6th.replicant Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 Dizziness: "The current 20th Anniversary Redbook and HDTracks releases are identical masters." Ergo, the HDTracks 24/96 is merely up-sampled? And, umm, 'scuse me for sounding stoopid, but if a remaster is a compression/loudness job, then what's the point in releasing in a hi-res format (aside from milking saps like me)? It's illogical, surely? Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted September 29, 2011 Author Share Posted September 29, 2011 Hi 6th.replicant - Good questions. Remastering can do much more than adjust the loudness level. Here is a general article from Wikipedia -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remaster I highly recommend people listen to the 24/96 version (if possible) before massacring it. So far I like what I've heard from this download. Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
dizziness Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 Yeah, the CD and HDTracks download are the same mastering job. But the HD Tracks is clearly the hi-res master BEFORE it was downsampled and dithered to 16-bit. As I said before (and I agree with Chris), the HD Tracks release is audibly superior, albeit with limited dynamic range. The fidelity difference is smaller than an "Audiophile" recording but heck, it's rock and roll. iMac/Wireworld Ultraviolet/Arcam rDAC/Blue Jeans LC-1/Audioengine A5 Link to comment
ted_b Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 upsampled. Plenty of energy to 40k+. Crushed yes, upsampled, no. "We're all bozos on this bus"....F.T. My JRIver tutorial videos Actual JRIver tutorial MP4 video links My eleven yr old SACD Ripping Guide for PS3 (needs updating but still works) US Technical Advisor, NativeDSD.com Link to comment
wgscott Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 I am teaching a freshmen university chemistry class right now, and I just had what drunks refer to as a moment of clarity: they weren't alive when Nirvana and Pearl Jam started out. OK, I will hobble away back to the retirement home now. Link to comment
6th.replicant Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 Chris and Dizziness, thanks for your replies. Sure, remastering can have its benefits - Davis's Kind Of Blue and Bowie's David Live and Stage are prime examples, IMHO - but why compress/clip? When remastering, give us improved soundstage, separation and vinyl-type bass punch etc - but leave the dynamic range intact, please. If I listen to HDTracks Nevermind 24/96 online samples via USB, will I be hearing genuine 24/96 or are HDTracks samples compressed (i.e. AACs or similar)? Thanks Link to comment
ted_b Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 Nevermind is crushed yes, but no clipping involved. The 24/96 stuff sounds pretty damn good...it is grunge remember. "We're all bozos on this bus"....F.T. My JRIver tutorial videos Actual JRIver tutorial MP4 video links My eleven yr old SACD Ripping Guide for PS3 (needs updating but still works) US Technical Advisor, NativeDSD.com Link to comment
Talos2000 Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 Sorry - This post got placed in the wrong forum ... not sure how I managed that. And there was no way to delete it. Just ignore it. Link to comment
EuroChamp Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 He guys, I can show you some facts. And, just for fun I downloaded the highly promoted "newly remastered" version from the iTunes store (AAC256kbits44.1kHz converted to WAV by Foobar2000). For my taste of listening, I like the MFSL disc most. I don't like the clipping of the newly remastered versions. The MFSL represents more dynamic, air, room and body to the sound. But I fully understand HDtracks, it's definitely not their fault. They are not responsible for the mastering. They only want to offer an absolut top album in their download store and they can. Enjoy listening, Bernhard P.S.: For better understanding: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loudness_war Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted September 29, 2011 Author Share Posted September 29, 2011 I sure wish HDtracks could obtain the rights to offer MFSL downloads. Especially for the albums no longer available. Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
EuroChamp Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 I'm with you. In reality, nobody needed this remastering of the original album. The biggest advantage with this new mastering is: More 'slam & punch' is coming out of my 3mm smartphone speaker! ;-) Link to comment
6th.replicant Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 Thanks for sharing your findings, EuroChamp. Very enlightening - and very disappointing re the 24/96. Yeah, it'd be wonderful if HDTracks could offer MFSL recordings. (An MFSL SACD of What's Going On is one of my most prized recordings.) Link to comment
Mercman Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 Chris, I have a feeling that the MFSL titles that are out of print are also out of license with the record company. Steve Plaskin Link to comment
wgb113 Posted October 1, 2011 Share Posted October 1, 2011 After reading the disappointing posts about the remaster her I jumped over to eBay and found a used copy of the MFSL CD for $47 and free shipping. Can't wait to hear it. Bill Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication. Mac Mini->Roon + Tidal->KEF LS50W Link to comment
Lost Turntable Posted October 11, 2011 Share Posted October 11, 2011 The vinyl may not be as loud, but it's still an overcompressed mess taken from a digital master. If you Google my screenname you can find my blog, I go into detail about it there. Link to comment
Miska Posted October 11, 2011 Share Posted October 11, 2011 I somehow suspect if those high frequency peaks are just result of analog clipping in the waveform. Zooming in on some of those would reveal if that's the case... (or filtered digital limiter/compressor) Signalyst - Developer of HQPlayer Pulse & Fidelity - Software Defined Amplifiers Link to comment
thrand1 Posted November 17, 2011 Share Posted November 17, 2011 So with everyone having a few weeks to download/listen to these files, I was wondering what the general opinion is of this download. I own the CD- not the MFSL version, just a regular version bought at a retail store eons ago- and it is ripped at 320kbps MP3 quality. Would I notice a significant difference between the MP3 and this 24/96 download? I saw the mentions of reduced dynamic range from the CD, so I am unsure of whether or not it is worth the money...can anyone else comment on their experience comparing the CD (whether it is ripped to FLAC/MP3, or just listening to the disc itself) to this download? Welcome your insights before deciding whether or not to purchase this album from HDTracks. Thanks! -Tyler Office: iPod classic/iPad -> Shure SE425 IEM Home: Oppo BDP-83/Synology DS211j -> Integra DTR-7.8 -> Revel speakers Link to comment
j20056 Posted November 26, 2011 Share Posted November 26, 2011 It sounds amazing. I have a good monitoring system. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now