|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
69.42.15.214
Since the start of the year, I bought 719 music files (tracks) totaling 14.4 GBytes. That included 7 MP3 files where buying a CD was not practical and the rest were CDs or Flac downloads.NONE of that music was available as high definition downloads (bit depth > 16 bits and/or sample rate > 44.1 KHz.)
My last high def. purchase was on 9/27/2013. That was four files totaling 26 minutes of music.
I'm buying recorded music based on the work and the performance. High def. versions of those same performances are rarely available. There may be other performances of the same works in high def. but those performances are rarely competitive.
my blog: http://carsmusicandnature.blogspot.com/
Edits: 04/10/14Follow Ups:
I totally agree.
I am a classical music fan and while I prefer hi-res when I can get it in good sound quality and performance quality, I often cannot find the music I want in hi-res. Most of the hi-rez classical available is of the standard "war horses" and I already have a good collection of those in redbook. I am at a stage where I am exploring good, but less well known composers, such as George Lloyd, Arnold Bax, Hovhaness, Korngold, Rodrigo, Dohnanyi, Kalliwoda, Reicha, Castelnuovo-Tedesco and Casella, as well as less well-known works by the "Grand Masters", such as Bizet's Roma. With few exceptions, such music is just not available in hi-rez. I wish it were.
Cheers,
Bill
Like the Old Listener, I have many 16/44.1 files that I enjoy. I also have a mountain of hi-res PCM and DSD. When everything is done right, and you guys know what I mean by this, I feel that the hi-res and DSD are superior sounding to CD quality. But in no way does CD quality diminish my ultimate enjoyment of the music.
Edits: 04/11/14
"Like the Old Listener, I have many 16/44.1 files that I enjoy. I also have a mountain of hi-res PCM and DSD. When everything is done right, and you guys know what I mean by this, I feel that the hi-res and DSD are superior sounding to CD quality. But in no way does CD quality diminish my ultimate enjoyment of the music."
I do not have a DSD DAC yet, but feel exactly the same way.
*
This experience mirrors mine exactly. I have maybe a dozen high-rez albums and I don't play them often. Some of it was extracted from DVD-A and some of it is from AIX records.
98% of my collection is 16/44.1.
I also have a few DVD-V music concerts extracted at 16/48 because my current crossover system has a latency delay so it can't be used for watching video material (unless one can tolerate syncing issues and I can't).
Cheers,
Presto
I own a boatload of both redbook and hirez (PCM and DSD). I have found that I buy hirez for one of four reasons (in this order):
1) the mastering and quality of the recording is much better. This is the majority of what my hirez favorites are all about. Kidd glove treatment on reissues like AP, Opus 3, etc. (Kinda like finding that more expensive suit and realizing that not only is the fabric nicer..but the darn suit is just better made.). The corollary to this is that when you find the same kind of treatment given to a redbook recording, buy it!
2) the remastering to hirez does indeed bring out better resolution, detail, timbre or all of the above. This is true for most of the analog-to-DSD jazz reissues I own.
3) my DAC has a sweetspot at a certain sample rate or format, so buying true hirez (not upsamples; I could do that myself) at that sample rate ensures best playback.
4) I am a collector of sorts, so I will often try to obtain the last pieces of a collection (RCA Living Stereo, AP Blue Note, etc). Stupid reason, but its reality.
This does not mean all hirez is on my radar. Much of it is faux and a ripoff, especially if the source is not known. Funny how that happens.
By the way, one way to ensure good hirez purchasing is to first start with the guys that do native hirez recordings....RR, MA Recordings, Soundkeeper, BlueCoast, Sound Liason, etc. Some styles may not be to your liking, but that kind of stuff is easily identifiable via samples.
HiDef buyers and listeners who prefer its better SQ do not cast doubt or post against those those who buy lower def because of taste or budget.
The reverse is not true and there is reverse snobbishness that seem to compel some to post like this. (which adds nothing to computer audio quality)
There is another poster who owns quite a few higher end dacs and who says that 2496 is adequate for him. Fine, but why do these inmates keep repeating this kind of personal preference as though others are being picky or whatever?
N/T
see your sense of humor? I can't recall your ever displaying it on this forum.
I reported what I had bought since the first of the year. I said nothing about anyone else's experience.
Look at the other posts in this thread. Abe expressed a humorous idea based on my OP. Some people built on the humorous idea Abe started. Other people posted links to music they enjoy in a low res. form. A positive and humorous thread. Rare on this forum now.
