Hi-Res - Does it matter? Blind Test by Mark Waldrep

[Rt66indierock]

33 minutes ago, Miska said:

 

I only care that music important for me is available in hires. That ranges from Daft Punk to David Gilmour and Mark Knopfler, and to classical music and blues/jazz. I'm not even rounding error as customer for a record company, so I care as much about their market as they care about me.

 

 

The exact thought process that stunted adoption of SACD.

[mansr]

42 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

They don't add up to anything but a rounding error in the market.

DSD is made of rounding errors.

[Miska]

6 minutes ago, gmgraves said:

Right now, I am using an AudioQuest Cobalt in my office system, AFAICS, it does not support DSD, but the Chord Quetest that I have on loan does, and I have used it to listen to my DSD master files. Without that, I have to rely on my Kong MR-2000s or MR-1 to play them back!

 

OK, the Chord converts DSD to PCM first and then back to SDM. But the Korg does have actually DSD capable DAC too. And a real 1-bit DSD ADC (any PCM recording with it is just DSD-to-PCM conversion).

 

[gmgraves]

17 minutes ago, Miska said:

 

I know both especially the DPA but also the Sennheisers being used for lot of classical recordings by different labels. Especially if you look at 5.1 channel Decca-trees or similar suspended from concert hall ceilings. Like here in Helsinki. DPA used to have 130V phantom versions of 4006 etc, and especially those are used in high quality recordings. Many still have the original versions under B&K brand, before DPA split.

 

When I'm looking at for example HiFi-News reviews of recent hires recordings, many of the 96k tracks, or even most, have content reaching the 48k Nyquist.

 

If someone is making hires releases, it only makes sense to invest into hires capable microphones as well.

 

P.S. 2L is Norwegian, not Swedish...

 

Forgive me for the error, you are right 2L is most assuredly Norwegian! I agree that it does make sense that modern Hi-res recordings use microphones with response at least to 30 KHz. But most hi-res being done by and for the majors simply use the normal microphones that they have on hand. And many of the hi-res releases are of older material, either originally analog, originally 16/44 digital, or early attempts at 24/96 or DSD. 

[jabbr]

1 hour ago, gmgraves said:

One thing that I don’t see mentioned in this conversation much, are the microphones themselves. While it is possible to buy microphones that have significant frequency response out beyond 30 KHz

 

It's all a self fulfilling prophecy if the assumption is that nothing above 20 kHz. No one will record higher and there wouldn't be hi-res recordings with real hi-res content. In that case there would be no difference. The public will accept what is shovelled at it.

[sandyk]

25 minutes ago, Miska said:

If someone is making hires releases, it only makes sense to invest into hires capable microphones as well.

 

Barry Diament for example uses microphones that are only 1dB  down at 40kHz for his 24/192 recordings.

[gmgraves]

1 minute ago, Miska said:

 

OK, the Chord converts DSD to PCM first and then back to SDM. But the Korg does have actually DSD capable DAC too. And a real 1-bit DSD ADC (any PCM recording with it is just DSD-to-PCM conversion).

 

Correct. The two Korgs still do the best job of rendering the DSD that was captured on them in the first place!

[Miska]

7 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

The exact thought process that stunted adoption of SACD.

 

I think that has much more to do with technical annoyances. It is still alive and kicking. But DSD only took off properly after it appeared in computer audio and downloads. DVD-Audio based on LPCM and Meridian's proprietary compression (from the same guys that brought you MQA) died really quick. Although that compression is still in a way alive on Bluray.

 

Physical media, be it RedBook, SACD or Bluray is pretty much dead.

 

[jabbr]

2 hours ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

We've had high resolution for a couple of decades and nobody cares at the consumer level. And if you take out Japan does anyone care about DSD? 

 

The whole reason for Mark's test is he really believed high resolution sounded better. Then he met me. 

 

If no one cares then why bother posting here. This site is less than a rounding error for the market!

 

If no one cares then just listen to MP3 or AAC or Spotify and be done with it.

 

If no one cares then just open your mouth and swallow MQA.

[Miska]

4 minutes ago, gmgraves said:

And many of the hi-res releases are of older material, either originally analog, originally 16/44 digital, or early attempts at 24/96 or DSD. 

 

Yes, some of the analog material is actually pretty good. I run analysis of all the hires content I get to have idea what it contains.

 

96/24 has been around for quite a while. I got my first 8 channel in, 8 channel out 96/24 AD/DA converter exactly 20 years ago... That was actually pretty nice device.

 

[Ralf11]

for some reason, this discussion is starting to resemble recent theories on cosmic inflation

[gmgraves]

1 minute ago, sandyk said:

 

Barry Diament for example uses microphones that are only 1dB  down at 40kHz for his 24/192 recordings.

Ok, I suspect our friend Mario Martinez also uses the latest wide-band microphones. When Telarc was still recording, they decided to release everything after around 2000 in DSD, but Bob Woods, their engineer used the same B&K omnis that he always used. While these were “calibration mics”, and had very flat response, I recall that they didn’t go very far above 20K.

