|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
92.232.186.234
In Reply to: RE: MJ - Bad [HD TRACKS] — A complete FRAUD posted by audiomusicphile on August 24, 2014 at 23:06:08
It would appear that the '87 cd/vinyl versions are the best while the 24bit 'audiophile' versions are some of the worst when it comes to dynamic range.
Edits: 08/25/14Follow Ups:
Yes, a lot of the 24/96 DLs, SHM CDs, etc., IOW the premium purchases, are utter crap and amongst the worst versions of albums available. Speaking of both dynamic range and general SQ.
It is surprising that in many cases the only way to get well-recorded stuff is on LP, and I mean even on new/curent LPs recorded from digital files...obviously not the digital files they're selling though...strange.
I am not speaking of any particular vendor here, just in general.
But where is the fraud?
It is offered as;
Available in Audiophile 48kHz/24bit
Forget the word "Audiophile" it is meaningless. The only relevant thing is "48kHz/24bit".
There is no offer or warranty this download is any better or better sounding or even different that any 'Bad' album previously released.
The only thing offered is it is 48kHz/24bit ~ so as long as it is as offered then the idiocy & maliciousness the original poster is obvious.
Smile
Sox
.. JUST PAINTS A PERFECT PORTRAIT OF YOU.
I will NOT respond to the barrage of insults you have hurled at me. Others will take care of you. For a start, the behaviour and the manners you have shown in this topic will just serve to underscore the kind of person you are.
You know, you could get a job writing press releases for the North Korean "Dear Michelin Man" or whatever this one is called.
You have a talent for this work.
Too late. You already responded.And if you think this is a barrage of insults, follow some of Sudz' posts. You're being handled with relative kindness.
Edits: 08/25/14
This is one of the reasons I still spin CDs. I will never pay a premium price for a download when the mastering of most of these 24 bit/192KHz files have been crushed by the compression pedal. Take a look at Rush's latest album 'Clockwork Angels' that was released in 2012. The sound on the CD is crap along with the HD Tracks 24 bit/96KHz as well. The only way I can listen to this album (and enjoy listening to the album) is to either play the vinyl version or play a Cd that has the vinyl rip of 'Clockwork Angels'. A pretty sad statement indeed.
As far as remasters are concerned, they are typically all louder (i.e, lower Dynamic Range) compared to the original Cd and this translates to a lower quality recording when played back in a high end stereo system. The exception that I have found is MOFI or Audio Fidelity remasters. These outfits know how to properly remaster a Cd with even more dynamic range compared to the original.
-Ionman
"An ounce of perception, a pound of obscure." - Neil Peart
I agree with you. But using the term "audiophile" when promoting a product usually preys on the inexperienced in our hobby. It is approaching false advertisement, if not actually getting there.
Oz
Don't worry about avoiding temptation. As you grow older, it will avoid you.
- Winston Churchill
They also offer a Beck album in 'Audiophile 96kHz/24bit' but at least two of the songs have been recorded as MP3s by Beck and so do not exist as true Hi-Rez files anywhere.
Do you think HDTracks should inform their customers that they are merely upsampled MP3s?
Is it fraud that they do not?
In the case of the MJ album HDTracks do not give direct information about which version it is they are selling but it possibly could be inferred from the given release date.
Still requires the customer to check for themselves in the DR database provided they know of its existence.
I just noticed that HDTracks version of Fleetwood Macs 'Rumours' lost 5dB in dynamic range compared to the vinyl, '84 & '90 cd releases.
Ironic really considering that over-compression will lose much, much more in SQ than might be gained by going Hi-Rez.
My only reference is to the serious allegations made by the original poster.
I see no evidence of fraud with the download he purchased.
If he is too stupid to even raise his concern with the retailer then I have no sympathy for him whatsoever.
I have not looked at the other albums to which you refer.
If the download is in the format advertised then I doubt any fraud has taken place. I see no warranty or advice downloads will sound better or different to other available albums. (but I have not searched the site or the albums you mentioned, only the Bad album)
As always, caveat emptor.
Smile
Sox
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: