• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). Come here to have fun, be ready to be teased and not take online life too seriously. We now measure and review equipment for free! Click here for details.

Inside High res Music (Antonio Forcione) (Video)

voodooless

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 16, 2020
Messages
1,015
Likes
1,301
Location
Netherlands
#41
By the way, could you please provide some hints on how to avoid inter-sample overs? Does it require a special DAC or other hardware / software..? Or do I stray too much from the main topic?
Not sure if it’s ontopic.. it might be :).

Avoiding them is a complex question. They basically happen at the edge of the spectrum where on high impulses ringing effects become evident. Typically this happens when clipping. Avoiding clipping works well for that. Next to that it’s a property of the DAC’s reconstruction filter and/or upsampling filter. Note that in principal, inter sample overs are not really “wrong” by itself. They make sure that the signal is properly band limited. They are an issue if they make the DAC voltage go against the voltage rails, adding more clipping artifacts. That is why lowering the maximum amplitude by a bit might help smooth those issues a bit. So if you have a DAC prone to this issue: do not set it to max voltage, and/or use an external upsampler that appears to have less issues.
 
Joined
Feb 7, 2019
Messages
65
Likes
60
Location
Germany
#42
Because it was derived from a 48kHz recording, I believe, Hi Res makes no sense, well in general..., but even less so when the recording is not Hi Res.
Yeah, that would seem to be the case. A 48kHz file was upsampled to 96kHz and was sold for more because of it. Sad that I fell for it - although I mean, how can I evaluate the claim before buying the file, especially if it from a reputable on-line store of Hi-Res music?*

The answer is: as Amir has made clear, there is no reason to pay more for anything better then 44.1/16 or maybe 48/20 (should you find that).

*Let's however acknowledge that some newer "Hi-Res" releases are re-mastered from from better originals and indeed do sound much better - but not because of the "Hi-Res", but because of the better source and better hopefully post-loudness-wars mastering technique.
 

trl

Major Contributor
King of Mods
Joined
Feb 28, 2018
Messages
1,452
Likes
1,529
Location
Iasi, RO
#43
An objective analysis of two high resolution tracks to see if the full spectrum is utilized and any artifacts within. These videos are were produce a couple of years ago so apologize for lower quality of my voice recording.
I wonder how the 24/48 will look compared with the 24/192?
I also wonder how the master looks like and what was the format: DXD or 24/192 uncompressed?
I also wonder why they don't use simple low-pass filters at the end of the analogue audio chain, to not catch these spikes and unwanted noises on the final recording?
 
Joined
Apr 23, 2021
Messages
7
Likes
2
#44
That's the common misconception. The only thing gained by using a higher sampling rate is a higher frequency being captured, not a more accurate reconstruction.

44.1kHz samples rate gives you up to 22.05 kHz frequency response. 96 gives you up to 48, 192 gives you up to 96, etc. That's all you get. That's baked into sampling theory.

At 44.1 kHz, you are able to get everything audible, so there's no need for more. I'd like to see 48 kHz be more standard to give a little more room for proper filters, but it isn't at all necessary.
That's not correct either. 44,100 samples per second vs 96,000 samples per second is a measure of resolution, where frequency _is_ in the time domain. The Nyquist limit rises in addition to and in proportion with the sample rate, it is not the *only* difference.
 

trl

Major Contributor
King of Mods
Joined
Feb 28, 2018
Messages
1,452
Likes
1,529
Location
Iasi, RO
#45
A 48kHz file was upsampled to 96kHz and was sold for more because of it.
Hope no audio store does that. I've seen several albums not being available on high-res, so I do hope that audio stores are doing legit job there, otherwise what you're saying is called rubbery.

I would personally buy 24 bit/48 kHz anytime against 16 bit/44 kHz (if price diff. will be small), but I will not pay extra for 24 bit/192 kHz because it makes zero sense to me to do that.
 

voodooless

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 16, 2020
Messages
1,015
Likes
1,301
Location
Netherlands
#46
That's not correct either. 44,100 samples per second vs 96,000 samples per second is a measure of resolution, where frequency _is_ in the time domain.
Higher sample rate does not give you more time resolution.
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
32,161
Likes
106,158
Location
Seattle Area
Thread Starter #47
Someone asked about bit depth analysis. Unfortunately this is very difficult to do. The challenge is that you have to distinguish between noise and music content. You need to run a statistical analysis to determine what is noise and what is music. No readily available tool does this. Note that just taking the quietest part as the lowest level doesn't work due to digital muting/fade to zero.
 
Joined
Mar 30, 2020
Messages
50
Likes
42
#48
Hope no audio store does that. I've seen several albums not being available on high-res, so I do hope that audio stores are doing legit job there, otherwise what you're saying is called rubbery.
I think Mark Waldrep from AIX has been complaining for years that most big labels have been doing exactly that, just sampling old masters and selling them with no spectral content above 20 kHz. And although his recordings are legit 24/96 you can see an ultrasonic constant tone in some of them.
There are other fake high-res tracks that do have content above 20 kHz but it is spectral images of the music so they probably messed up the upsampling (intentionally?).
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
32,161
Likes
106,158
Location
Seattle Area
Thread Starter #49
I want to clarify that these videos are about specific pieces of music, not the entire high-res format. How a content producer uses the format varies greatly. The idea here is to show a range of content and what problems if any creep up into them. There are indeed content that go way higher in spectrum usage than this clip.
 

voodooless

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 16, 2020
Messages
1,015
Likes
1,301
Location
Netherlands
#50
I want to clarify that these videos are about specific pieces of music, not the entire high-res format. How a content producer uses the format varies greatly. The idea here is to show a range of content and what problems if any creep up into them. There are indeed content that go way higher in spectrum usage than this clip.
I don’t think you can avoid the discussion :facepalm:

Especially since I still have a major open question after the whole MQA debacle that is very relevant: how do mastering engineers deal with the HF content? What are best practices? Are there even any? And if not? What should that tell us? From the few samples we’ve seen here and elsewhere it’s quite random.
 
Joined
Mar 25, 2021
Messages
38
Likes
24
Location
Mount Everest
#51
In my opinion, music is not just about specifications, musical performance is the defining factor, and often, the ability to capture the performance using minimalist microphone techniques and solid engineering skills will make the difference.

Right now, I am listening to Jazz At The Pawnshop in cd format. The sound is excellent, immediate and with a great sound stage. I don’t really care that it is not Hi-Res; the balance is good and obviously was recorded and engineered by someone who knew what they were doing.
 
Joined
Mar 21, 2021
Messages
29
Likes
6
#53
This would mean buying dacs that could decode the higher bit rates is a waste of money as well... Just get the lowest one with the best specifications. And for streaming music go with the cheap services the do CD quality.
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
32,161
Likes
106,158
Location
Seattle Area
Thread Starter #54
I don’t think you can avoid the discussion :facepalm:

Especially since I still have a major open question after the whole MQA debacle that is very relevant: how do mastering engineers deal with the HF content? What are best practices? Are there even any? And if not? What should that tell us? From the few samples we’ve seen here and elsewhere it’s quite random.
I have an MQA encoded piece coming. :)
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
32,161
Likes
106,158
Location
Seattle Area
Thread Starter #55

thefsb

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Nov 2, 2019
Messages
539
Likes
372
#57
I want to clarify that these videos are about specific pieces of music, not the entire high-res format. How a content producer uses the format varies greatly.
Now I want to try composing music entirely in the spectrum above 24 kHz so that if the listener hears anything it will depend entirely on non-linearity in the playback system.
 
Top Bottom