"Things that cannot be measured"

[KMSA]

Just listening to the Mp3 files ( I guess) from the 2 sites the the even better quality of the mix and master is evident.

I find the new remaster of her classic album, Thousand Shades of Blue, incredible. One would think it impossible to improve but the devil is in the small details.

For the fun of it, I asked chatgpt why the remaster sounds better and amazingly it seems spot on;

Reading at the SL website it is a new mix and mastering;
The older version is available at Carmen Gomes Inc BandCamp site in redbook quality 16/44.

 

[Sal1950]

FYI one does not need to purchase you can do it at the site.

Yes but they are matching masters so the format is the variable.

I don't trust them for one minute to offer straight honest comparisons.
Like cable companies having five or six difference cost levels of interconnects or speaker cables.
IMHO they're in the snake-oil business of selling you ever higher sampling rate masters that "they say" will sound ever better.
And many will require you to purchase special gear that play back DXD, 2x DXD, 10x DSD
From their friends that are in the Hi-End DAC cult.
It's all baloney.

 

[Timcognito]

I don't trust them for one minute to offer straight honest comparisons.
Like cable companies having five or six difference cost levels of interconnects or speaker cables.
IMHO they're in the snake-oil business of selling you ever higher sampling rate masters that "they say" will sound ever better.
And many will require you to purchase special gear the play back DXD, 2x DXD, 10x DSD
From their friends that are in the Hi-End DAC cult.
It's all baloney.

Well I don't know if its legit or not. I did the test with HP and there were some very minor variances but none were better, to these aging ears.

 

[antcollinet]

Is the mastering actually different?

not just the sample rate/bit depth

If it sounds diffderent the mastering must be different. Or we have simple sighted bias.

Because the 24/96 won't offer anything audible that 16/48 can't.

 

[Sal1950]

How soon people forget.
Remember the Audioquest HDMI cable video. LOL

Potential Audioquest Rigged HDMI Demo Exposed

Audiophile drama is unfolding as an Audioquest HDMI cable demo, featuring an Audioquest employee showing unrealistic changes in sound, was seemingly debunked as fraudulent by Mark Waldrep, Dr. AIX.

www.audioholics.com

AudioQuest HDMI Cables – Real HD-Audio

www.realhd-audio.com

 

[xray]

How soon people forget.
Remember the Audioquest HDMI cable video. LOL

Potential Audioquest Rigged HDMI Demo Exposed

Audiophile drama is unfolding as an Audioquest HDMI cable demo, featuring an Audioquest employee showing unrealistic changes in sound, was seemingly debunked as fraudulent by Mark Waldrep, Dr. AIX.

www.audioholics.com

AudioQuest HDMI Cables – Real HD-Audio

www.realhd-audio.com

The article mentions a post by banned member amirm on that site. I wonder who that would be

Audioquest HDMI cables

As we all know from Amir's postings, HDMI cables have a set standard that they must attain. Either they work... or they don't. Here is an interesting article that I came across saying that Audioquest bends the rules a little. Just another cable debate? Audioquest HDMI cables

www.whatsbestforum.com

 

[danadam]

Is the mastering actually different?

Based on the preview tracks on respective album pages (mp3, 256 kbps, 48k for the original album and mp3, 320 kbps, 44k for the revisited one) it looks like they compensated for the high frequency hearing loss we all suffered since 13 years ago

 

[Sal1950]

The article mentions a post by banned member amirm on that site. I wonder who that would be

Best not to open old wounds, you'll find a few of us banned there, dark times they were.

 

[xray]

Best not to open old wounds, you'll find a few of us banned there, dark times they were.

But you are all here so it's all good as far as I'm concerned

 

[Holmz]

Based on the preview tracks on respective album pages (mp3, 256 kbps, 48k for the original album and mp3, 320 kbps, 44k for the revisited one) it looks like they compensated for the high frequency hearing loss we all suffered since 13 years ago

View attachment 422879
View attachment 422880

Are we supposed to guess the song just by looking at the power spectral display?

What is to be gleaned from looking at those graphs.

 

[danadam]

Are we supposed to guess the song just by looking at the power spectral display?

Hm... no. Reading from the title "I'm on fire" should be enough. It's the first track on the album.

What is to be gleaned from looking at those graphs.

