CHANGSTAR: Audiophile Headphone Reviews and Early 90s Style BBS
Lobby => Music and Recordings => Topic started by: LFF on April 02, 2013, 07:52:12 PM
-
Yes I have.
LOL, thank you for reading the important notes in the spreadsheet. I can't tell you how many people have asked me questions pertaining to the circumstances of the review but did not read the fine details.
To be honest, I only tried two DSD tracks from two albums. I didn't think they sounded any different from PCM (in terms of the treble issues). I also tried various tricks I've used in the past to smooth things out such as up-sampling PCM in JRiver to move the digital filter up way out of the audio band.
Quite frankly, I don't buy into the DSD dedicated DAC thing for computer audio - at least not yet. A native DSD DAC is nice, a DSD DAC can be a fun DIY project, but ultimately DSD can now be converted to hires PCM in JRiver or in Foobar? (Besides, 98% of my music is in PCM.) As I've said time and time again, I get SACDs only because of the availability of differently mastered recordings. Typically, SACD masters tend to be mastered or sometimes re-mixed better than their CD counterparts. (Then again, the MJ Thriller SACD was pretty badly messed up.)
Are there differences between PCM or DSD as they are handled by the chip and DAC? Yes, probably, but not significant enough to matter. I really don't masturbate about the fine details between 24/96 to 24/192 to DSD to DXD or whatever. The right mastering job of a recording will affect sound quality 100x more than the difference between 16/44 and DSD and 24/192.
God damn Sony. I sincerely hope they go bankrupt (pissed at them right now because the PS3 update bricked the box and Sony in it's infinite wisdom won't let you roll-back - I gotta pat $150 to get it fixed.)
Purrin is right about that.
SACD's were always seen as a "niche" product and thus, the record companies never really cared enough to screw them up.
Thus, on many SACD's, we got FLAT transfers of the master tapes, with NO compression or added EQ.
On others, we got very well mastered SACD's with NO compression.
That's the main reason why SACD's sound better...it's not the High Resolution...it's the better mastering. In fact, on many hybrids, the companies INSISTED the CD layer be an exact copy of the retail CD (which is often shit) or be an "approved" redbook mastering (also shit).
The right mastering job of a recording will affect sound quality 100x more than the difference between 16/44 and DSD and 24/192.
-
The right mastering job of a recording will affect sound quality 100x more than the difference between 16/44 and DSD and 24/192.
Thank you, Purrin and LFF, for this.
The #1 question we get on DACs these days is "Will it support DSD?"
To which we answer, "How much DSD ya got?"
Answer is invariably, "Nothing."
The problem is that DSD has been built up as the second-coming, holy-crap-gotta-get-this, next-latest-and-greatest audio format touched by divine hands and able to perform miracles like raising the dead and making crocodiles as pettable as kittens.
And here's the big problem: this creates more confusion in a market that already thinks we audiophiles are a bit touched in the head. Once you start explaining "Well, you know, most of your music is probably 16/44.1, but there's also 24/88 and 24/96 and 24/176 and 24/192 and by the way now there's also DSD, but it's not just DSD but DSD 1X and DSD 2X and DXD," well, the natural response is, "Wow, you guys are really bonkers, Ima just gonna go to the iTunes store and get what they sell me."
Some of us remember SACD. And HDCD. And DAT. And quadraphonic. And reel-to-reel. Yes, all better than the mainstream formats of the time. But they went exactly nowhere due to lack of content. And yeah, I know there's like 8000 SACDs out there (in stock where? mastered from what?) and they're playable on $50 Sony DVD players (but you can't get digital out, oh noes!), but, you know, it's still a tiny part of the overall musicosphere.
-
I love this thread.
Great posts from Purrin, LFF, and Jason. Karma points all around.
-
I love this thread.
Great posts from Purrin, LFF, and Jason. Karma points all around.
Thanks MF!
It's critical that people understand the true meaning of "Source First". I have said it time and time again...it's all in the mastering. Just look at the High Resolution master of Nirvana's "Nevermind" on HDTracks. facepalm facepalm facepalm facepalm facepalm facepalm facepalm facepalm facepalm facepalm facepalm facepalm facepalm facepalm facepalm facepalm facepalm facepalm
High-Res won't do poo for you if it's brickwalled and improperly EQ'd. :gross:
-
Absurd thinking of the audiophiles out there who buy some fancy dac and then just listen to 16 albums.
-
Absurd thinking of the audiophiles out there who buy some fancy dac and then just listen to 16 albums.
I kinda envy them.
It's frustrating to have a pile of CD's and LP's waiting for your attention and not having the time to listen....
-
The problem is that DSD has been built up as the second-coming, holy-crap-gotta-get-this, next-latest-and-greatest audio format touched by divine hands and able to perform miracles like raising the dead and making crocodiles as pettable as kittens.
At this point, the whole SABRE thing is looking like the third coming. You forgot DVD-A. ::)
-
I just can't get too riled about specific formats.
Entire rooms of my living quarters are filled with physical media: CDs, vinyl LPs, minidiscs, and cassettes. I also have several external drives filled with lots 'n' lots o' files.
I try to find the best quality I can whenever possible, but often times you just have to go with what's available. Even if it's a cassette tape wrapped in a banana leaf and stuffed in a ziplock bag (for reals).
-
I agree with all that has been said, the only reason I pestered on the DSD/DXD in the X-Sabre thread was because according to the unclear notes it didn't look like it had been tried at all. I didn't know if you three had heard native of those before and wanted you to experience it and see what you thought. Your results are identical to mine. I heard great sound but that could have easily been the master more than the format.
