|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
67.235.228.24
So you don't trust the record companies? Thinking they might pull a fast one? Well do I have a hi-res release for you. I had to analyze all 19 songs to figure out what these guys were up to.This album is sold in Deluxe Edition as a 24/96 download. It has the original mix album, a remastered version of the album, and a bonus track. 19 songs for $20.
Now for the bad news.
Of the original mix, 8 songs are upsampled 16/44, and one is a poor quality MP3, like 128kbps, and yes it's upsampled to 24/96.
The bonus track is listed as 24/48, and it is solid.
The remastered version has 7 songs that look to be very good quality hi-res files. I would put them at 24/88, but they qualify as 24/96. The above graph shows a quality hi-res file.
Of the two remaining songs. "Trilogy" is a straight 16/44 upsample, and they don't even try to hide it.
The song "Fugue" looks like a 320kbps MP3 upsampled to 24/96. No I'm not joking.
Fugue is just Keith Emerson's piano. It sounds so great on my big horns, and Razor and Tie record company says I can only have a MP3 version of it? Should that be good enough for me? I could type out a long answer, and state my opinion that they are a bunch of dirty rotten bastards, but I won't.
My one point is; they must have offered these two compromised songs for proprietary reasons. Are these two songs so great that people would copy them and use them in commercials, or in some other way siphon off their coke money? Has anyone heard Trilogy or Fugue played on the radio lately?
I guess if you figure that hi-res songs are $2.50 a piece, then it's not a rip off, sort of.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Big speakers and little amps blew my mind!
Edits: 09/21/15 09/21/15 09/22/15Follow Ups:
My one point is; they must have offered these two compromised songs for proprietary reasons.
My guess is that whatever archive tapes they used were missing or damaged for "Trilogy" and thus they couldn't do a new hi-res transfer.
Regarding Fugue, I believe you're looking at the limitations of Emerson's synths.
I'm sure you're right. "Hoedown" has to have the most commercial value of all these songs.
I have read more than a few times that when record companies can't find a good original tape, they will rip a clean vinyl record. I would think that a 24/96 rip of a vinyl record would sound better than an Mp3. For all we know that 24/48 and Mp3 file could have been sourced that way.
I wouldn't be surprised if there was a Steinway somewhere there in Fugue. :)
----------------------------------------------------------------
Big speakers and little amps blew my mind!
The above is a textbook example of a 16/44 file upsampled to 24/96, and no effort is made to hide it. It certainly isn't hi-res.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Big speakers and little amps blew my mind!
what makes it a textbook case of 16/44 upsampled to 24/96? Thanks
Sure, but before I do I would like to change my answer to a 24/48, or 16/48 master file, not a 16/44.
It's a textbook case because when the musical content stops at 24kHz, then it's empty black all the way to 48khz. The empty black means there is 0 high frequency content.
Now take another look at the Mp3 charts. They do pretty much the same thing. Look at the bottom one with the green spectrograph. The cut-off frequency is 9.4kHz. That's a sample rate of 18.8kHz. Everything to the right of the cut-off is empty green. It's kind of hard to say that a sample rate of 18 could be labeled as 96.
Now go back and look at the first graph that was labeled good. Notice how it has musical content all the way to 48kHz on the very far right. Notice also how the roll-off is very natural and gradual.
Keep in mind that all the graphs have the same scale. They all measure to 48kHz. It's just some of the files measure all the way to the right. Some measure to the middle, and some to the left on the scale.
On a different note, do you think I should keep posting these reviews? I'm pretty sure there are people out there who would want to read them. I have a feeling it would save somebody some money.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Big speakers and little amps blew my mind!
I also saw the energy between 22-24 kHz and assumed it meant a 48kHz source. I also did not see how you could tell between a 16 bit or 24 bit source. Is there a way to do that? I do think this information is useful before purchasing - I use Audacity spectrum plots and also have seen "hi-res" files that seem to have been upsampled. To be honest, there are a lot of "true" 24-96 and 24-192 files that my ear cannot reliably distinguish from a Redbook 16-44 version of the same master. It's a journey...
Sorry I was ticked off, in a hurry, and trying to make a point. I'll try to be more careful next time, but either 44 or 48 would lead me to the same conclusion about the 24/96 file.
Musicscope doesn't save the total dynamic range, which is how you figure the bit depth. The total DR only shows on the cursor, and the only way I can record that is with a screenshot. PITA. I'll try a new way of showing two versions of the same measurement, so anybody can figure out the bit depth, which is divide the DR by 6.
I can't really hear a difference with symphonic music, but anything with the human voice I can. I think hi-res is all about low level detail, and what that brings to the music.