[Miska]

1 minute ago, gmgraves said:

Ok, I suspect our friend Mario Martinez also uses the latest wide-band microphones. When Telarc was still recording, they decided to release everything after around 2000 in DSD, but Bob Woods, their engineer used the same B&K omnis that he always used. While these were “calibration mics”, and had very flat response, I recall that they didn’t go very far above 20K.

 

You can still get the same stuff under DPA brand, like 4006 and 4007...

[gmgraves]

5 minutes ago, Miska said:

 

You can still get the same stuff under DPA brand, like 4006 and 4007...

That’s right. I had forgotten that B&K’s product line was taken over by DPA. The DPA 2006 is very close to the B&K used by Bob Woods at Telarc. I do not know whether or not DPA has changed it since they took over, but the 2006 has a frequency response of 50 - 20,000 Hz +/- 2dB (and, ostensibly, has usable response to 20 Hz, but DPA doesn’t say how far down the mike is at 20 Hz) and does have response to around 30 KHz, but is more than 10 dB down at that frequency, so I suspect that it is suitable for Hi-def recording. Now, whether or not the B&K equivalent had similar specs, I have no way of knowing.

[Speedskater]

20 minutes ago, gmgraves said:

When Telarc was still recording, they decided to release everything after around 2000 in DSD, but Bob Woods, their engineer used the same B&K omnis that he always used.

Robert Woods was the Recording Producer. Jeck Renner (RIP) was the Recording Engineer. Jack passed away in July 2019 at the age of 84.

[Speedskater]

30 minutes ago, Miska said:

When Telarc was still recording, they decided to release everything after around 2000 in DSD, but Bob Woods, their engineer used the same B&K omnis that he always used. While these were “calibration mics”, and had very flat response, I recall that they didn’t go very far above 20K.

Jack Renner used a distance mic technique with as few mics as practicable. At 30 to 50 foot from the musical instruments. There is a lot of high frequency loss thru 30 feet of air.

[gmgraves]

2 minutes ago, Speedskater said:

Robert Woods was the Recording Producer. Jeck Renner (RIP) was the Recording Engineer. Jack passed away in July 2019 at the age of 84.

Thanks. Yes, that’s true. But When I met Bob Woods at a SF AES convention, he said that he decided what equipment, including mikes that they used. Renner was a fan of C.R. Fine of Mercury Living Presence fame, and used his spaced omni recording scheme (with which I do not agree, BTW). Telarc freshened it with better microphones, that’s all (Fine used an omni Telefunken from the early 1950’s. It was only “somewhat” omnidirectional; which is the only reason Fine’s stereo recordings worked as well as they did. Telarc’s B&K mikes were true omnis, so their stereo was not as good as Mercury’s [IMHO, of course]).

 

Nice discussion, BTW. A lot of knowledgable people involved. 

[fas42]

As regards this thread's topic, "Hi-Res - Does it matter?" - the answer is not one, tiny, minuscule little bit - it can help if the rig's hardware is not up to scratch, in regard to replay of CD standard recordings.

 

The joke is that most audiophile setups very carefully stunt the level of treble in the room, by having downward tilts to the FR, and soaking up excess energy with 'room treatments' - "so that it sounds better" ...  . Yet, somehow, this magical ultrasonic content is going to burst through, and make the playback so much more convincing, especially to 'senior' people whose hearing acuity crashes to the floor above a certain frequency - hmmm, maybe I could sell the Sydney Opera House to one or two from this crowd ... 😝.

[Rt66indierock]

1 hour ago, jabbr said:

 

If no one cares then why bother posting here. This site is less than a rounding error for the market!

 

If no one cares then just listen to MP3 or AAC or Spotify and be done with it.

 

If no one cares then just open your mouth and swallow MQA.

 

Nice try, but I seem to get my points across here. I do listen to Mp3 over on  over web radio stations. Good music is good music. And I listen to AAC every morning on my morning walk/run on my iPod Shuffle. 

 

The goal is get as good as possible sound recorded then distribute it to consumers as CD quality.  Not nearly as easy to do as you would think. I think focusing on improving CD quality is the way to improve recording quality overall. The math of high resolution is troubling especially if you take out crash cymbals. 

 

As for MQA I'm not interested in a new format that doesn't sound better to anyone but the audio press. 

[Rexp]

On 10/29/2019 at 11:02 AM, Ajax said:

Hi Everyone,

Following is an invitation to participate in a study being performed by Mark Waldrep to determine whether or not we can actually hear differences between various formats? I know this is an old and tired argument but one in my opinion that really needs to be put to bed and I encourage you to participate. Too may of us are being ripped off by manufactures' marketing hype, and too many potential audiophiles are staying away because we have overcomplicated things by looking for solutions to problems that simply don't exist. It takes courage to participate in these types of tests because you may have to face your biases and long held beliefs. 

