Ronnie1963
Member
I "found" the CD files and deleted them after listening. Too stimulating for my tinnitus this wall of sound. Decent album though.
What software are used for the analysis and the the comparisons?Hello,
The Rolling Stones are back with their 24th studio album “Hackney Diamonds”, 7 years after “Blue and Lonesome”, which was a covers album, and 18 years after “A Bigger Bang”, which consisted of original songs.
View attachment 320114
For this album, 3 versions are tested: Amazon Music UltraHD in 24 bits 96kHz, Tidal MAX flac in 24 bits 96 kHz and Tidal Dolby Atmos.
The waveform of the stereo versions is without comment, with significant use of dynamics compression (DR5) as shown in the curve below:
View attachment 320115
Tidal (or Amazon) Waveform
When you zoom in, as shown in the curve below, you can see that the dynamics compression is not clean and that there are small areas of clipping (red circles):
View attachment 320116
Zoom in the Tidal Waveform
If we compare with the Atmos version downmixed in stereo (curve below), we can see that the dynamic range has been preserved (DR12):
View attachment 320117
waveform : Tidal Atmos downmised in 2.0
The Dolby Atmos mix expands the front soundstage by making the most of the side channels in terms of spatialization.
View attachment 320118
Average spatialization (Atmos 7.1.4)
When you listen to it, on the one hand you have a high-resolution stereo version (24/96) that's rather in-your-face with the dynamics compression, unlike the Dolby Atmos version, which provides much more precision and dynamics, which is noticeable when you increase the volume, the Dolby Atmos version having more impact even in stereo downmix.
You can find the extracts to compare as well as all the measurements here.
Enjoy your listening.
Jean-François
It's also the CD version in there... This practice has been going on for decades, long before streaming ever existed, so don't blame them for the loudness war.STREAMING services are destroying recordings, which have been on the path of commercial FM radio for decades. And it is getting worse and worse.
Unbelievable that they allowed clipping in the 24/96 mix down.Hello,
The Rolling Stones are back with their 24th studio album “Hackney Diamonds”, 7 years after “Blue and Lonesome”, which was a covers album, and 18 years after “A Bigger Bang”, which consisted of original songs.
View attachment 320114
For this album, 3 versions are tested: Amazon Music UltraHD in 24 bits 96kHz, Tidal MAX flac in 24 bits 96 kHz and Tidal Dolby Atmos.
The waveform of the stereo versions is without comment, with significant use of dynamics compression (DR5) as shown in the curve below:
View attachment 320115
Tidal (or Amazon) Waveform
When you zoom in, as shown in the curve below, you can see that the dynamics compression is not clean and that there are small areas of clipping (red circles):
View attachment 320116
Zoom in the Tidal Waveform
If we compare with the Atmos version downmixed in stereo (curve below), we can see that the dynamic range has been preserved (DR12):
View attachment 320117
waveform : Tidal Atmos downmised in 2.0
The Dolby Atmos mix expands the front soundstage by making the most of the side channels in terms of spatialization.
View attachment 320118
Average spatialization (Atmos 7.1.4)
When you listen to it, on the one hand you have a high-resolution stereo version (24/96) that's rather in-your-face with the dynamics compression, unlike the Dolby Atmos version, which provides much more precision and dynamics, which is noticeable when you increase the volume, the Dolby Atmos version having more impact even in stereo downmix.
You can find the extracts to compare as well as all the measurements here.
Enjoy your listening.
Jean-François
It's also the CD version in there... This practice has been going on for decades, long before streaming ever existed, so don't blame them for the loudness war.
Anyway, we can just stream the Atmos version and have decent dynamics.
You'll just trade one compromise for another... Pic your evil.Why do you think that almost everything I listen to is vinyl and its rips?
It wasn’t acceptable 20 years ago, it’s not acceptable now… what are we going to do about it?this is really not acceptable anymore
neither did I, and i own both, and some others, but i don't even know how to play them. I asked here once and iirc the response was not very encouraging.I was gonna mention that as well. Let it Bleed is, by and large, remarkably fine sounding in those DSD remasters of... when was it? The late '90s? Turn of the century?
Come to think of it, I have Beggars Banquet on SACD that I picked up somewhere... I've actually never even listened to it!
As has been pointed out before in this forum and elsewhere, comparing vinyl releases and digital releases in terms of the crest factor is pointless. The crest factor is only really meaningful when comparing different digital versions, and even then it is not guaranteed to give accurate information about dynamics. In this case of Hackney Diamonds, I'm pretty sure they basically used the same master for both the digital and analog vinyl releases.