I think having the native format flexibility is a nice bonus, but as Jason said, I have basically no media to run with that flexibility.
-
Yep -- it's frustrating to see people attribute better sounding records to the actual format themselves (hi-res or SACD) than the mastering. Same with many people preferring vinyl versions of albums, despite the medium being inferior to digital.
But since the SACD formats tend to have better masters, in the end, it ends up being SACD > CD anyway. Sure, it's for different reasons than the average joe audiophile thinks, but the result is the same. That in itself will make SACD/DSD format more prevalent and the support of that format more desirable.
Then again, the fact that JRiver and Foobar can convert DSD to PCM makes the native support of DSD unnecessary. Thank god I don't listen to audiophile music so I don't have to worry about this stuff.
-
I have to agree with everything on the last couple pages of the thread. It has been my experience that the format has less to do with sound quality then the recording and mastering does. Having a high resolution recording that was recorded terribly won't make it sound any better.
Out of curiosity I bought the 176/24 version of Time Out from HD tracks to compare it with the version I bought from Itunes a couple years ago. I don't have the best ear in the world for this stuff, but the difference between the two was so small that there is no way I could reliably tell the difference. Some of my old Beatles mp3 rips sound better than the FLAC rips of other albums that I have done more recently.
Based on what I have picked up around here from people like LFF, I have focused on finding well mastered recordings rather than finding the highest resolution version and have noticed a much more meaningful improvement in the sound quality.
I am sure that if you were to find an excellently mastered high resolution file it would sound great, but the reality is that the number of albums available in these formats is quite small and I would rather not limit my music collection.
-
I need to take some audio engineering classes so I can just re-master all of my crap-sounding albums like LFF does. Win win.
-
The problem is that DSD has been built up as the second-coming, holy-crap-gotta-get-this, next-latest-and-greatest audio format touched by divine hands and able to perform miracles like raising the dead and making crocodiles as pettable as kittens.
At this point, the whole SABRE thing is looking like the third coming. You forgot DVD-A. ::)
Always need DVDA....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tx1mryKqvT8
-
I need to take some audio engineering classes so I can just re-master all of my crap-sounding albums like LFF does. Win win.
Hey, I've only been at it nearly 14 years.... headbang
-
There's a new "audiophile" 24/96 version of Countdown To Extinction on HDTracks.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analyzed: Megadeth / Countdown to Extinction
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DR Peak RMS Duration Track
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DR5 -0.30 dB -6.13 dB 3:15 01-Skin O' My Teeth
DR5 -0.30 dB -6.94 dB 4:01 02-Symphony of Destruction
DR5 -0.30 dB -6.82 dB 3:35 03-Architecture of Aggression
DR4 -0.30 dB -5.92 dB 4:17 04-Foreclosure of a Dream
DR6 -0.30 dB -8.18 dB 5:03 05-Sweating Bullets
DR5 -0.30 dB -6.55 dB 3:42 06-This Was My Life
DR6 -0.30 dB -7.20 dB 4:17 07-Countdown to Extinction
DR5 -0.30 dB -6.70 dB 4:11 08-High Speed Dirt
DR6 -0.30 dB -7.60 dB 4:42 09-Psychotron
DR6 -0.30 dB -7.23 dB 4:14 10-Captive Honour
DR5 -0.30 dB -6.68 dB 6:11 11-Ashes in Your Mouth
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of tracks: 11
Official DR value: DR5
Samplerate: 96000 Hz
Channels: 2
Bits per sample: 24
Bitrate: 3244 kbps
Codec: FLAC
This sort of thing should be criminal. The day that the Loudness War hits high-res files in full force is the day that everyone will stop giving a shit about high-res and HDTracks, and go back to buying first press vinyl. It's absolutely the master that matters. Unfortunately a proper master of Countdown doesn't exist. The original was done with a "smile" EQ and is all bass and cymbals, and the remasters are all godawful.
-
Not sure about the DR Rating on it but the HD Tracks version of Madman Across the Water is terrible as well. It's smashed and then completely chopped off (it looks pretty hilarious in Audacity).
My $5 bargain bin CD copy sounds better, and my original Polydor CD beats that. You'd pay more for the HD Tracks version over either one of those.
Haven't bought anything from them since. Vinyl has definitely given me more than 'high res' downloads have.
-
The day that the Loudness War hits high-res files in full force is the day that everyone will stop giving a shit about high-res and HDTracks, and go back to buying first press vinyl.
Yes, that's why I stopped visiting the site since last year. I don't trust them anymore. I've gone back to my transport despite the slight inconvenience. The potential of digital media and improved quality is turning into a perverted mythology. I'm not repeating my past errors of walking into a tower records, buying 30 classical cds and ending up with only 4-5 worth a damn. Until I can track their releases, just No. I have a very pessimistic view of the direction of digital music currently.
-
At least 50% of the HDTracks Album's I got are worse than first edition cd's. I have already bought some LP's, and am looking for a turntable. Some of the releases (Adele is a good example), are just so much better on vinyl (not compressed to shit).
