones Sennheiser 650s will be up for sale soon .

 

The Grado on the other hand, is simply one of the best headphones I´ve ever heard. And I can heartily recommend it to anyone intererested in true high end sound in a portable format.

They are very revealing,maybe even too revealing for low rez formats with digital artifacts and limited resolution !

 

all the best from Chrille ,

 

still waiting for much more real music as hi rez downloads.

 

 

Link to comment

"still waiting for much more real music as hi rez downloads".

 

It's a recurring point I know, but not much benefit sitting there listening to a 24/192 track of music you abslotutely can't stand! What if you tire of some obscure string quartet, or aren't really into jazz (sorry for heresy!) They could all be 48/384 for all I care....

 

Now 24/192 Floyd, Radiohead, or Zepplin....then you'd be talking.....

 

We need hirez choice for mainstream stuff as well!!!!!!!

 

New simplified setup: STEREO- Primary listening Area: Cullen Circuits Mod ZP90> Benchmark DAC1>RotelRKB250 Power amp>KEF Q Series. Secondary listening areas: 1/ QNAP 119P II(running MinimServer)>UPnP>Linn Majik DSI>Linn Majik 140's. 2/ (Source awaiting)>Invicta DAC>RotelRKB2100 Power amp>Rega's. Tertiary multiroom areas: Same QNAP>SMB>Sonos>Various. MULTICHANNEL- MacMini>A+(Standalone mode)>Exasound e28 >5.1 analog out>Yamaha Avantage Receiver>Pre-outs>Linn Chakra power amps>Linn Katan front and sides. Linn Trikan Centre. Velodyne SPL1000 Ultra

Link to comment

Please tell me this is one of your "hints" which is coming shortly......and not pie in the sky!

 

New simplified setup: STEREO- Primary listening Area: Cullen Circuits Mod ZP90> Benchmark DAC1>RotelRKB250 Power amp>KEF Q Series. Secondary listening areas: 1/ QNAP 119P II(running MinimServer)>UPnP>Linn Majik DSI>Linn Majik 140's. 2/ (Source awaiting)>Invicta DAC>RotelRKB2100 Power amp>Rega's. Tertiary multiroom areas: Same QNAP>SMB>Sonos>Various. MULTICHANNEL- MacMini>A+(Standalone mode)>Exasound e28 >5.1 analog out>Yamaha Avantage Receiver>Pre-outs>Linn Chakra power amps>Linn Katan front and sides. Linn Trikan Centre. Velodyne SPL1000 Ultra

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×
×
  • Create New...