[ruthieandjohn]

Thank you, thx1000!

 

[fiascogarcia]

  Just bought it with the discount code yesterday... Thank You!
 
Unfortunately, I got the "Apple Lossless Audio Format" (ALAF) at 96 kHz/24 bit, thinking "Apple" meant "iTunes" and I could listen to it on my iPod. It runs on iTunes on my PC but I get complaints that my iPod does not support that sampling rate. 
 
So I converted it to standard iTunes formant (256 kBps VBR, a lossy format that in past experiments I cannot distinguish from uncompressed).
 
Is there a lower bit rate uncompressed format I should use instead?  Can iTunes make that conversion?
 
Anyway, sounds absolutely revelational!  Good job, Cheskys!

In iTunes, under edit/preferences change import settings to a lossless 44 or 48/16 format, using ALAC, WAV, or AIFF. Go to the tracks you want to convert and use the ctrl/click to select the files. Then go file/create new version.

 

[simonm]

Yep, you should be able to convert from higher 192 to lower resolution 96 or 48 ALAC in iTunes (keep 24-bit).
 
If not and you're on a Mac, XLD is an indispensable lossless converter app.  It can convert anything to anything and it's free!

 

[fiascogarcia]

  Yep, you should be able to convert from higher 192 to lower resolution 96 or 48 ALAC in iTunes (keep 24-bit).
 
If not and you're on a Mac, XLD is an indispensable lossless converter app.  It can convert anything to anything and it's free!

iPods and iPhones won't play 24 bit files, to my knowledge.

 

[purk]

Love this album.  Listening to my R10 out of my GS-X MKII right now and just absolute love track 08 (whippoorwhill) by Alexis Cole.  This track is so very well recorded....I'm super impressed!

 

[rptlead]

purchased. thanks for the discount!

 

[simonm]

  iPods and iPhones won't play 24 bit files, to my knowledge.

 
Not true.  I have a number of 24-bit ALAC albums that play fine, and have played fine on my iPhone for a long time (going back to at least iPhone 4 if not earlier).  In fact I distinctly remember playing 24-bit/48 kHz ALAC on a paltry iPod Shuffle in 2007 (when this particularly album was released)!
 
I'm not sure if there's a point at which the bit-rate gets too high and this probably depends also on the age of your iPod/iPhone/iTunes.  Sure it doesn't support FLAC but Apple's equivalent format is pretty much the same anyway.  Plus they released it as an open standard.
 
I'll probably get the album at 192 kHz and can test or if someone wants to email me or link to part of a 24/192 audio file I can confirm.
 
Downloading 24/192 sample file...
 
Result:
 
24/96 and 24/192 ALAC both FAIL iPhone 5 sync and playback!  So it's true that iPod/iPhone isn't truly hi-def capable.  24/192 plays fine in iTunes but iTunes won't offer to down-convert the file to copy it to iPhone.  The best quality that the iPod/iPhone currently supports is therefore 24-bit/48 kHz.
 
Keep in mind if you intend to buy this album that you can still buy it at 24/96 or 24/192 and convert it to 24/48 using XLD as mentioned above.  However, there are an increasing number of DACs that support 24/192 and Apple may enable support for this in future.
 
For now there's probably no point purchasing at a quality above 24/96 unless you're a stickler for experimentation and/or OCD about bit rates.  24/96 lossless is more than good enough for most people and equipment I'd say.

 

[Rumpelstiltskin]

Highly recommended. Great guys to deal with. Buggered up order format (I did) and everything put right (they did) in a flash.
FLAC 24/192 awesome (and will make you jump in places).

 

[ruthieandjohn]

  Highly recommended. Great guys to deal with. Buggered up order format (I did) and everything put right (they did) in a flash.
FLAC 24/192 awesome (and will make you jump in places).

Hmmmm... wonder if that means that they will put right my stupid mistake in ordering a high sample rate that my iPod cannot play... thanks!

 

[Rumpelstiltskin]

Just ask. They were great with me. Seriously. 
contact@hdtracks.com

 

[immersifi]

Hey...Thanks so much for the post about this CD. It's great that you're helping to raise awareness of binaural recording; as someone who's been doing that for a few years now, it's always nice to see knowledgeable people give the subject some attention. I don't know that binaural is for everyone per se (some seem to love it, others, not so much), but certainly for the head-fi-ers, it's right up our proverbial alley.
 
If you want to check out some more binaural tracks from my sessions, links are shown below; some of the work is just binaural, some is hybrid (a mix of binaural and variations on conventional stereo), and some tracks are straight up conventional stereo. Howvere, please don't stream the tracks from the soundcloud site - their player transcodes content down to 128 kbps and this wreaks havoc with the imaging. However, you can download any or all of the tracks and avoid that. Some of the material has been posted in flac format, some in 320 kbps mp3 format, and some events have been posted in both formats:
 
https://soundcloud.com/immersifi
 
You can also check out (and download) a Cowboy Junkies show I recorded back in 2009 at The Ark in Ann Arbor:
 
https://archive.org/details/cj2009-10-05.ku100_at37
 
You can also audition / download a live recording of Sam Roberts Band (from back in 2009), which was recorded at The FIllmore Detroit:
 
https://archive.org/details/SRB2009-11-28
 
So...grab those 'phones and check out the various tracks. I hope you guys and gals dig my work.
 
Mark

 

[autoteleology]

 

Anything that compresses uses software that makes up,data witha data recovery software type . So short answer is you loose your data even though you think you do not. I always download wav and store . And convert to flac to play. Also there is a flac without compression as well. That is what I use to play. I am not saying I can hear it but why would I remove data for space with music I just paid for In a loss less file

 

 
FLAC is obviously good, but I prefer .wav between the two

 
Lossless is lossless is lossless. The only differences that matter between them are their compression or the lack thereof, or in practical terms, how much space they take up versus how much processing power it takes to decode them back to PCM data in real time. Uncompressed lossless takes less power but takes up more space. Compressed lossless takes up less space but takes more work to decode in real time.

 

[TheGame]

   
Lossless is lossless is lossless. The only differences that matter between them are their compression or the lack thereof, or in practical terms, how much space they take up versus how much processing power it takes to decode them back to PCM data in real time. Uncompressed lossless takes less power but takes up more space. Compressed lossless takes up less space but takes more work to decode in real time.

I only stated I preferred .wav over FLAC, I didn't say one was lossless and the other was not. FLAC is a lossless audio codec, while .wav as a container can hold numerous kinds of audio codecs and is more widely supported than FLAC. I didn't say that I thought one was better than the other, just stated my own opinion friend.

 

[miceblue]

 
iPods and iPhones won't play 24 bit files, to my knowledge.

Not true.  I have a number of 24-bit ALAC albums that play fine, and have played fine on my iPhone for a long time (going back to at least iPhone 4 if not earlier).  In fact I distinctly remember playing 24-bit/48 kHz ALAC on a paltry iPod Shuffle in 2007 (when this particularly album was released)!

iDevices can read 24/88, but they are downsampled to 16/44.1.

 

[hearo]

THX for the discount code. I got the 24/192 FLAC version and playing on VOX on OSX. Unsurprisingly, kind of an eclectic mix here. Not sure how I feel about the echoey sound of a church v. ultra isolated sound of a recording studio. Maybe I would have preferred a meat locker (Neal Young reference). L O L. Seriously though, the background sound is kind of dull but the sounds in the foreground are terrific.
 
 
FYI: MBPr (VOX)>O2>HD650