Kamakiriad in hi res?

[esimms86]

I was hoping that someone who had downloaded Donald Fagen's "Kamakiriad" in 24/96 from HDTracks might want to offer a few words on their listening experience. I'm on the fence regarding making a purchase because the sound of the redbook recording is so good that I don't know what I have to gain by owning another copy. Donald Fagen, after all, has a well deserved reputation about fanatical about recording quality.

 

As a side note, I look forward to the day that Steely Dan's "Aja" is released as a hi res download. That will be the computer audiophile's experience of nirvana.

 

Esau

 

[frederick184]

I have the Donald Fagen box set and ripped the 24/96 DVD-A version just recently using DVD Audio Extractor. I think it is a very worthwhile improvement over the redbook version, at least the one that I have. There's much more definition, separation of instruments and voices and the bottom end is better.

 

Colin

 

[ted_b]

One of my top five of all time.. But yes, the hirez stereo layer is very very good. For me, it might be a toss up as the 24/96 really shows off but I'd rather buy the DVD-A and rip the stereo layer (and keep the surround as a bonus).

 

[thb]

I was a little reluctant to buy this since I feel I was ripped off on my purchase of Gaucho at 24/96 from HDTracks, but I bought it because this is one of my favorite albums. I think it sounds better than the redbook CD. Vocals are more up front, the bass seems tighter, the high end is not as bright as the CD, and it has not been compressed more than the CD. I think it is well worth the money for the 24/96 download.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[cmidyet]

I have downloaded about a dozen HD Tracks albums and this is the best so far. Gaucho was a very minor improvement over the red book version that I have. Not so with this one ...much larger difference. Interestingly, on track 2, there is a guitar fill that is centered on the red book version. With this mix, it is only in the right channel. I am assuming that they took a stereo version from the surround mix for this one vs. the CD that I have. Of course, this is just a difference in the mix. However, SQ is much fuller across all the cuts and there are details that are much easier to discern on this version. The vocals are much improved. I wish that my experiences with the other HD albums that I've purchased was this good! My red book setup is quite good using the "5" filter on a Rega DAC so that may explain the mostly subtle differences that I've heard thus far. This album is the one that I tell people to get to hear real differences from the CD version ...my two cents.

 

[uvrmd]

Did I read this properly? Is it possible to use the DVA-Audio Extractor to rip the stereo PCM tracks from the MVI discs from the Nightfly Trilogy boxed set?

 

[ted_b]

delete

 

[frederick184]

To use DVD Audio Extractor. I used it on the box set to rip The Nightfly, Kamakiriad and Morph The Cat. The Extras disc is in Redbook only.

 

Colin

 

[uvrmd]

Yes, but are these the 24/48 & 24/96 files?

 

[frederick184]

24/48 and 24/96 two channel files

 

Colin

 

[frederick184]

The disc contains the Redbook versions plus the 24/48 stereo version of The Nightfly and the 24/96 stereo versions of Kamakiriad and the Morph The Cat and then the 5.1 versions. In DVD Audio Extractor just choose which version you want.

 

Colin

 

[uvrmd]

Thanks!

 

[wooster]

I think you must be comparing the download to a remastered CD version. The download of Gaucho sounds much better than my mid-80s CD. The differences are immediately obvious. This goes some way to supporting a suspicion of mine that the mastering is far more important than bit-depth/sample rate. It also means that whether it's worth buying another version of an album really depends on which version you have in the first place.

 

[uvrmd]

I definitely agree that mastering is far more important than the bit-depth/sample rate. Jessica Williams' "Live At Yoshi's Volume 1 & 2" are two of the best recordings I've ever heard and this recording is a 16/44.1 RedBook CD.

 

[REShaman]

Just when I thought it was safe to read a post. I ordered from Donald Fagen's website the Nightfly trilogy. Inspiration requires me to comply. Thank you ted_b. Oy!

Best,

Richard

 

[cmidyet]

Knowing which master you have is very relevant to this discussion. Unfortunately, it is rarely published info. Wouldn't it be great to have a simple inclusion of date, person doing the master and the running list of past masters for that particular album? At least, a listener could compare differences knowing whether the mastering had something to do with it.

 

Wooster, you are correct. I think I actually ripped the stereo layer (still red book) from a hybrid SACD disc for Gaucho instead of an older CD. That may explain the more subtle variation from the HD Tracks version that I perceived.

 

[frederick184]

I downloaded the 24/96 from HD Tracks and could discern no difference at all between it and the redbook CD I also have. I totally agree that good mastering can make all the difference. I have some very excellent sounding CD's. Additionally, I downloaded The Eagles Hotel California in 24/96 and found it inferior to the CD version I have from the 90's. I find the 24/96 version dull and muddy in comparison.

 

Colin

 

[REShaman]

Colin, that, too, was my experience with the Hi-Res download from HDtracks of The Eagles' Hotel California. My original CD is better as you articulated. Also the DTS DVD version of their concert Hell Freezes Over of Hotel California is gorgeous as well. While I am able to convert from DVD video/audio with DVDAE, alas not with DTS DVD. If there is a way, I sure would love to know how to do that.

Best,

Richard

 

[RFP]

This is one of my favourite albums.

 

I extracted the LPCM with DVD-A explorer - which I assume is the same as the HD Dl's

 

Res is good but again the mastering is different and more compression is used than on the RBCD. Bear in mind that I don't like compression or limiting and given the choice between a higher res / dnr compressed version and RBCD without compression I will always choose the latter.

 

I was likewise disappointed with Gaucho 24/96. The MFSL CD really slays it with dynamics.

 

The Nightfly isn't too bad on DVD-A but the peaks have been clipped and I prefer the regular CD.

 

Morph the Cat is the worst quality by far, with serious amounts of compression used.

 

If you can find it, the Neil Young Harvest DVD-A is really excellent. This IMO should be used as a benchmark by other mastering engineers. We need to send the message that compression and limiting should never be used when remastering to high res formats. I will pay more to get much less. I want a transfer from the the original tape without any signal processing added.

 

[RFP]

 

The first track is a totally new mix. There's now new reverb added behind Fagens voice and also a new drum snare synth - + totally different vocal backing arrangements.

 

There's no compression or limiting which is good, but messing with the album to this extent is just wrong. I'll be interested to hear the remaining tracks to see what else has been done.

 

edit: I'm sure this is must be the surround L+R+C. The mix on all tracks is wrong with some of the saxes way off in the background and others too much into the foreground etc.

 

 

 

 

[esimms86]

I agree with cmidyet that knowing which remaster you are making comparisons to is key. If only it were made easy by the record companies. I would love to have Barry Diament's remaster of Led Zeppelin to compare to what I have in the box set.

 

RFP, how does the DVD Audio version of Neil Young's Harvest compare to the blu ray box set version?

 

Esau

 

[RFP]

I'm confident it would be good too - and now you mention it I will see if I can track down a copy.

 

I have now also downloaded the Steely Dan 2AN album from HDT. It has the same problem as Kamakiriad - the stereo mix has been derived from a multi channel 'mix down' and there's little resemblance to the RB CD stereo mix, and it's a poor mix.

BTW, the DVD-A stereo tracks are really good on this album and beat all others with ease. HDT should have used the stereo DVD-A.

 

 

rf

 

 

 

[benjamin]

I am amazed that no one has noticed that the HD Tracks download is a TOTALLY different mix. So different in fact, that go and put on your CD now and listen to the hi-hats.....they come from the LEFT channel on the RBCD, which in itself is strange because they are usually biased to the right. The HDT download however has the hi-hats emanating from the right speaker as they should.

 

The balance of many instruments is totally different to the RBCD so it is pretty clear that this is not just a re-master it is a totally re-mix of a killer album. I for one LOVE the HDT download as it has much better space around instruments, and as someone has already said, it sounds fuller. In fact I think the RBCD sounds anaemic after the HDT download.

 

[jcpom]

I too would like to know how to extract and play DTS DVD, especially via DVDAE.

 

[RFP]

The RBCD and DVD-A are also 'channel reversed'. I did notice that the HD downloads were the same as the DVD-A.

 

Sorry, but I really do not like the new mix. There are instruments such as the saxes on 'Florida keys' that appear off in the distance and the gain balance is all wrong between instruments.

 

IMO the original RBCD is still the best reference for this album.