The answer to the question in the post I replied to, whether it is a different master or just sample rate/bit depth change.

 

[Holmz]

Hm... no. Reading from the title "I'm on fire" should be enough. It's the first track on the album.


The answer to the question in the post I replied to, whether it is a different master or just sample rate/bit depth change.

It makes about as much sense as showing the single reflectivity of photo and having us all guess as to what it is a picture of.
It really does not say much about the song or the sampling.

 

[kemmler3D]

It makes about as much sense as showing the single reflectivity of photo and having us all guess as to what it is a picture of.
It really does not say much about the song or the sampling.

I think the spectrum being visibly different is a good way to establish whether it's just a transfer or a remaster.

 

[Holmz]

I think the spectrum being visibly different is a good way to establish whether it's just a transfer or a remaster.

Certainly being different says something more than if it was the same.
(Whereas with it being the same, you could still have differences in phase or timing.)

 

[Roland68]

I don't trust them for one minute to offer straight honest comparisons.
Like cable companies having five or six difference cost levels of interconnects or speaker cables.
IMHO they're in the snake-oil business of selling you ever higher sampling rate masters that "they say" will sound ever better.
And many will require you to purchase special gear that play back DXD, 2x DXD, 10x DSD
From their friends that are in the Hi-End DAC cult.
It's all baloney.

I find this view very one-sided.
First and foremost, the purchase of the music, artist, recording is paid for. Sound Liaison offers these albums in different resolutions/formats, mostly from 96kHz/DSD64 and around 40% cheaper than the high-resolution formats.
The 96kHz/DSD64 versions are also significantly cheaper than the current CDs in this range.

But what is even more important is that ASR members certainly do not make up a large proportion of the buyer base and Sound Liaison also has to survive. Apart from the fact that it is a high-res label, they would probably go under if they tried to "convert" customers. The typical fighting against windmills. And if a customer wants to buy higher resolutions, why shouldn't they do that?
In the EU and USA, cars are also sold that are 2-3 times faster than the maximum permitted speed.

I also cannot see that Sound Liaison is forcing or encouraging anyone to buy equipment for other formats.

 

[antcollinet]

Sound Liaison offers these albums in different resolutions/formats,

But there is the porblem right there. They are doing exactly what @Sal1950 says they are.

They sell the higher resolution formats of the same music at a higher price. They claim this (my bold):

Furthermore, we’ve pushed the boundaries of digital fidelity by remastering the album at 768kHz-32-bit, an astonishingly high resolution, over 17 times the standard 44.1kHz used for CD audio. This high sample rate reveals unparalleled harmonic richness and authenticity. While some of these nuances may only be fully appreciated by the most discerning listeners, the enhanced clarity of the soundstage is evident to everyone.

That claim simply does not stack up. They charge more for something which is not (or should not be unless they are deliberately degrading them) audibly better than the lower res formats, while claiming it is.

 

[solderdude]

People ask for the highest possible resolutions and one would be daft not to supply those (when the actual recordings are done in that highest format)
Where there is a demand there is a market.

No one is forced to buy the highest resolution directly but I would assume buyers might gladly pay that bit extra 'knowing' the 'quality' of the recording is 'higher'.
Not that they would NEED it or actually hear it but rather they want it and believe they can hear it.
A good incentive to more expensive buy hi-res.

Soundliason makes really beautifully done recordings, regardless if one likes the genre/artist/albums.

 

[antcollinet]

....

Soundliason makes really beautifully done recordings, regardless if one likes the genre/artist/albums.

I would be happier if they simply made claims about that: The recording quality, the minimally compressed mastering, the one mic setup etc etc. All things that make a genuinely audible difference for the customer. Then sell at a single premium price for all distributed resolutions - even if that price was what they now charge for the highest res.

That would show integrity and honesty, and minimise promotion of the audiophool mythology surrounding high res formats.

 

[solderdude]

In the end it is all about making money. Advertising helps.
I would be equally happy if all audio equipment manufacturers would be honest as well... not going to happen though... money makes the world go round.
A fool and their money are easily parted. Honesty made very few people rich.

 

[antcollinet]

Of course - their current model gives those of us in the know the opportunity to get their excellent recordings at the best price.

....looks....

Good grief - they even sell their 96kHz flac lower than the 96kHz PCM.