• 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.

[POLL] Hi-res music

Hi-res music?

  • I do pay for hi-res music files and I can discern an improvement over lower rate files

    Votes: 40 15.4%
  • I don't pay for hi-res music files and I can discern an improvement over lower rate files

    Votes: 21 8.1%
  • I do pay for hi-res music files but I can't discern an improvement over lower rate files

    Votes: 83 32.0%
  • I don't pay for hi-res music files but I can't discern an improvement over lower rate files

    Votes: 103 39.8%
  • Dont think I have ever heard a hi-res music file.

    Votes: 12 4.6%

  • Total voters
    259
D

Deleted member 30699

Guest
Nope. I want to know what people think of what is sold as "hi res", ie the stuff with the sticker on. If you pay for a "hi res" streaming service, you're not going to be analysing the file content. And a fair few will assume it "sounds better" just because of the sticker. Ditto mqa.

Just to close the loop: There is a significant disconnect on what people think is "hi res" vs what is branded/sold as "hi res"
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/high-resolution-audio-inquery.22678/
Anyhow, both polls show that there is little interest in hi-res
 
OP
Jimbob54

Jimbob54

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
7,337
Likes
8,717

RichT

Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2020
Messages
21
Likes
27
Hello, I've been buying hi-res music files and they are a lot of fun. I can't prove anything but the hi-res files seem fuller, bigger and rounder but only slightly comparied to a .wav or .flac file ripped from a cd. I do love music and will buy more, fun stuff, regards
 

danadam

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2017
Messages
452
Likes
641

Bullwinkle J Moose

Active Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2021
Messages
217
Likes
83
That's so nice of you.



Do you "lose the coherent image" now even with integer ratios?
No, I do not

I still get better focus and imaging with integer ratios, BUT.......

Only on certain songs

On a "very few" songs, the difference is quite apparent
On many songs, the difference is barely noticable
On many others, there is no apparent difference

Even though sample rate conversion messes up both integer and non integer ratios, there is something else going on that has not been adequately explained

The difference is only apparent when the DAC is on USB

There is no apparent difference when the DAC is using Optical or Coax SPDIF port
 
  • Like
Reactions: pjn

Kegemusha

Active Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2020
Messages
245
Likes
221
I buy some CDs per year, listen to FLACS locally from my NAS, 99% are all encoded to 16/44.1, and I have spotify premiun only.
I listened to 24/96 and I can't hear any diff vs the same 16/44.1 file, so I dont need more than that.
 

brbsnacks

Member
Joined
Apr 25, 2021
Messages
17
Likes
15
Location
North Carolina
I use Amazon HD. There were a few weeks where I was very OCD and changed bitrate in windows to match the song every time. My dac goes to 192. There were times I thought I heard some improvement and sometimes I thought it sounded worse playing the higher quality stuff. I really question if some things are just upsampled on there. I dont even care anymore. I keep it on 44.1 now and I've been pretty happy. When my subscription runs out I might try a different source. Amazons exclusive mode is pretty terrible.
 
Last edited:

David Harper

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2019
Messages
344
Likes
393
I have screwed around some with listening to hi-res. I have maybe ten music blurays ( 24/96 and 24/192) and a few SACD's and a couple DVD-A discs.
The only thing I'm sure of is that the sound quality seems completely unrelated to the bit/sample rate. A couple of the audio blurays have terrible sq.
Neil Young's "Psychedelic Pill" on bluray disc has mostly awful sq except there's a short intro in acoustic guitar that sounds excellent. But then the music transitions to all electric guitar that sounds like sh!t. With acoustic instruments I can hear good sq. On electric instruments not so much.
Maybe electric instruments have no inherent sq. I have an SACD of Eric Claptons "Slowhand" which has excellent sq but I think that's a result of better mastering. You can choose either the CD layer or the 20/88.2 sacd layer but I'm not sure if they are the same master. If you try to A/B them to compare it's hard to do; by the time you've re-programmed the player to switch layers it's pretty much impossible to compare the sq. They sound very much the same. IMO hi-res is completely irrelevant in terms of musical enjoyment because it is trumped so completely by other factors like mastering/recording quality. I have Clapton "Unplugged" on vinyl and the sq is awesome. One of the best I ever heard. I'm guessing it was recorder/mastered digitally and I don't know what the bit/sample rate was. It's Reprise record 468412-1. I've looked it up and haven't been able to learn whether it was recorded on analog tape or digital. In any case I don't hear any difference in sq between CD and hi res that cannot be attributed to some factor other than bit/sample rate.
 

sq225917

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 23, 2019
Messages
478
Likes
488
I have a few albums in hires, upto dxd, before 2l.no went stupid. I rate the mozart violin concertos they did as possibly my finest classical album, pre mqa abortion.
 

Robin L

Major Contributor
Joined
Sep 2, 2019
Messages
3,346
Likes
4,457
Location
1 mile east of Sleater Kinney Rd
After voting in the poll, I went for Amazon Music's "HD Ultra" tier. My Topping E30 DAC is now set to be capable of playing back at a sampling rate of 384khz. Looking at the info at Amazon Music indicates playback with as high a resolution as 24/192. Two things worth noting. First, I don't hear any difference in the quality of sound that couldn't be explained by different mastering or mixing. Second, Amazon Music HD is a RAM hog, my cheap & cheerful Acer Aspire 5 has only 4GB of RAM, so dropouts are frequent. I'm guessing my laptop can't multitask Microsoft Explorer and Amazon Music without major irritation. I'm going to experiment, run Amazon Music HD without surfing the web at the same time. Fortunately I-Tunes works smoothly and I have plenty of Apple Lossless files. Also, it looks like it's pretty easy to upgrade the RAM with this laptop, so I might do that. Amazon Music has a deep catalog including a lot of obscure Classical music, so it's worth $10 a month to me.

Bottom line: while Hi-Rez files sound good, they don't sound better to these ears than standard Redbook, which is higher rez than LPs. Note that I also have around 60 discs of various Hi-Rez formats, SACDs, DVD-A, Blu-Ray. While some sound very different, it's clearly on account of remastering/remixing. The Grateful Dead "Workingman's Dead" DVD-A uses different 'takes' for its remix than the standard CD. There's some obvious performance differences.
 
Last edited:

sq225917

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 23, 2019
Messages
478
Likes
488
Hires is a commercial marketing term, sometimes applied to devices only cable of 16 bit lossless devices. It's not 100% indicative of higher sample rates.
 
Top Bottom