And then you chime in with the same old stuff.
my blog: http://carsmusicandnature.blogspot.com/
"Abe expressed a humorous idea based on my OP."
Actually was not that funny. Can be taken more like just another dig...
> Can be taken more like just another dig...
Or not. Your choice.
my blog: http://carsmusicandnature.blogspot.com/
Is that a manifestation of your great sense of humor?
You quoted 2 words from this post
"I guess that I need to bulk up on Reference Recordings and HDTracks downloads so that the audiophile bullies won't kick sand (silicon) in my face."
It refers to a classic ad.
my blog: http://carsmusicandnature.blogspot.com/
As I said before, "audiophile bullies" seems to be a derogatory term for those who disagree with your views.
These were my words:
"I guess that I need to bulk up on Reference Recordings and HDTracks downloads so that the audiophile bullies won't kick sand (silicon) in my face."
I referred to the classic ad in my previous post. The word bullies clearly comes from the idea in the ad and the word "audiophile" relates the idea to the first part of the sentence about buying high-def, recordings.
I've explained what I wrote at length. If you choose to see "a derogatory term", that's your problem.
my blog: http://carsmusicandnature.blogspot.com/
N/T
of humour does not extend to posts aimed at reflecting negatively on the needs and benefits for high resolution audio.
I also buy content based upon what I enjoy, but it's always nice when what you want is available in a higher resolution format. And works with the same player used for ripped CDs and MP3 content. :)
Are you telling us that you can actually 'enjoy music' regardless of format?! Your Computer Audio Asylum membership card will be revoked while the 'daily tweakers' line up to ridicule you.
buying this on lowly CD
is the audio track from studio album 'See Saw' dubbed against the video of 'Live in Amsterdam'.
Russian Hackers are pretty good!
Blu Ray is above, link below:
an iTunes low res download of this
Both of your video links were worth listening too. I think you are smart to mine Youtube for music you want to hear. When the choice for music that I want to hear is low res. or nothing at all, I think it is wise to choose low res.
Here is a video I like. Julia has not recorded this work for a commercial CD.
my blog: http://carsmusicandnature.blogspot.com/
Take this recommendation with a grain of salt as I am a classical music novice, but I like track 33.
That's really nice. I added it to my "Watch Later" playlist so I can play it from my HDTV through my main stereo system. I love the violin.
My favorite instrument is the clarinet, though. One of my favorite clarinetists is Pete Fountain. Here is one of his performances.
After I listened to your Pete Fountain video, I Googled for "clarinet big band leader". I was looking for big band clarinetists like Goodman, Shaw and Herman. On a Clarinet-now.com page, I found a video of Sabine Meyer and Julian Bliss playing a movement from a Krommer concerto for two clarinets.
Threads like this are great for sharing info on what you like and getting ideas from other people. Thanks for giving me some discoveries.
my blog: http://carsmusicandnature.blogspot.com/
This has been a fruitful and (mostly) enjoyable thread for me.
Thinking about clarinetists lead me to play the Artie Shaw Begin the Beguine album. Great stuff from first to last track.
It's all a reminder of the pleasure of listening to music that originated on 78s, LPs, CDs, high res. downloads and even MP3s and YouTube videos. I'd say that computer audio is a great way to access all kinds of music. That fact that you can go looking for one recording and find dozens of other recordings is a huge benefit.
a couple of Fats Waller links:
Fats Waller - Ain't Misbehavin' - Stormy Weather (1943)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSNPpssruFY
and the one linked below that has some good clarinet playing toward the end.
my blog: http://carsmusicandnature.blogspot.com/
Magic with reeds...
nt
my blog: http://carsmusicandnature.blogspot.com/
I like them a lot better when there's a video performance to go along with the audio?
Edits: 04/10/14
nt
my blog: http://carsmusicandnature.blogspot.com/
My kind of music!
Here's an old one of Pete. Lawrence Welk's son discovered Pete.
Thanks
I guess that I need to bulk up on Reference Recordings and HDTracks downloads so that the audiophile bullies won't kick sand (silicon) in my face.
my blog: http://carsmusicandnature.blogspot.com/
Old Listener, congrats on not being a sample rate and format fetishist!!!!
WHAT!
You are listening to music instead of file formats?
A triple IP-ban should be the minimal penalty :)
The Well Tempered Computer
Edits: 04/10/14
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: