1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.

    Dismiss Notice


Discussion in 'High-end Audio Forum' started by magiccabbage, May 14, 2015.
833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842
844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853
  1. Triode User
    With my Hugo MScaler and Dave I can definitely tell the difference and as long as the downloaded file is a genuine hi res file and not just upscaled by the download site. This is the case even if the hi res version is 48k as against 44.1.

    Mind you 44.1 red book is pretty darned good through the MScaler. I also have Blu2 in another system and the same comments apply to that as well.
    Last edited: Nov 30, 2018
  2. gnomen
    Thanks for the quick response, guys. I was rather hoping not to mess with hi-res files any more, partly because I don't trust their provenance. I guess you can at least check by listening, as to whether it is genuine hi-res or seller upscaled.
  3. ray-dude
    FWIW, I'm perfectly happy with lossless TIDAL streaming, and only purchase high res content when I adore the label/recording engineer, and trust the content as actual high res. Redbook through mScaler is astonishingly good.
  4. aldavey
    Since about 90% of so called Hi Res is either analogue or 44.1 in a High res ‘bucket’ I would stick to RBCD which sounds brilliant through HMS
  5. ecwl
    Whenever I hear a new classical music album release I really enjoy on Tidal, I would purchase the high-res version. Unfortunately that version is almost always 24/96. While I find for some, the difference between the 24/96 and 16/44 is present but not huge, I do find some other albums to offer a much more dramatic improvement. I don’t know whether that’s related to source music or the conversion from the original 24/96 to 16/44. Regardless one thing I consistent find is that the unfolded MQA 24/96 sounds inferior with DAVE or Blu2+DAVE compared to the 16/44. Either way, I can happily live with the 16/44.
    jscmd2000 likes this.
  6. jscmd2000
    I cannot hear, on most days, the difference between 16 and 24 bit depths and I am not proud of it. I was hoping for no difference answer for CDs and high res through HMS but... sounds like I have another item on the to do list. hdtracks might not go out of business after all.
  7. Triode User
    I have a Qobuz Sublime+ subscription which gives healthy discounts on HiRes downloads
    jscmd2000 likes this.
  8. Triode User
    Really? Where do you get that from? I'm not doubting you, just asking.
  9. Crgreen
    And how do you know if a file is genuine hi-res of just upscaled?
  10. aldavey
    If the original master was mastered either analog or 44.1 how can putting this out at high res in 96/24 file increase the resolution.
    Of course if the original is mastered 96/24 then there should be an identifiable increase in sq. But how many albums mastered like this are there for the vast majority of music to which we listen?
  11. Triode User

    Well I thought you were telling us that 90% sold as Hi Res were in fact just upscaled so according to you then your answer to your own question is 10%. Maybe there needs to be some sort of advertising standard on this.
  12. GLM101
    I think the optical cable is limited to 48khz, so if you have files higher i.e 24/96 then you will not hear the music at its best.
    Or have I got that wrong?!
  13. Crgreen
    Optical can go up to 192/24.
  14. GLM101
    A source of good quality music 16 or 24 bit is a site called "Bandcamp". I bought a VNV Nation album "Resonance" in 24/88khz and it sounds magnificent. However unlike the majority of their albums, this one was done with an orchestra. And a lot of older albums by various artists are on this site at 24 bits.
  15. GLM101
    Thanks for the information!
833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842
844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853

Share This Page