Lossless albums!!! HDTracks.com - Page 2

Back on-topic. I checked out the site, and I agree that it represents an important step in the right direction. Not a lot of artists yet, and nothing mainstream of course, but hopefully they (and others) will get there. I have also used Linn records site to download FLAC files, and I am very impressed with the content and delivery of those files. They are also fairly priced. Pricing on HDTracks is reasonable as well, considering the competition.

Fact is, if I want a lossless version of some music, I will likely buy the CD, as FLAC download prices are not yet low enough to dissuade me from that approach. If CDs become unavailable, then I will look for lossless downloads as a first choice for music I want in the highest quallity format. Even now, though, I buy some downloads from Amazon (high-quality MP3 VBR -V0) and a lot from emusic (MP3 VBR -V0 or -V2 for some stuff). That's good enough for portable use, and for a lot of the music I want to listen to, I'd have to strain to hear any difference from FLAC (not even sure I could)even on my home rig.

yeah if you get one of those CD clubs, you can get CDs much cheaper. However the selection isnt as big of course.

I use Yourmusic.com. Picked up quite a bit from them and the best part is they are all pretty muc $6.99. Great deal for CD's.

I mostly like buying used CDs from garage sales. I've found prices under $1.00 per CD if I buy up a bunch at once! It's a fun way to explore music. My general belief is that CD quality is as good as anybody can hear.

But out of curiosity I downloaded the sample 2496 tracks from HDTracks, and then bought Rebecca Pidgeon's "Retrospective," also in 2496. My sound card has always had 2496 capability, and my external DAC can handle it too, so I've been curious to find out if I could hear anything different.
I don't know if I could pass a double blind test, but after listening to the 2496 files and then listening to them converted to 44.1 CD quality, I'm either hearing a real difference, or experiencing a wonderful placebo effect.
Anybody think there is a real audible difference between 44.1 khz 16 bit and 96 khz 24 bit? I've read about tests where people couldn't hear the difference between SACD, and the same recording converted to 96/24 or even downsampled to 44.1 16 bit.

I just learned that my TDA1543 based dac truncates the 24 bit to 16 bit, so If I'm really hearing any difference it has to be due to 96kHz vs 44.1kHz. My soundcard's analog output should do the full 24/96.

Ha! My computer tested me and I didn't even know it. It switched itself to 44.1 kHz before I started iTunes. Listening through the sound card's analog output, the Rebecca Pidgeon tracks still sounded excellent. I switched it back to 96 kHz. I'm not really noticing anything particularly different. This makes me happy because I don't have to sell the Apple TV and buy a Mac mini to get 96kHz sound out to my front living room system, or pay a bunch for high res files.

96/24 is better to 44.1/16 ...

But a good 44/16 still good. I have many 96/24 not very exceptional.

The difference is not big but I am able to hear it when I do A/B. From what I hear, I am glad to pay for that quality.

Specially with HDtracks, they not expansive at all ...

Just buy the CDs. I don't understand the point in paying to download music.

why pay for download instead of buy CD

Instant gratification for one thing.
In the case of Rebecca Pidgeon's Retrospective, the 2496 download is less expensive than buying the hybrid SACD. If you get the mp3 version you save even more money.

edit: I can't find an mp3 version now that I've looked so I guess that's not an option.

Great site.

I support them and often purchase .FLACs from them.

Of note is their Chesky Records stuff ... including the wondrous works of Rebecca Pidgeon.

Also ...

And because I'm secretly in love with her ...

Be sure and check out the .FLACs from Marta Gomez!

[SIGH]

My own very much loved Colombian sonic siren!

(and her band is sick sick sick!)

Marta is Hotness!

It's very convenient, you can buy only the track you want. No wait time. It's cheaper than the real CD (often).
You can download the studio master 24/96 when available.

It's the point for me.

There seems to be some confusion as to the meaning of LOSSLESS.  Sure CDs provide lossless music but at a 44.1/16 sample rate.  HDTracks offer music at 96/24 or 192/24 sample rates.  Hence higher sample files being that much larger than smaller sampled files.  They are all lossless, but a higher sample rate will reveal more of the music.  You can look at 44.1/16 being the MP3 of lossless because there is a lot that is not captured at this sample rate.  People buy from HDTracks to get superior digital music.  Also used CDs are usually the original mix, while the music from HDTracks is usually ripped from better quality current re-engineered mixes.  Used CDs also contain scratches that in reality could effect the music you hear as CD players are made to be able to over-sample on either side of a unreadable portion on the CD.

 

... just my 2 cents worth

I recall some sort of controversy about some downloads from HD tracks actually being not as advertised (upsampled from "regular" CDs)... basically, I think the gist was that it's hard to tell what you're getting until you download.

 

Ah, here we go... I googled "HD tracks not HD" and a bunch of results came up:

 

http://forums.naimaudio.com/displayForumTopic/content/17476120005266865

 

Might be BS... it is the internet, after all, and everyone's an expert with a golden ear (I mean, look at this forum...  I kid, I kid), but I guess it still comes down to buyer beware.

If you are worried about the tracks at hdtracks, you can go to computeraudiophille,com where they test most of the albums that are being released there.