My first day as an Audacity Cowboy

[Blumlein 88]

I suppose if one can claim ultrasonic transients effect what one hears, one can claim ultrasonic sampling can effect a mic that can't hear it either. And one wouldn't expect vocals to have such range.

 

[krabapple]

1) beware of 'DR' readings from LPs
2) yes, 'high rez' releases have been unpredictably compressed and/or bandwidth-limited (i.e., not the 'audiophile' quality claimed) ever since they were first touted. Here's a thread I start about dynamic range compression in DVD-Audio releases, way back in 2008 (discussing some older DVD-As). Stereophile also ran an 'expose' on this , some years back.

It's been a scam from day 1. HDTracks isn't 100% fault, since they only sell whatever files the record companies give them. They don't do their own transfers. They *should* check their files though. They *should* make it clear that the format is not the sound. Sticking a Redbook master in a 96/24 container doesn't make it 'high resolution'.


3) if we're gonna do this, we should agree on what FFT settings to use. Audition offers a number of FFT size and window options, for example.

 

[tomelex]

1) beware of 'DR' readings from LPs
2) yes, 'high rez' releases have been unpredictably compressed and/or bandwidth-limited (i.e., not the 'audiophile' quality claimed) ever since they were first touted. Here's a thread I start about dynamic range compression in DVD-Audio releases, way back in 2008 (discussing some older DVD-As). Stereophile also ran an 'expose' on this , some years back.

It's been a scam from day 1. HDTracks isn't 100% fault, since they only sell whatever files the record companies give them. They don't do their own transfers. They *should* check their files though. They *should* make it clear that the format is not the sound. Sticking a Redbook master in a 96/24 container doesn't make it 'high resolution'.


3) if we're gonna do this, we should agree on what FFT settings to use. Audition offers a number of FFT size and window options, for example.

IF HD tracks is not going to check and verify their stuff they are not going to get anything from me, they are simply lying to me by branding anything without verifying it. Right from the beginning they damn well knew what they were doing, cheating.

 

[Sal1950]

I made a request to HDTracks to publish the DR numbers in the About This Album info tab but never received any reply. LOL
I was a bit hot after purchasing Bonnie Raitt's new Dig In Deep release. There had been a review and interview in Stereophile where she talked about being excited to do a "audiophile" release, etc, etc. so as soon as HDT's got it, I jumped. I guess they were referring to the LP as after I downloaded it I measured and found it to have a DR7
If you google I think you'll find me making a few posts on some audiophile sites about the issue. I was not happy. The Grammy winning Nick and Draw had measured like 13/14.
In all its a nice enough sounding release but I got such a booner over the issue I didn't listen to it enough to appreciate it until a few weeks back. LOL
Anyways it is sad the labels release such crap to the HDA distributors, IMO this is not High Definition quality mastering.

 

[Thomas savage]

HD track means little if you don't know the provenance of the recording or indeed as you say the dynamic range.

The labels have no clue what's what! It's a den of ignorance! Record executives are clueless, it's just about profit. Fidelity is insignificant to them, even if they were to understood what it means.. Which in the main they don't!

 

[Sal1950]

HD track means little if you don't know the provenance of the recording or indeed as you say the dynamic range.

The labels have no clue what's what! It's a den of ignorance! Record executives are clueless, it's just about profit. Fidelity is insignificant to them, even if they were to understood what it means.. Which in the main they don't!

Sure, but I don't think you can claim ignorance or cluelessness. The greedy bastards are laughing all the way to the bank at the stupid audiophiles paying premium prices for downloads (no manufacturing or distribution costs) while they quick rip a analog tape to a big bit bucket.
There are some releases being done that are worth it, the Wilson-Hoffman remasters being a couple examples. But the vast majority of the classic rock stuff being released is just more snake-oil.
What a bunch of chumps we can be.

 

[Thomas savage]

Sure, but I don't think you can claim ignorance or cluelessness. The greedy bastards are laughing all the way to the bank at the stupid audiophiles paying premium prices for downloads (no manufacturing or distribution costs) while they quick rip a analog tape to a big bit bucket.
There are some releases being done that are worth it, the Wilson-Hoffman remasters being a couple examples. But the vast majority of the classic rock stuff being released is just more snake-oil.
What a bunch of chumps we can be.

Ah, if you look into conspiracy and such cynical intent as you suggest the origin is more often than not ignorance and incompetence but in this case we don't know.