-
There's a new "audiophile" 24/96 version of Countdown To Extinction on HDTracks.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analyzed: Megadeth / Countdown to Extinction
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DR Peak RMS Duration Track
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DR5 -0.30 dB -6.13 dB 3:15 01-Skin O' My Teeth
DR5 -0.30 dB -6.94 dB 4:01 02-Symphony of Destruction
DR5 -0.30 dB -6.82 dB 3:35 03-Architecture of Aggression
DR4 -0.30 dB -5.92 dB 4:17 04-Foreclosure of a Dream
DR6 -0.30 dB -8.18 dB 5:03 05-Sweating Bullets
DR5 -0.30 dB -6.55 dB 3:42 06-This Was My Life
DR6 -0.30 dB -7.20 dB 4:17 07-Countdown to Extinction
DR5 -0.30 dB -6.70 dB 4:11 08-High Speed Dirt
DR6 -0.30 dB -7.60 dB 4:42 09-Psychotron
DR6 -0.30 dB -7.23 dB 4:14 10-Captive Honour
DR5 -0.30 dB -6.68 dB 6:11 11-Ashes in Your Mouth
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of tracks: 11
Official DR value: DR5
Samplerate: 96000 Hz
Channels: 2
Bits per sample: 24
Bitrate: 3244 kbps
Codec: FLAC
This sort of thing should be criminal. The day that the Loudness War hits high-res files in full force is the day that everyone will stop giving a shit about high-res and HDTracks, and go back to buying first press vinyl. It's absolutely the master that matters. Unfortunately a proper master of Countdown doesn't exist. The original was done with a "smile" EQ and is all bass and cymbals, and the remasters are all godawful.
Hmmm...might I suggest...
(http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQRlXPIn44ebBp6I4FmqWwtmCJSh1yETQZtFLTsM9jQ5Jh0Jdd4)
BTW...I prefer the original first pressing for this one.
-
The smilie eq is mostly fixable, so just grab the original and remaster as you prefer.
The horrible DRC is not fixable.
-
The smilie eq is mostly fixable, so just grab the original and remaster as you prefer.
The horrible DRC is not fixable.
Not quite....
With DRC'd music, you can only apply negative EQ as any boost is likely to cause clipping.
DRC is rarely, if ever, fixable.
-
Hmmm...might I suggest...
(http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQRlXPIn44ebBp6I4FmqWwtmCJSh1yETQZtFLTsM9jQ5Jh0Jdd4)
BTW...I prefer the original first pressing for this one.
I have an original Countdown on German vinyl. It's too bright and too thin in the mids like the original CD, but it's the best that there currently is. MFSL's "original master recording" is a crock of shit. it's not an original anything. The original master tape shows up with 75Khz+ of FR on the vinyl. Both the MFSL vinyl and CD were taken from the 2004 remaster - the MFSL vinyl tops out at 48Khz, and it has the same crappy "drum machine" sound as the standard '04. Dave absolutely RUINED the sound of the drums.
Aside from that, and I assume this is MFSL's fault, in their versions they went too far in the other direction with the highs, they're too recessed.
-
Hmmm...might I suggest...
(http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQRlXPIn44ebBp6I4FmqWwtmCJSh1yETQZtFLTsM9jQ5Jh0Jdd4)
BTW...I prefer the original first pressing for this one.
I have an original Countdown on German vinyl. It's too bright and too thin in the mids like the original CD, but it's the best that there currently is. MFSL's "original master recording" is a crock of shit. it's not an original anything. The original master tape shows up with 75Khz+ of FR on the vinyl. Both the MFSL vinyl and CD were taken from the 2004 remaster - the MFSL vinyl tops out at 48Khz, and it has the same crappy "drum machine" sound as the standard '04. Dave absolutely RUINED the sound of the drums.
Aside from that, and I assume this is MFSL's fault, in their versions they went too far in the other direction with the highs, they're too recessed.
It's been a LONG time since I have heard this album. I might have to revisit it with my good friend, Mr. Sontec, EQ. ;)
-
I like the remixed version over the original but I prefer the original master of the remix to the mfsl version
-
The day that the Loudness War hits high-res files in full force is the day that everyone will stop giving a shit about high-res and HDTracks, and go back to buying first press vinyl.
Yes, that's why I stopped visiting the site since last year. I don't trust them anymore. I've gone back to my transport despite the slight inconvenience. The potential of digital media and improved quality is turning into a perverted mythology. I'm not repeating my past errors of walking into a tower records, buying 30 classical cds and ending up with only 4-5 worth a damn. Until I can track their releases, just No. I have a very pessimistic view of the direction of digital music currently.
WADR, I think you're misapportioning the blame here.
HDTracks is a record store, not a record company. They can only sell what they can buy. The hi-res version of "Countdown to Extinction" is massively compromised because the label thinks that's what people want and the band didn't say "no." I've always found it somewhat odd that people blame HDTracks for things that they don't blame Amoeba for.
You can argue that HDTracks, hiresaudio, Qobuz, and the rest of them should try to exert pressure on labels to provide better-sounding files if they want the additional margin that comes with premium pricing. You can also argue that the distributors should exert more pressure on labels to provide more accurate information about provenance, dynamic range, etc., which they can then post so that consumers can make informed buying decisions. I agree with both of those arguments.
Blaming HDTracks for the poor quality of (some, not all, of) the files they distribute is analogous to blaming Ralph's when you open that box of Cheerios you bought there and find it half-empty.
-
Wrong. HDtracks purports and markets itself as "High Def Music / World's Greatest-Sounding Music."
What HDtracks is doing would be like if Whole Foods sold premium brand cereals which were really repackaged Cheerios in fancy boxes. HDtracks can choose to conduct their business honorably and according to their marketing spiel by rejecting recordings which didn't meet a standard of "World's Greatest-Sounding Music" or "High Def" by refusing to sell them. Instead, they rip people off. But then again, buyer beware.
I think it's safe to say that a lot stuff from HDtracks is of quality not necessarily any better than what one can get on CD. People buy stuff from them because they get hard-ons from "24/96" and "24/192".
