|
|
Post by Slinger on Aug 27, 2023 12:44:09 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Aug 27, 2023 13:24:14 GMT
Good article, and it really is an absolute minefield.
When we refer to hi-res being the best format, that only reflects the capability of the format and says nothing about the way in which that resolution was derived, and indeed how the recording was originally made.
If it was an analogue recording, then anything could happen from stellar mastering from a good copy of the original master tape (e.g. the Miles Davis - Kind of Blue recent remaster) to absolute rubbish ADC wasting a lot of potential in the format, or even to cases where the original recording was very limited (e.g. Simon & Garfunkel - Bridge Over Troubled Waters remaster).
Just as problematic are digital recordings. The earliest non-classical one was Ry Cooder - Bop Til You Drop and it's really fantastic considering the rudimentary nature of the early Soundstream equipment. The engineer knew not to let it hit the limiters and consequently it sounds like a quiet recording, but the sound quality is fantastic.
The format tells you little about the sound quality. A better tool is the ReplayGain number, which is available on Qobuz and possibly other platforms. It reflects how much the volume needs to be turned down to retain the same loudness. A ReplayGain of 0dB is spot-on and can provide the maximum dynamic range. On the other hand, -10dB will sound very loud and potentially compressed. It's just an indicator, but useful.
I find a good CD derived 16/44 track can sound way better than a poorly mastered 24/96 one. The only real arbiter of quality is to listen to them all, and here streaming gives you a distinct advantage as you can often listen to the different remasters on one platform.
|
|
|
|
Post by stellabagpuss on Aug 27, 2023 14:21:22 GMT
A good read indeed, Hi Res as you say has no real indication of quality,how it was mastered etc.
I believe the sampling Frequency of Hi Res is a bit of a Joke, all that data on 192Khz that can't even be heard.
Although I think the industry heading in a better direction with 24bit 44.1K seemingly to become the norm on major labels.
Funny you mentioned Ry Cooder Bop Til you drop, the original CD used to drive me up the wall,l would play it my car, it was so quiet and dynamic,l remastered it and compressed so l could actually hear it over the road noises.
I have since purchased the,JPN remastered release, which is in my view,a lot better, but the technology has moved on when they remastered it.
|
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Aug 27, 2023 14:25:39 GMT
The idea of high sampling rate is it pushes all the ultrasonic spuriae well away from the audio spectrum, allowing for more gentle filters and thus less phase distortion.
|
|
|
|
Post by MikeMusic on Aug 27, 2023 14:46:02 GMT
You can't Hi-Res a turd !  |
|
|
|
Post by stellabagpuss on Aug 27, 2023 14:52:51 GMT
The idea of high sampling rate is it pushes all the ultrasonic spuriae well away from the audio spectrum, allowing for more gentle filters and thus less phase distortion. l understand the theory, but l find the theory isn't really back up to reality of the spuriae being a real world issue with the use of filters. Personally 88.2k or 96k is ample,we lived with Red Book for years and there plenty of good examples of recordings. Funny l have Anita Baker Rapture on 16Bit and Hi res 24/96 and 24/192, strange as it may sound, l prefer the,24/96 the 192 slightly overemphasised on treble and bass, while l have a mate who prefers the 16bit, so it's a funny world.... l just think of all that wasted data and space and bandwidth you can't hear. |
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Aug 27, 2023 15:01:08 GMT
It's not always the same, Norah Jones - Come Away With Me in 24/192 is lush, just listen to the shimmer and decay of that cymbal. Many others don't maximise that resolution and many more again sound epic in just 16/44. Bandwidth these days is cheap so it doesn't matter, and streamers and DACs are still getting better.
Better to have proper 24/192 than that MQA shit that Tidal were peddling.
|
|
|
|
Post by stellabagpuss on Aug 27, 2023 16:09:41 GMT
It's not always the same, Norah Jones - Come Away With Me in 24/192 is lush, just listen to the shimmer and decay of that cymbal. Many others don't maximise that resolution and many more again sound epic in just 16/44. Bandwidth these days is cheap so it doesn't matter, and streamers and DACs are still getting better. Better to have proper 24/192 than that MQA shit that Tidal were peddling. So true reference the MQA.... l'm still old school Martin, prefer to have my files on a server, and all of them WAV PCM. Still it's a interesting subject, the over use of compression is my major hate, l like a little compression,certainly Rock wouldn't Rock if it wasn't applied, but it's applied to the whole waveform....crazy. |
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Aug 27, 2023 16:58:59 GMT
So true reference the MQA.... l'm still old school Martin, prefer to have my files on a server, and all of them WAV PCM. Don't confuse FLAC with true compression, though. FLAC reconstructs to the exact WAV data that it started out as, so is lossless. It's only used to conserve bandwidth in streaming. All it needs is a little more processing at the receiving end. So when I'm listening to 24/192 from Qobuz, it's exactly the same as your file (provided it's the same source master). Not so MQA, but we can forget all about that now. |
|
|
|
Post by stellabagpuss on Aug 27, 2023 17:11:05 GMT
Although Flac is theory is lossless, there is ,at least at my end a noticeable difference in,air and space compared with Flac compared to WAV. WAV sounds more natural to my ears.