Prior to reading the study please read the introduction to my previous thread on this subject "Some Commonsense" and in particular to John Siau of Benchmark Media's thoughts - it's all about the maths.

 

 

The HD-Audio Challenge II
Dr. AIX

I spent the weekend gearing up for the second round of the HD-Audio challenge. Some of you may remember the first iteration of this study (click here). The music industry seems intent on continuing to push their claims that "hi-res audio" is a tremendous advance in the evolution of music reproduction. After being involved with real high-resolution audio for almost 20 years, I'm not so sure it matters. I'd love to demonstrate that hi-res music and hi-res audio are delivering a "better" experience, but the studies I've read have left me unconvinced.

I believe that I can contribute to the debate by offering up a catalog of real high-resolution tracks in a variety of formats. You — my readers and fellow audiophiles — can download the tracks and play them to your heart's content. I only ask that you not analyze them to determine which is which. What's the point of cheating?

I've selected 20 tracks from a variety of genres and took into consideration suggestions from many of you. I've included solos, small and large ensembles, acoustic and electric, and vocal vs. instrumental http://www.realhd-audio.com/?p=6197.The tracks that will be available are listed below:

The HD-Audio Challenge II - Track List

These are full length tracks not merely samples.

I spent all weekend converting the tracks using Sonic Studio's professional software tool PROCESS to do the conversions. I took the native 96 kHz/24-bit PCM masters and downconverted them to 96 kHz/16-bit, 44.1 kHz/24-bits, and 44.1 kHz/16-bits (CD "Redbook" spec). I will also create constant bitrate MP3 versions at 320 and 256 kbps for those interested in compressed formats. Then I converted all of downconversions back to 96 kHz/24-bits so that all of them are precisely the same size. I have been very careful to ensure that they are the same volume.

I have uploaded all of the files to a folder in my premium Dropbox account and will "Share" the contents with those interested in participating in the study. The files are randomly named and should provide a rich opportunity for those willing to download them and do some serious listening. The goal is to discover if bona fide high-resolution audio recordings can be distinguished from lower resolution formats.

A Preview

I will be doing a thorough analysis of each file and providing the spectra and dynamic analysis to participants. I've already done that for a test file by The Latin Jazz Trio. Here's the spectra of all of the formats:

The Spectra of "Memories of Rio" in all six formats

Sign Up

The more audio enthusiasts that participate in this study, the more raw data I'll have and the more valid the results will be. I'm prepared to be criticized for the casual nature of this experiment. Some will insist that using my own catalog is too limiting, others will insist that it be done in a state-of-the-art studio, or with mega buck equipment. I don't believe that any of those things matter. We all have different rooms, systems of differing values, and varying abilities to listen...exactly the diversity that is required to establish whether the marketing claims made by the industry are true.

If you want to sign up, you'll have to visit the post on my site and use the form at the bottom of the page by clicking here.

This should be fun. I'll leave the files up for a couple of months. I have to report back to my university sometime in early 2020, so you'll have lots of time. Thanks!

 

Ok just got the files, listened in the car on my way to work. First files are BMS A v BMS B (assume BMS is the Bright Morning Star track). There is big difference! Anyone else tried? 

[Rt66indierock]

2 hours ago, Miska said:

 

I think that has much more to do with technical annoyances. It is still alive and kicking. But DSD only took off properly after it appeared in computer audio and downloads. DVD-Audio based on LPCM and Meridian's proprietary compression (from the same guys that brought you MQA) died really quick. Although that compression is still in a way alive on Bluray.

 

Physical media, be it RedBook, SACD or Bluray is pretty much dead.

 

 

Go back a little over 15 years ago for SACD. If you think DSD took off please explain it looks like a dead format to me. When I wrote MQA is Vaporware many in the DSD world asked if I felt DSD was vaporware? I told them the only thing preventing from being vaporware is that it is in DAC chips but chip manufactures never could give a good reason why they included DSD.

[Allan F]

44 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

I told them the only thing preventing from being vaporware is that it is in DAC chips but chip manufactures never could give a good reason why they included DSD.

 

Would you care to share what evidence you have to support your contention that "chip manufacturers never could give a good reason why they included DSD"? I strongly suspect that you are presenting your opinion as fact.

[kumakuma]

52 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

Go back a little over 15 years ago for SACD. If you think DSD took off please explain it looks like a dead format to me. When I wrote MQA is Vaporware many in the DSD world asked if I felt DSD was vaporware? I told them the only thing preventing from being vaporware is that it is in DAC chips but chip manufactures never could give a good reason why they included DSD.

 

SACD is dying as a delivery format for DSD just as CDs are dying as a delivery format for PCM. Doesn't mean that DSD is dead though.

[Rt66indierock]

1 minute ago, kumakuma said:

 

SACD is dying as a delivery format for DSD just as CDs are dying as a delivery format for PCM. Doesn't mean that DSD is dead though.

The number of DSD titles is not an indication of a healthy format.

[kumakuma]

3 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

The number of DSD titles is not an indication of a healthy format.

 

What is?