I did read a interview from the owner founder of hdtracks that claimed mass ignorance on the behalf of record executives in regards to recording origin and fidelity. They simply never worried about it so did not know.

We lose either way! We can agree totally on that.. The rest is accidemic.

 

[TBone]

Ah, if you look into conspiracy and such cynical intent as you suggest the origin is more often than not ignorance and incompetence but in this case we don't know.

Banner = "High Definition Music | The World's Greatest-Sounding Music Downloads"

That's what they claim, and that's the expectation, b/c audiophiles have never required extensive documentation in the past towards justifying these type of purchases ... we simply required text indicating "rec. from master" or acronyms indicating "higher-resolution/definition".

Why should things change now?

Not long ago, I was looking at a particular classic rock album available @HD Tracks for $20 in 96/24. Of course, no provenance based documentation was afforded. This particular recording has been re/mastered numerous times. However, often, simply looking at the track/song time/lengths are enough to indicate which version it may have been derived. In this case, the track times indicated a certain original/mastered pressing. Yet, the track times proved to be incorrect, derived from a different master/pressing altogether.

If they can't even get the basic info correct ...

 

[Thomas savage]

Banner = "High Definition Music | The World's Greatest-Sounding Music Downloads"

That's what they claim, and that's the expectation, b/c audiophiles have never required extensive documentation in the past towards justifying these type of purchases ... we simply required text indicating "rec. from master" or acronyms indicating "higher-resolution/definition".

Why should things change now?

Not long ago, I was looking at a particular classic rock album available @HD Tracks for $20 in 96/24. Of course, no provenance based documentation was afforded. This particular recording has been re/mastered numerous times. However, often, simply looking at the track/song time/lengths are enough to indicate which version it may have been derived. In this case, the track times indicated a certain original/mastered pressing. However, the track times proved to be incorrect, it was actually derived from a different master/pressing altogether.

If they can't even get the basic info correct ...

Yea, I am not defending them as ignorance is no defence but they do seem to just take the record companies word for it and only look into things when they get a million complaints about a offering.

I totally agree with you by the way, it's a broken system when they can ups sample some terrible crap and claim it's a great recording.

Sampling rates mean little but are the headlines used to market stuff, let's face it could the public handle anything else?

I want the recording to take centre stage, just delivered at what ever rate it was mastered in. Provenance of recording given, it's all that matters as we all know.

 

[TBone]

I've no need for re-buying/storing huge files which contain the same information (or less) as my 16/44 media.

I've had my fill of over/up/xquadrupled sampling promises; unless it was rec.natively in "hi-rez", little interest to me.

My only remaining interest w/xsampling, is none. Still looking to find/mod/lampi an older TDA1541 design (Philips/Marantz), 'em's my kicks ...

 

[TBone]

1) beware of 'DR' readings from LPs

I'd rather be aware ... not "beware" ... b/c in generalist/simplistic terms, sure, certainly turntable playback s.quality remains a moving target, yet even a well-setup $400 Technics 1200 can recreate proper DR values.

 

[amirm]

They have automated filters now for upsampled music.

 

[TBone]

they?

recently, while playing within my CD collection; same song, 5 different labels/sku#/mastering ...

 

[Thomas savage]

they?

recently, while playing within my CD collection; same song, 5 different labels/sku#/mastering ...
View attachment 2170

This sort of thing deserves its own area of the forum.. Hint hint!

 

[TBone]

This sort of thing deserves its own area of the forum.. Hint hint!

Don't you mean Nudge Nudge, and I reply ... say no more, say no more?

 

[Thomas savage]

Don't you mean Nudge Nudge, and I reply ... say no more, say no more?

Wink wink

But please do say more as it needs doing!

 

[Thomas savage]

Getting amir to do this is about as easy as getting Microsoft to fix bugs pre the release of its software and to amir

I have initiated 'project shame '

Anything for you T-bone

 

[TBone]

well, my stereo will be disabled this weekend. During summer months, when not north doing Stews bidding, the only "audiophiling" I'll be doing is rec.needle-drops and maybe rebuild/fix a turntable or two, and/or lampi a old cdp, or perhaps re-cap one of my amps (as you can see, like Amir, a lot of wishful thinking goes on here also) ...

 

[Sal1950]

Don't you mean Nudge Nudge, and I reply ... say no more, say no more?

Wink wink

But please do say more as it needs doing!

Anything for you T-bone

Get a room please.

 

[Thomas savage]

Get a room please.

Why you so grumpy? Forgot to wash that sock of yours