Jump to content

sandyk

  • Content Count

    13068
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About sandyk

Personal Information

  • Location
    Cooranbong NSW Australia

Recent Profile Visitors

15018 profile views
  1. I agree with Peter. You should be able to hear clear differences between both versions, not just hazard a guess based on looking at waveforms to make up your mind first.
  2. Even the sceptics should be able to hear very clear differences between these 2 16/44.1 files.
  3. Were you using a DAC that is able to play 24/352.8 DIRECTLY without Downsampling ? The majority of affordable DACs don't do more than 24/192 directly.
  4. That is my understanding too, and you also apparently need marked clocking improvements, and in the case of the Metric Halo ULN changing to Ethernet as well.
  5. The Record Companies are never going to let that happen. They would probably rather see their storage vaults burn down than release that material for others to profit from, including the original artists too.
  6. Dennis Please check your emails re the above. Alex
  7. Perhaps she has more power to dictate how she wants her work to sound these days ? They also appear to be using a less aggressive form of compression with the Joanne album too.
  8. http://www.cco.caltech.edu/~boyk/spectra/spectra.htm
  9. Actually,. the Lady Gaga recording is not representative of most general releases these days, as it is far less compressed than most pop releases these days.
  10. The SoundForge 9 Spectrum Analysis image that I posted in post 112 on page 5 of the Barry Diament 24/192 track Bye-Ya (Bolero ) told me .
  11. My apologies. The wording of your reply about the noise suggested otherwise on this occasion, as this thread appears to be mainly about trying to discredit High Res recordings. Alex
  12. Paul Speaking of Lady Gaga , you may be correct about her production values. Lady Gaga- Joanne for example is in 24/44.1 and to my surprise her voice doesn’t sound too bad after using SeeDeClip Duo Pro as they don’t appear to have used cursed digital compression this time, or very little of it, and the original wasn't too bad either. Not that I am a fan of hers, but it was just an exercise to give me something to do. Regards Alex
  13. Paul While I basically agree, there are quite a few recordings being marketed these days as high res which are only 24/44.1 ! I wonder if this means that they weren't recorded originally at a higher Bit Rate ? They include ones like Lady Gaga-Joanne and many others from Oasis, Depeche Mode, McCartney etc. Regards Alex
  14. That was implied in their blurb about perceptual encoding and supposedly only the removal of material that was masked. Neither did they say too much about the reduction in the maximum frequency response possible with .mp3 encoded files. at the recommended bit rate.
  15. Which sums up the title of this thread very nicely . It's a shame that so many people were ill advised to get rid of their vast CD collections after saving them as .mp3 files.
×
×
  • Create New...