[interpolate]

Which services are using to download or buy higher fidelity* music recordings?
 
I found a few scattered throughout the interweb although I find a lot of these are limited to classical/orchestral/jazz type genre which I have nothing against alas I digress. 7digital seems offer more of a choice, with a distinct lack of classical/jazz and more popular choices of music.
 
I purchased a few songs from there with a couple of Pink Floyd Albums in FLAC 24/96 although any differences were very discreet. Playing the media through Mediamonkey gives reasonable playback.

 

[Music Alchemist]

Check these out...
 
http://www.head-fi.org/a/list-of-lossless-and-high-res-music-flac-alac-aiff-dsd-dxd-etc-download-sites
 
...but first, read this article:
 
https://xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html
 
The only thing that matters is the master. Format is irrelevant as long as it is 256 kbps AAC or higher.

 

[interpolate]

If I pay more for the same song I do expect some sort of difference.
 
It's like the sport car analogy, it can drive the same speed and arrive at the same destination as a standard family car although your kids will be so smug when they leave the car all of their friends see them. 

 
Neil Young is a Canadian jerk so pfftt.......just kidding. I will read that article.

 

[Music Alchemist]

  If I pay more for the same song I do expect some sort of difference.

 
Just depends on the master. Some high-res downloads use the same master as their CD counterparts and sound exactly the same. However, most high-res downloads are thankfully derived from a better master and tend to sound better due to this.

 

[interpolate]

Much of the stuff, that will be better are stuff taken from the original analogue recordings and re-transferred through the higher end mastering equipment. I think though, by increasing any dynamic range there's a chance that any noise floor and sensitive equipment is going to highlight any undesirable artifacts. Of course, the engineers job will also to be reduce the amount of oddities that make it back over into digital domain.
 
As for digital masters, if the original master files are recorded and kept at the same bit depth & sample rate, then you would expect the playback result to be uncompromising by mechanical or equipment-based limits other than the medium and speakers used to listen.
 
Just to be clear, these are my expectations rather than reality.

 

[Music Alchemist]

  Much of the stuff, that will be better are stuff taken from the original analogue recordings and re-transferred through the higher end mastering equipment. I think though, by increasing any dynamic range there's a chance that any noise floor and sensitive equipment is going to highlight any undesirable artifacts. Of course, the engineers job will also to be reduce the amount of oddities that make it back over into digital domain.
 
As for digital masters, if the original master files are recorded and kept at the same bit depth & sample rate, then you would expect the playback result to be uncompromising by mechanical or equipment-based limits other than the medium and speakers used to listen.
 
Just to be clear, these are my expectations rather than reality.

 
You're right about analog masters potentially being better. Converting those to digital is tricky, and for some albums, there are many different digital versions, all derived from the original analog master using different techniques.
 
All you need for digital playback is 16-bit / 44.1 kHz. This covers all the audible dynamic range in existence and all the frequencies humans can hear. Selling music in higher resolution than that is pure marketing and has no added benefit in terms of sound quality -- only higher download time, storage space, and cost.
 
As I alluded to above, you can even convert lossless files (whether 16-bit or 24-bit) to 16-bit / 44.1 kHz 256 kbps AAC, and it will be indistinguishable from the original. There is a reason the iTunes Store sells everything in 256 kbps AAC. Unfortunately, some of the masters available from there aren't so good.
 
Also, 24-bit is only useful for studio applications, due to stuff involving audio processing.

 

[interpolate]

When recording audio you should always start high and the work down the way, when it gets to mastering. Personally I would say it is a placebo effect, although one reason for high-resolution recordings is to push the noise to the nether regions and give a much less distorted, purer listening experience. I can see argument from both sides of the fence and put it down to how important you think something is. Some iTunes M4A (AAC) files are really badly mastered especially modern dance music, with IMD and very little headroom between the digital ceiling.
 
Today's generation don't know how to appreciate good quality music because they haven't had the opportunity.

 

[Music Alchemist]

  When recording audio you should always start high and the work down the way, when it gets to mastering. Personally I would say it is a placebo effect, although one reason for high-resolution recordings is to push the noise to the nether regions and give a much less distorted, purer listening experience. I can see argument from both sides of the fence and put it down to how important you think something is. Some iTunes M4A (AAC) files are really badly mastered especially modern dance music, with IMD and very little headroom between the digital ceiling.
 
Today's generation don't know how to appreciate good quality music because they haven't had the opportunity.

 
Most modern recordings are done in 24-bit or higher anyway, but this has no relevancy to playback for the end consumer. And of course, having all these fancy numbers on your producer belt won't guarantee high fidelity or quality. That comes down to the recording techniques, musicians, and so on. I'd say if you are searching for high fidelity / good quality music in general, you can find it everywhere, from the iTunes Store to rare vinyl.

 

[interpolate]

I think the whole point is you just need to look for the wheat between the chaff.

 

[Music Alchemist]

  I think the whole point is you just need to look for the wheat between the chaff.

 
If you mean finding quality recordings amidst an ocean of sludge, then I concur. Otherwise, there are any manner of things you could be implying. hehe

 

[interpolate]