----------------------------------------------------------
Big speakers and little amps blew my mind!
> On a different note, do you think I should keep posting these reviews?
Yes! This is the first time I've seen one of your reviews and I find it quite interesting. What sort of software do you use to display these spectrum analyses for determining resolution.
Thanks,
John Elison
Thanks John. It's called Musicscope, and jusbe put me onto it.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Big speakers and little amps blew my mind!
+1
Bill
These are the two version of Fugue. I didn't do the math, but they look like 320 and 128 kbps. Unbelievable. They suck.
----------------------------------------------------------
Big speakers and little amps blew my mind!
This data is from a needledrop of the 1972 Cotillion SD 9903 recorded at 24/96. It looks very similar to what you are seeing.
Thanks for the post rrob. Yep that's it. I take back what I said about it being an Mp3.
Last night I noticed this graph of "Cans and Brahms" on Fragile, which is just a Wakeman solo. It looks very similar to Fugue, and there is a lot going on in cans and brahms too.
Thanks for that vinyl verification. "Trilogy" was a complicated analysis, especially for a first one.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Big speakers and little amps blew my mind!
I think that most LPs, even direct-to-discs, have little to no musical frequency content above 20-kHz and many end at 15-kHz. Here is a spectrum of a Sheffield Lab direct-to-disc:
It seems like everything involved in audio wants to roll-off at 15kHz. Of course I've always heard producers want to mix recordings that sound good on FM radio.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Big speakers and little amps blew my mind!
Not Sheffield Lab! None of Sheffield Lab's direct-to-disc records were designed for FM radio. They were designed for audiophiles with high-end audio systems. The thing is, microphones and cutting lathes roll off fairly quickly after 20-kHz. Most importantly, the human ear doesn't hear anything past 20-kHz and many of us older folks can't hear anything past 10-kHz. On the other hand, I still believe that well mastered high-resolution digital sounds better than 16/44 Redbook. Therefore, there must be some reason other than high-frequency response that's responsible for the improved sound quality.
Best regards,
John Elison
John I agree with everything you wrote in your two posts.
I think originally DaveK and then rrob had points about the song Fugue, and their posts had to do with the limited music content shown on the graphs. Now I agree with their view, and it surprises me how such complicated keyboarding can only generate such a little spectra on the graph. That is a learning experience to me.
About high frequency sampling. General wisdom is that it allows you to target your high frequency filter up higher, so you don't hear it as much. Ringing or pre-ringing, or something. Also an argument for DSD, because it's filter consists of a single capacitor. Just a simple first order passive crossover. From my experience with SETs I can tell you loosing one or two caps in the signal path can really open up the sound. Strange but true. I've read that a higher frequency sampled also translates into more samples per second, and I think that has something to do with an increase in sound quality. More samples per second means a more accurate reconstruction of the original analog waveform. I would think.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Big speakers and little amps blew my mind!
I'd be willing to bet that the only way vinyl can contain frequencies past 20-kHz is if the vinyl is half-speed mastered. I'd be willing to bet that cutting lathes pretty much hit a brick wall at 20-kHz. Therefore, half-speed mastered vinyl might very well contain music frequencies past 20-kHz if the master recording contains them. Unfortunately, direct-to-disc records cannot be half-speed mastered because they are recorded in real time.
Best regards,
John Elison
MoFi Waiting For Columbus is half speed mastered. Musicscope claims content over 20kHz but I'll never hear it @ -90 db.
There is really no need for frequencies above 20-kHz because nobody can hear them anyway. Some audiophiles believe that just because they can't hear those frequencies when isolated and played alone, they can all of a sudden hear them when music is playing. I don't believe that. All frequencies above 4-kHz are basically music harmonics, which occur at lower levels than music fundamentals. Moreover, higher order harmonics above 10-kHz occur farther and farther below the level of music fundamentals. In other words, higher order harmonics become lower and lower in intensity compared to the fundamental that produced them. Therefore, if you can't hear these frequencies when isolated and turned up loud, how could you believe you will all of a sudden hear them when they are masked by music fundamentals that are 20-dB or 30-dB louder than the harmonics. That's totally illogical in my mind.Anyway, I said that half-speed mastered LPs might contain those higher frequency harmonics. They have to have been recorded in the first place, which means the tape recorders and microphones had to be flat to 30-kHz, which is unlikely but certainly possible.
Best regards,
John Elison
Edits: 09/27/15
Same file, spectral data from RX4
cool graphics! This is a great album, in any format.
Thanks fantja!
This is one album that really did need a remix, and they did a very good job of it. I think the hi-res songs on this version really sound great.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Big speakers and little amps blew my mind!
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: