Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Music › A Love Supreme on HDTracks in 96/24
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

A Love Supreme on HDTracks in 96/24 - Page 2

post #16 of 44
Well my pocketbook is happy to hear that but my ears and soul are not!
post #17 of 44

I hear you -- pocketbook hit is only 18 bucks (it's not like committing to $900 headphones you don't like).  The soul-hit is deep as it gets.  I've bought "Kind of Blue" more times, but only because they marketed it to me more times.

 

I really do mean it when I say I think there's a difference I hear.  There's that. I just also mean that if there is, it's really subtle. I make no claims to be golden-eared. (And I don't have equipment like some of what I see on the high-end forum; but my equipment *is* pretty highly resolving, at least... so .... yeah, I would hear it clearly if it were a clear difference.  Sorry).

post #18 of 44

And one more development from HDTracks -- I told them I re-downloaded, and thanked them, but had the noise in the same exact point.  It's 4:21 on the FLAC as played through VLC... the piano solo just ends, Coltrane plays a 2-note figure to begin his solo, and it's in the middle of the second note.  With that much description, the "HDTracks team" (email was not personally signed) wrote back and said, in essence: "holy cow, I just listened again and it's clearly there in the file. So sorry for missing it the first time. We'll work it out, it might take a bit of patience to get the record company to get us the corrected track".  And then they sent me a one-use discount coupon just to thank me for pointing out the error. 

 

Anyway, after a round of annoyance, at least they've come through on the customer service with flying colors.

post #19 of 44

4:21 on pursuance, it is definitely there. Really yanks you out of the song. I wonder if they will send an email to all who bought it offering a free download of the corrected track?

post #20 of 44

I'll bet they will. I'll mention it here if/when they notify me (which I feel sure they'll do!), or you can send a complaint to them as well through their form on the contact page.

 

Might you have a redbook version, too? I'd love to know if you can distinguish, aurally.  As mentioned, I gave it a (perhaps too brief) comparison and couldn't be sure of a difference. That's another issue with this particular download.

post #21 of 44

This is good news, and bad news about the glitch, as I will have to wait to hear when they've fixed it before buying it.

post #22 of 44

One would hope it's fixed now, since their most recent email promotion features the album prominently at the top of the page.

post #23 of 44

I'd ask before downloading.  I haven't asked them if it was fixed yet; I also haven't heard anything.

post #24 of 44

After all the hoopla around several of their catalog remasters actually being upsampled 44.1/16bit files converted to 96/24, I'm still on the fence about this one.  I may just go with the 45rpm vinyl, where the provenance is known.

post #25 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan_h View Post

After all the hoopla around several of their catalog remasters actually being upsampled 44.1/16bit files converted to 96/24, I'm still on the fence about this one.  I may just go with the 45rpm vinyl, where the provenance is known.



It should be very easy to tell if they are upsampled. I'll think about getting a song or two to verify...

 

As with all old albums, you need to do your proper research to know which version is the best. Sometimes it's an audiophile release. Other times, it's a 1st pressing and yet other times, it might be a certain vinyl pressing. You just never know.


Edited by LFF - 10/22/10 at 7:19pm
post #26 of 44

If they up-sampled  16/44.1 tracks to make the 24/96, I will be extremely disappointed.  Where was this hoopla?

post #27 of 44
The stevehoffman.tv forum, which seems to be the most expert and prolific forum for tracking down mastering and edition information for catalog releases like the kind of research LFF is talking about. But I haven't found anyone who has done the analysis or otherwise has specific information about this release.
post #28 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan_h View Post

..... But I haven't found anyone who has done the analysis or otherwise has specific information about this release.

I just purchased two albums. I will look at them more closely as soon as I can and report back with suitable proof.
 

post #29 of 44

I look forward to your analysis.  Lot's of conjecture, but folks are lean on data.

 

Now there is some interesting stuff about some of the remasters, with data, including this doosy about Frampton Comes Alive.  This has little to do with high rez formats -- in fact, it would appear that they must have bypassed earlier 44.1/16bit copies and gone back to some kind of master tapes since they re-mixed it as well as remastered it.  But the mastering here is ironic in that it arguably presents the music with fewer dynamics than the original, lower rez digital formats.

 

http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showpost.php?p=5552322&postcount=10

post #30 of 44

Just by a quick look I can see that the range extends to about 48,000 cps. The highest direct sound extends to about 42,000 cps (See to left of white line). See this:

 

JC-An0.jpg

 

JC-An.jpg

 

Here  is the regular CD issue, upsampled....

 

JC-An2.jpg

 

 

It doesn't look like the HD tracks are HD-fakes.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Music
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Music › A Love Supreme on HDTracks in 96/24