KVR Audio

aMUSEd · Post by **aMUSEd** » Wed Dec 30, 2015 12:17 pm

I have all my CD collection ripped to FLAC but am wondering about updating my favourite albums to a HD format - maybe 24 bit FLAC? I notice HD Tracks have quite a few of my faves on sale right now. 2 questions - does it really make a difference sonically? If so what is the best format, 24 bit FLAC (should I always choose the highest sample rate?), DLS (not sure how to play that yet), other?

aMUSEd · Post by **aMUSEd** » Wed Dec 30, 2015 1:11 pm

Also if it's a classic album - I'm looking at some Mile Davis albums for example (and Astral Weeks) - would it make any difference at all? I assume the original material would have needed to be recorded in HiRes to start with, otherwise it's just like converting a 16 bit recording to 24 bit - it can't improve the quality one bit.

do_androids_dream · Post by **do_androids_dream** » Wed Dec 30, 2015 1:22 pm

I would say no. Simply because - having bounced hundreds of 24 bit recordings to 16 bit - I've never, ever noticed a difference.

T.O.B.I. · Post by **T.O.B.I.** » Wed Dec 30, 2015 1:38 pm

For me, there is a audible difference between a MP3 and a WAV or FLAC file from CD, when it comes to richness, width, separation, low-end and so on. But I also never noticed any difference between a 16 bit and a 24 bit file. Sampling rate is another thing, cause - technically from Nyquist - you're able to put more frequency information in a 96k file (highest freq. max. 48kHz), than in a 44.1k one (max. freq. 22kHz). So there might be an audible difference, if your interface supports higher sampling rates. But if you're already having 16 bit files, personally I woundn't spend any money on 24 bit FLACs, even with a 96k or higher sampling rate not.

If you are looking for some Miles Davis albums in 96k or 192k sampling rate, take a look at highresaudio:
https://www.highresaudio.com/search.php ... es%20Davis

aMUSEd · Post by **aMUSEd** » Wed Dec 30, 2015 2:46 pm

Thanks - HD tracks also has those too. However Highres audio seems to have some cheaper than HDTracks (on the other hand it doesn't always have the 192 sample rates that HDtracks have - but you pay more for those).

Aleatoriac · Post by **Aleatoriac** » Wed Dec 30, 2015 2:59 pm

I've noticed it depends. Some of the HDTracks.com stuff *is* a different master with greater dynamic range than the original release, but not all of it is.

If you're talking about using the same source material you already have and just ripping it at a different rate and depth, good for you if you can tell the difference! I'm jealous.

sprnva · Post by **sprnva** » Wed Dec 30, 2015 3:05 pm

Try out some demo tracks if there are any available. I think qobuz also have HD audio tracks and a few free tracks to see how it works.

"Citation needed", I've seen people question how HD some of HDTracks' releases are. Whether they're upscales or just padded out I don't recall. A year or two ago I got some free tracks from Linn Records in a promo they were doing. The one I was most interested in was Oxygene IV. It was only 48/24 but on first listen it sounded bad to my ears. Sure enough after checking the dynamic range against my CD copy it was 7 for the HD and 10 for the CD. So not even "audiophile" releases are safe from the loudness war.

I'm sure in the right hands a HD release from the studio masters should be the best possible version. But that's not to say that all releases will be treated as so. Best to research each release if that's your goal. See what the experts say about it.

aMUSEd · Post by **aMUSEd** » Wed Dec 30, 2015 3:07 pm

Codestation wrote:I've noticed it depends. Some of the HDTracks.com stuff *is* a different master with greater dynamic range than the original release, but not all of it is.

If you're talking about using the same source material you already have and just ripping it at a different rate and depth, good for you if you can tell the difference! I'm jealous.

That's what I'm unsure about, clearly there would be no difference from doing that but also it's not very easy to tell how these 24 bit versions were made - was the original source material HD or are they just ripping it at a new rate/depth and selling it at a premium? Would a jazz album recorded in the late 50's still have masters available of high enough quality for a 24/192 version to be meaningful or are they just converting and upsampling the CD version?

aMUSEd · Post by **aMUSEd** » Wed Dec 30, 2015 3:12 pm

sprnva wrote:Best to research each release if that's your goal. See what the experts say about it.

I think that is the only way as the marketing isn't telling me anything and I can't demo the actual album - eg for Astral Weeks this is an interesting discussion:

http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/a ... 637/page-2

HD music?