Besides, Ralph's let's us return that half-empty box of Cheerios. With HDtracks, were are SOL.
-
Besides, Ralph's let's us return that half-empty box of Cheerios. With HDtracks, were are SOL.
Ralph's lets you return the half-empty box of Cheerios for three reasons, two economic and one legal.
(1) They value good customer relationships.
(2) They know that when they give you your money back, they're going to get a credit from General Mills.
(3) They are subject to truth-in-labeling laws, which they violate when the box says "11.5 oz." and the contents only weigh six ounces.
Certainly, (1) would apply with equal force to an on-line distributor of digital music files. There are stories (perhaps apochryphal, perhaps not) of people getting refunds from HDTracks, and there are instances in which they have pulled product off the "shelf" when it was shown to not be what it purported to be. As to (2), it's possible, but having never seen any of the agreements between HDTracks and its suppliers, I'm not prepared to make any assertion either way. It's certainly true in the case of music on physical media: if you return a slab of vinyl because of non-fill, the company that sold it to you will get a credit from the label. As to (3), who knows? Not all marketing hype is illegal, and one assumes that HDTracks' website copy is vetted by competent lawyers.
Everybody's experience is different. My experience with HDTracks, on balance, has been pretty good. For the vast majority of what I buy from them, "first press vinyl" is unobtanium, and I'm willing to bet a couple of bucks on the proposition that the hi-res file I can get from them sounds better than the CD I can get from Amazon (when the "bet" is $14, as in the case of the new Tomasz Stanko album, not so much; I'm buying that on CD).
If you've been disappointed, I'm sorry to hear that, and by all means vote with your wallet.
But I don't see what's gained by focusing all of the blame for a flawed supply chain on the actor that's arguably least responsible for the problem.
-
If you've been disappointed, I'm sorry to hear that, and by all means vote with your wallet.
But I don't see what's gained by focusing all of the blame for a flawed supply chain on the actor that's arguably least responsible for the problem.
That's exactly what I'm doing. Thanks for pointing out that HDTracks has even less incentive to be responsive to customer needs than General Mills and Ralphs, that reaffirms my decision. So called 'HDTracks' wants to market compressed garbage that fine, but now they are just another faux 'Mastered for iTunes' gimmick. Hell, taking a bad master and putting in on 24/192 probably mathematically makes it even sound worse. So yes, they've lost my wallet till they restore faith or I find a way to do due diligence they refuse to do despite being implicit to their companies name and mission statement. Look at the top of their website:
https://www.hdtracks.com/ (https://www.hdtracks.com/)
It says, "The World's Greatest Sounding Music Downloads." I'm sorry, you have no case to make in their defense. They have incriminated themselves with their own marketing and mission statement:
https://www.hdtracks.com/index.php?file=staticpage&pagename=aboutus (https://www.hdtracks.com/index.php?file=staticpage&pagename=aboutus)
"Bringing the same fidelity and integrity..."
I can't believe you think a distributor bears no responsibility for a supplier's content. I'll make sure to blame Columbia next time I get arrested for peddling crack on a street corner, I'm sure the judge will let me off.
-
There's a new "audiophile" 24/96 version of Countdown To Extinction on HDTracks.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analyzed: Megadeth / Countdown to Extinction
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DR Peak RMS Duration Track
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DR5 -0.30 dB -6.13 dB 3:15 01-Skin O' My Teeth
DR5 -0.30 dB -6.94 dB 4:01 02-Symphony of Destruction
DR5 -0.30 dB -6.82 dB 3:35 03-Architecture of Aggression
DR4 -0.30 dB -5.92 dB 4:17 04-Foreclosure of a Dream
DR6 -0.30 dB -8.18 dB 5:03 05-Sweating Bullets
DR5 -0.30 dB -6.55 dB 3:42 06-This Was My Life
DR6 -0.30 dB -7.20 dB 4:17 07-Countdown to Extinction
DR5 -0.30 dB -6.70 dB 4:11 08-High Speed Dirt
DR6 -0.30 dB -7.60 dB 4:42 09-Psychotron
DR6 -0.30 dB -7.23 dB 4:14 10-Captive Honour
DR5 -0.30 dB -6.68 dB 6:11 11-Ashes in Your Mouth
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of tracks: 11
Official DR value: DR5
Samplerate: 96000 Hz
Channels: 2
Bits per sample: 24
Bitrate: 3244 kbps
Codec: FLAC
This sort of thing should be criminal. The day that the Loudness War hits high-res files in full force is the day that everyone will stop giving a shit about high-res and HDTracks, and go back to buying first press vinyl. It's absolutely the master that matters. Unfortunately a proper master of Countdown doesn't exist. The original was done with a "smile" EQ and is all bass and cymbals, and the remasters are all godawful.