l know of few people who share my thoughts,but if your streaming,you listen to what is given,l not saying FLAC is terrible,it just sounds different to WAV
MQA ...Sorry...but know thanks.
|
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Aug 27, 2023 17:16:24 GMT
Although Flac is theory is lossless, there is ,at least at my end a noticeable difference in,air and space That's the decompression processing and depends on CPU, RAM timing, quality of PSU, quality of clocking etc. The actual file is exactly the same. I can only compare with what I had before (SACD, records) and the air and space I have now is huge |
|
|
|
Post by stellabagpuss on Aug 27, 2023 18:36:30 GMT
[quote The air and space I have now is huge [/quote] Same at this end ..Tec has come a long way in the past 3 years.. Like yourself the sheer resolution and soundstage we experiencing is something l had never experienced in the past. |
|
|
|
Post by bencat on Aug 27, 2023 19:04:29 GMT
The Ry Cooder Bop Till You drop CD in the Rhino records box set has been remastered to a much higher level bu Joachim Cooder and is the best digital version of this album I have heard to date . I have heard the JPN version and it is not as good as the Rhino records one .
|
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Aug 27, 2023 20:00:40 GMT
The Ry Cooder Bop Till You drop CD in the Rhino records box set has been remastered to a much higher level bu Joachim Cooder and is the best digital version of this album I have heard to date . I have heard the JPN version and it is not as good as the Rhino records one . Are you talking about record releases? They are, of course, all mastered from the digital recording. I can only find the 1979 release on Qobuz and I dare say the other streaming catalogues. This, presumably original, master sounds excellent to my ears (but at an unusually low level). |
|
|
|
Post by stellabagpuss on Aug 27, 2023 20:10:20 GMT
The Ry Cooder Bop Till You drop CD in the Rhino records box set has been remastered to a much higher level bu Joachim Cooder and is the best digital version of this album I have heard to date . I have heard the JPN version and it is not as good as the Rhino records one . Are you talking about record releases? They are, of course, all mastered from the digital recording. I can only find the 1979 release on Qobuz and I dare say the other streaming catalogues. This, presumably original, master sounds excellent to my ears (but at an unusually low level). I was talking about the original CD release, they then released a remastered JPN CD which is this one....
It's levels have been corrected,and due to the advances in DACs,its seems to offer more resolution,l haven't done DRC test,but from memory,when last played it,l enjoyed this great album. |
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Aug 27, 2023 20:22:13 GMT
Oh ok, thanks. Remastering to a higher level will sort out the volume but no more detail can be retrieved. As I said, it's an excellent recording as-is if you adjust the volume.
|
|
|
|
Post by stellabagpuss on Aug 27, 2023 20:34:27 GMT
Dr is 11 on the remastered, the original is 15. dr.loudness-war.info/album/view/123084l will have to play them side by side, as this was the era of playing CDs Although it's not uncommon due to advances in DA conversion, and mastering techniques for them reveal subtle details,or the use of EQ, of course the final sound is subjective. l remember the storm that brewed when Genesis remastered their old albums, l love the SACD mixes,for a lot of people, it was to clean... They loved the mush of tape noise. |
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Aug 27, 2023 21:21:41 GMT
The SACD of Selling England by the Pound is stupendous in its sound quality, and so is the version on Qobuz.
The record was comparatively very average.
|
|
|
|
Post by bencat on Aug 27, 2023 22:19:01 GMT
On the Rhino Records box set release as linked to below the whole set of albums were remixed and presented with Ry Cooders son Joachim in place of Ry as they were done outside of the US and Ry had his passport confiscated for mixing with Cuban musicians and visiting the country to record Buena Vista Social Club . This is one of the reasons why for years he could only tour the US .
|
|
|
|
Post by stellabagpuss on Aug 27, 2023 22:35:43 GMT
That's interesting...However if you read the Amazon reviews,many reviews complain they haven't been remastered at all, so it's hard to know who to believe
|
|