Yeah ive got the MSFL release which looks a bit better on the DR front
foobar2000 1.1.11 / Dynamic Range Meter 1.1.1
log date: 2013-04-04 16:03:02
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analyzed: Megadeth / Countdown To Extinction (Remaster)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DR Peak RMS Duration Track
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DR8 -0.37 dB -9.47 dB 3:17 01-Skin O' My Teeth
DR8 -0.10 dB -9.31 dB 4:08 02-Symphony Of Destruction
DR8 -0.42 dB -9.82 dB 3:40 03-Architecture Of Aggression
DR7 -0.58 dB -8.88 dB 4:23 04-Foreclosure Of A Dream
DR9 -0.10 dB -11.05 dB 5:28 05-Sweating Bullets
DR8 -0.10 dB -10.03 dB 3:43 06-This Was My Life
DR8 -0.12 dB -9.63 dB 4:19 07-Countdown To Extinction
DR8 -0.10 dB -8.39 dB 4:21 08-High Speed Dirt
DR8 -0.10 dB -9.22 dB 4:42 09-Psychotron
DR7 -0.10 dB -8.66 dB 4:15 10-Captive Honour
DR8 -0.10 dB -8.98 dB 6:14 11-Ashes In Your Mouth
DR8 -0.37 dB -9.16 dB 3:19 12-Crown Of Worms
DR7 -0.10 dB -8.24 dB 3:56 13-Countdown To Extinction (Demo)
DR7 -0.11 dB -9.03 dB 5:30 14-Symphony Of Destruction (Demo)
DR8 -0.10 dB -8.99 dB 5:29 15-Psychotron (Demo)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of tracks: 15
Official DR value: DR8
Samplerate: 44100 Hz
Channels: 2
Bits per sample: 16
Bitrate: 999 kbps
Codec: ALAC
================================================================================
But luckily for me, its one of my least favorite Megadeth CDs, i pretty much only listen to Killing is my business, peace sells, and rust in peace...
-
My take on HDTracks:
HDTracks is comprised of two types of recordings:
1) Well recorded "audiophile" music - not necessarily someone I actually want to listen to but very nice recordings
2) Traditional popular albums getting the re-release treatment in HiRez
For #1, there are quite a few sites around that do this besides for HDTracks and they'd never really pick up traction in a larger sense over their competition with just this route. However, once they start incorporating your Fleetwood Mac, Nirvana, etc, that's when all of a sudden your average musicophile is not "giving up" to be an audiophile - more and more of your favorite albums are available in hirez!
Of course, getting the rights to these albums in hirez can a PITA, which is why all these other sites don't have the catalog HDT has - they spend a lot to get those rights, as they're still quite a small fish and can't push any of the heavyweight labels around for the sake of a few thousand downloads for each album.
So they get the releases slowly - and they get whatever slim pickings are given them - they can't/won't fight for original tapes or exclusive costly remasters - they need the popular content and will turn a blind eye without batting an eyelash to have that edge.
So in that sense I blame everyone. Sure, maybe HDTracks could focus on getting tapes and/or going through arduous remasters, but that would cut down on content and be more costly for them... and they'd make much less money. So they play up what they can - numbers like 24/192 and remastered in neon letters - and live to listen to their binaural recordings on their backwards HD800's another day.
-
Yeah ive got the MSFL release which looks a bit better on the DR front
foobar2000 1.1.11 / Dynamic Range Meter 1.1.1
log date: 2013-04-04 16:03:02
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analyzed: Megadeth / Countdown To Extinction (Remaster)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DR Peak RMS Duration Track
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DR8 -0.37 dB -9.47 dB 3:17 01-Skin O' My Teeth
DR8 -0.10 dB -9.31 dB 4:08 02-Symphony Of Destruction
DR8 -0.42 dB -9.82 dB 3:40 03-Architecture Of Aggression
DR7 -0.58 dB -8.88 dB 4:23 04-Foreclosure Of A Dream
DR9 -0.10 dB -11.05 dB 5:28 05-Sweating Bullets
DR8 -0.10 dB -10.03 dB 3:43 06-This Was My Life
DR8 -0.12 dB -9.63 dB 4:19 07-Countdown To Extinction
DR8 -0.10 dB -8.39 dB 4:21 08-High Speed Dirt
DR8 -0.10 dB -9.22 dB 4:42 09-Psychotron
DR7 -0.10 dB -8.66 dB 4:15 10-Captive Honour
DR8 -0.10 dB -8.98 dB 6:14 11-Ashes In Your Mouth
DR8 -0.37 dB -9.16 dB 3:19 12-Crown Of Worms
DR7 -0.10 dB -8.24 dB 3:56 13-Countdown To Extinction (Demo)
DR7 -0.11 dB -9.03 dB 5:30 14-Symphony Of Destruction (Demo)
DR8 -0.10 dB -8.99 dB 5:29 15-Psychotron (Demo)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of tracks: 15
Official DR value: DR8
Samplerate: 44100 Hz
Channels: 2
Bits per sample: 16
Bitrate: 999 kbps
Codec: ALAC
================================================================================
But luckily for me, its one of my least favorite Megadeth CDs, i pretty much only listen to Killing is my business, peace sells, and rust in peace...
Except my original vinyl pressing is DR13. MFSL did what they could with the piece of shit remix-master that Dave sent them, but the actual original master recording with MFSL treatment (or preferably somebody better like ORG) would've been a vast improvement, as I said it's mostly an EQ issue with the original, the recording is fine.
-
Wrong. HDtracks purports and markets itself as "High Def Music / World's Greatest-Sounding Music."
What HDtracks is doing would be like if Whole Foods sold premium brand cereals which were really repackaged Cheerios in fancy boxes. HDtracks can choose to conduct their business honorably and according to their marketing spiel by rejecting recordings which didn't meet a standard of "World's Greatest-Sounding Music" or "High Def" by refusing to sell them. Instead, they rip people off. But then again, buyer beware.
I think it's safe to say that a lot stuff from HDtracks is of quality not necessarily any better than what one can get on CD. People buy stuff from them because they get hard-ons from "24/96" and "24/192".
Besides, Ralph's let's us return that half-empty box of Cheerios. With HDtracks, were are SOL.
Agreed. The biggest problem I have with HDTracks is they provide (in most cases at least) NO sourcing information. Nothing. A lot of their 24/88 stuff is probably SACD to PCM conversions, but who knows? They don't tell you. They don't tell you if a 24/96 file was a DVD-A transfer or something else. Is a particular high-res file sourced from an original master or some existing re-master? Beats me!
What HDTracks sells is a box of premium brand cereal that has no product weight. It has no serving size. It has no nutrition information. The back of the box is completely blank. Maybe its good, maybe it isn't. If it does turn out to be crap and you complain, maybe you can get a credit so you can play the lottery with another mystery sourced high-res release. AFAIK you don't get your money back.
Contrast that with Analog Productions and their Doors releases. They wanted original master tapes for their new vinyl issues. The studio tried to give them 24/96 files because the original engineer didn't want to release the tapes. AP said it's originals or we walk, and they ultimately got their way. The surround mix for their SACDs are DSD conversions from the existing surround master done for the DVD-As from a few years back, and they readily admit as such. That's why I trust and buy from AP and why I don't buy anything from HDTracks.
-
Wrong. HDtracks purports and markets itself as "High Def Music / World's Greatest-Sounding Music."
What HDtracks is doing would be like if Whole Foods sold premium brand cereals which were really repackaged Cheerios in fancy boxes. HDtracks can choose to conduct their business honorably and according to their marketing spiel by rejecting recordings which didn't meet a standard of "World's Greatest-Sounding Music" or "High Def" by refusing to sell them. Instead, they rip people off. But then again, buyer beware.
I think it's safe to say that a lot stuff from HDtracks is of quality not necessarily any better than what one can get on CD. People buy stuff from them because they get hard-ons from "24/96" and "24/192".
Besides, Ralph's let's us return that half-empty box of Cheerios. With HDtracks, were are SOL.
Agreed. The biggest problem I have with HDTracks is they provide (in most cases at least) NO sourcing information. Nothing. A lot of their 24/88 stuff is probably SACD to PCM conversions, but who knows? They don't tell you. They don't tell you if a 24/96 file was a DVD-A transfer or something else. Is a particular high-res file sourced from an original master or some existing re-master? Beats me!
What HDTracks sells is a box of premium brand cereal that has no product weight. It has no serving size. It has no nutrition information. The back of the box is completely blank. Maybe its good, maybe it isn't. If it does turn out to be crap and you complain, maybe you can get a credit so you can play the lottery with another mystery sourced high-res release. AFAIK you don't get your money back.
Contrast that with Analog Productions and their Doors releases. They wanted original master tapes for their new vinyl issues. The studio tried to give them 24/96 files because the original engineer didn't want to release the tapes. AP said it's originals or we walk, and they ultimately got their way. The surround mix for their SACDs are DSD conversions from the existing surround master done for the DVD-As from a few years back, and they readily admit as such. That's why I trust and buy from AP and why I don't buy anything from HDTracks.
EXACTLY!!! X2!
-
In regards to HD tracks, do they provide any information on what type of files they use for the "samples" that you can preview. I haven't been able to find any definitive answer on the site. If you could properly sample the music that you are going to buy I wouldn't have an issue with them providing poorly mastered high-res music files.
Whenever I was considering purchasing an album from them I would check the samples. If it didn't sound the way I thought it should I wouldn't buy it. One time I purchased an album where the samples didn't sound very good, but I figured the actual files would be better quality. Turns out they weren't...lesson learned.
-
Contrast that with Analog Productions and their Doors releases. They wanted original master tapes for their new vinyl issues. The studio tried to give them 24/96 files because the original engineer didn't want to release the tapes. AP said it's originals or we walk, and they ultimately got their way. The surround mix for their SACDs are DSD conversions from the existing surround master done for the DVD-As from a few years back, and they readily admit as such. That's why I trust and buy from AP and why I don't buy anything from HDTracks.
Those new Doors releases are horrendously good, by the way...In case anyone was wondering. Definitely the best copies of those releases I've heard, vinyl or otherwise. At the least the vinyl is anyway. SH seems less impressed with the new SACDs, but I can't comment on those.
S/T is the weakest of the 6 and I have a feeling it because they had to use a janky tape. Due to the fact the original doesn't exist anymore, IIRC.
-
Those new Doors releases are horrendously good, by the way...In case anyone was wondering. Definitely the best copies of those releases I've heard, vinyl or otherwise. At the least the vinyl is anyway. SH seems less impressed with the new SACDs, but I can't comment on those.
S/T is the weakest of the 6 and I have a feeling it because they had to use a janky tape. Due to the fact the original doesn't exist anymore, IIRC.
Yeah I remember hearing that. They did the best they could, but it may make more sense to go buy a '67 Elektra first press which are expensive for a NM, but not outrageously so. The rest of their albums though are all done from proper master tapes and should beat the originals. Analog Productions vinyl is generally phenomenal. Only Music Matters and a few others are in their league.
-
p:8 Nice way to derail a thread :)p8
-
p;)
Yup, at one point only the music remains subject of the conversation.
-
Portions relating to DSD or hires were moved from the Mytek thread to here.
-
p;)
Yup, at one point only the music remains subject of the conversation.
As it should be headbang. My interest for DSD and hires formats is just in case they used a different master. In some cases they did and it's for good, in others facepalm
-
Chris at Computer Audiophile seems impressed with HD Tracks' new Van Halen releases.
http://www.computeraudiophile.com/content/515-van-halen-studio-albums-1978-1984-high-resolution-24-bit-192-khz-download/comments2.html#comments
-
Looks fishy considering the following:
- A poster indicated that an original VH CD had similarly great DR numbers.
- There's no comparison with earlier releases.
- I don't see much spectral content above 24kHz. It seems to die into a flattish noise floor (with a few spikes here and here.)
- Some recordings have a brick-wall filter at 22kHz. WTF? Are these up-sampled from the CD? Why is HDtracks releasing content with no information above 22kHz in 24/192 format?
-
Looks fishy considering the following:
- A poster indicated that an original VH CD had similarly great DR numbers.
- There's no comparison with earlier releases.
- I don't see much spectral content above 24kHz. It seems to die into a flattish noise floor (with a few spikes here and here.)
- Some recordings have a brick-wall filter at 22kHz. WTF? Are these up-sampled from the CD? Why is HDtracks releasing content with no information above 22kHz in 24/192 format?
Run a whole bunch of your SACDs and other high-res sources on an analyzer that can do 64kHz sampling with a -140dB noise floor, or 512kHz sampling with about a -120dB noise floor (hello, Stanford) and you may be very surprised by what you find.
Hint: most of them are brickwall source--whether mastered for CD or taken from CD, the information isn't there anymore.
-
HD Tracks days this: All VH transfers were from the original EQ production analog tapes.
-
I had almost no VH other than vinyl. I wanted some digital copies.
I grabbed the HDTracks set. It's sounding pretty good, FWIW.
-
Interesting DSD measurements here: http://archimago.blogspot.ca/2013/04/measurements-oppo-bdp-105-does-dsd.html
-
Looks fishy considering the following:
- A poster indicated that an original VH CD had similarly great DR numbers.
- There's no comparison with earlier releases.
- I don't see much spectral content above 24kHz. It seems to die into a flattish noise floor (with a few spikes here and here.)
- Some recordings have a brick-wall filter at 22kHz. WTF? Are these up-sampled from the CD? Why is HDtracks releasing content with no information above 22kHz in 24/192 format?
Available in 24/96 or SUPER AUDIOPHILE 24/192!!! (Tiniest print possible) we bricked some of them at 22Khz, so anything higher than 24/48 is a total waste of your time and hard drive space. Oh wait they don't say that, do they? Who did the transfering? On what? They don't say that either. I guess you're just supposed to hand over your $110 and hope for the best!
What a load of crap. A 1978 VH I first press will cost you about $15 for a NM. The later albums are even less than that.
-
And now his musings http://archimago.blogspot.ca/2013/04/musings-on-sacd-dsd-audio.html
popcorn
-
Thanks for the links Grahame. In the end it is all about the mix and master.
-
The next step is starting a list of pirate-approved labels and mastering studios. :)p3
Perhaps a review site (eh, hard to trust any) or a better version of loudness-war.info, taking into account loudness as well as other crap mastering techniques.
-
The next step is starting a list of pirate-approved labels and mastering studios. :)p3
Perhaps a review site (eh, hard to trust any) or a better version of loudness-war.info, taking into account loudness as well as other crap mastering techniques.
ORG, Analogue Productions, Music Matters, IMPEX, Mosaic, Speakers Corner, and Reference Recordings generally all produce excellent records. MFSL is more hit or miss. At the other end you have labels like Back On Black and Music On Vinyl that are best avoided unless there's no other choice.
We do pretty much exactly what you're suggesting at Metal-Fi, but obviously it's metal only.
-
HDTracks "Panama" at 24/192
(http://imageshack.us/a/img22/9168/vanhalen192.jpg)
HDTracks "Panama" at 24/96, resampled by me to 24/192.
(http://imageshack.us/a/img842/2840/vanhalen96resample.jpg)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jrwjiO1MCVs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jrwjiO1MCVs)
-
I checked my PS3 today and found out that mine supports SACD. When I loooked it up I found out that the PS3 does not output DSD. What is the point of that? Is that how other SACD players work? I had never thought of SACD, but hearing that they generally have better mastering had me considering trying it out. Has anyone tried the SACD function of a PS3?
As usual, I am kind of confused with this medium. If the PS3 converts the DSD stream from the SACD into PCM, what would the resolution of the PCM stream be? Is there any advantage to using the SACD disc layer vs. the redbook cd layer on a hybrid SACD? I want to assume that the two layers would have the same mastering but I have learned that something so logical may not be the case. I defer to the expert pirates here for the answer.
-
I checked my PS3 today and found out that mine supports SACD. When I loooked it up I found out that the PS3 does not output DSD. What is the point of that? Is that how other SACD players work? I had never thought of SACD, but hearing that they generally have better mastering had me considering trying it out. Has anyone tried the SACD function of a PS3?
As usual, I am kind of confused with this medium. If the PS3 converts the DSD stream from the SACD into PCM, what would the resolution of the PCM stream be? Is there any advantage to using the SACD disc layer vs. the redbook cd layer on a hybrid SACD? I want to assume that the two layers would have the same mastering but I have learned that something so logical may not be the case. I defer to the expert pirates here for the answer.
If the firmware on your PS3 is earlier than version 3.55, there is freeware out there that you can use to extract the DSD file from SACDs. There is an extensive discussion over at CA.
-
The next step is starting a list of pirate-approved labels and mastering studios. :)p3
Perhaps a review site (eh, hard to trust any) or a better version of loudness-war.info, taking into account loudness as well as other crap mastering techniques.
ORG, Analogue Productions, Music Matters, IMPEX, Mosaic, Speakers Corner, and Reference Recordings generally all produce excellent records. MFSL is more hit or miss. At the other end you have labels like Back On Black and Music On Vinyl that are best avoided unless there's no other choice.
We do pretty much exactly what you're suggesting at Metal-Fi, but obviously it's metal only.
+1 for Classic Wax series. Speaking of which...My copy of With Oden on Our Side shipped from Germany yesterday.
-
I checked my PS3 today and found out that mine supports SACD. When I loooked it up I found out that the PS3 does not output DSD. What is the point of that? Is that how other SACD players work? I had never thought of SACD, but hearing that they generally have better mastering had me considering trying it out. Has anyone tried the SACD function of a PS3?
As usual, I am kind of confused with this medium. If the PS3 converts the DSD stream from the SACD into PCM, what would the resolution of the PCM stream be? Is there any advantage to using the SACD disc layer vs. the redbook cd layer on a hybrid SACD? I want to assume that the two layers would have the same mastering but I have learned that something so logical may not be the case. I defer to the expert pirates here for the answer.
All units capable of SACD playback can do this as long as the firmware is 3.55 or earlier.
-
I checked my PS3 today and found out that mine supports SACD. When I loooked it up I found out that the PS3 does not output DSD. What is the point of that? Is that how other SACD players work? I had never thought of SACD, but hearing that they generally have better mastering had me considering trying it out. Has anyone tried the SACD function of a PS3?
As usual, I am kind of confused with this medium. If the PS3 converts the DSD stream from the SACD into PCM, what would the resolution of the PCM stream be? Is there any advantage to using the SACD disc layer vs. the redbook cd layer on a hybrid SACD? I want to assume that the two layers would have the same mastering but I have learned that something so logical may not be the case. I defer to the expert pirates here for the answer.
Sony was militant that SACD not be copyable. NO SACD player can output DSD using a conventional digital format like optical or coaxial. The only formats that support DSD from an SACD player or transport are Firewire, HDMI, and proprietary transport links used by certain companies. Ironic then that Sony's own PS3 would open the door to SACD ripping. If it was anybody else's machine, they would've been sued into oblivion.
Most SACD players still use either stereo or multi-channel analog outputs.
-
IIRC the only advantage to DSD is simplicity of DAC. All you need is a LPF.
-
I guess at this point in the SACD product life cycle they don't care about people ripping the files using modded PS3s based on old firmware (Mine is well past 3.55 and it can't be rolled back :(). I don't think I would ever want to rip the files, but being forced to use the PS3's internals to convert files to PCM seems like it defeats the purpose of offering a high definition music player.
This leads back into the context of the thread. Why do I constantly read about DSD capable DACs if the only way to use DSD functionality is essentially downloading DSD music files? I did a quick google search and there are only a handful of sites offering DSD downloads. Even assuming a sonic improvement I am not going to rush out to find a DSD capable DAC when the industry is clearly years away from offering any significant quantities of DSD music (this is probably the same thing people said about every other music format when they first came out). The way I see things going, any DAC I buy will be obsolete by the time the music catalog catches up. Sure it would be fun to test out the capabilities of a new toy but I don't see any value there at this point.
-
The right mastering job of a recording will affect sound quality 100x more than the difference between 16/44 and DSD and 24/192.
And don't forget the quality of the DAC, I'm pretty much solved on my Red Book CD collections :)
-
This leads back into the context of the thread. Why do I constantly read about DSD capable DACs if the only way to use DSD functionality is essentially downloading DSD music files? I did a quick google search and there are only a handful of sites offering DSD downloads. Even assuming a sonic improvement I am not going to rush out to find a DSD capable DAC when the industry is clearly years away from offering any significant quantities of DSD music (this is probably the same thing people said about every other music format when they first came out). The way I see things going, any DAC I buy will be obsolete by the time the music catalog catches up. Sure it would be fun to test out the capabilities of a new toy but I don't see any value there at this point.
It's a chicken/egg thing. Nobody wants to sell hydrogen fuel cell cars because there's nowhere to fill up. It's hard to sell DSD music files to people if there's no hardware to play it on. It's a minor deal anyway, DACs like the DSD1796, WM8742, and Sabre can do the conversion whether you decide to make use of it or not, and DSD over USB support makes it easy to get around the digital output limitations of SACD players. Other than that, all you really need is a low pass filter to eliminate the UHF noise in DSD.
-
With regard to the nay-saying posts in this thread, especially from industry insiders, we have heard all this before. I am at least as old as Jason S., and I, too, have seen all those formats come and go. IMHO, at least part of the reason was foot-dragging intransigence by manufacturers. The simple answer to the DSD question, based on listening to SACDs, is this: It sounds better. Whatever the relative contributions of mixing and mastering or the DSD process itself, in my experience, music recorded and produced this way just sounds better. :boom:
-
I can understand the simple point, but it certainly doesn't present a case for manufacturers to follow Betamax down the rabbit hole. The only thing that really matters wrt adoption is whether selling DSD tracks actually brings in enough money to change the landscape. From a market standpoint, has FLAC even put a dent in the mp3 landscape? I don't see it on Amazon and I don't think most iusers even know what FLAC is. Plus, if DSD is just about the mastering, then what the heck does anyone need a DSD dac for? Just have software convert the non bit-perfect signal to PCM and use what you have unless there is a loss int he process. If you beleive there is, then likely you need to make a case against FLAC versus Wav as well. Not saying you can or can't, just keeping it real.
-
Blah blah argument here, blah blah argument there. Not like there is any(or many if there is) friggin music that even begins to tap on the all advantages of HQ formats today, so why DSD exists again? I will just leave with HQ PCM at most. I have some SACDs with the logo DSD Mix on it that sound like cancer anyways.