|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
70.181.190.222
Steven,
The Herbie Hancock albums that were on our site were discovered to be upsampled, not true native 96/24. In our efforts to only offer pure, native 96/24, we removed those albums pending receiving native 96/24 files from the label. We have no ETA on this, although we are working hard to get these files. We'll let you know when they are available.
If you would like a refund, and then purchase the true 96/24 files when they are available, please let me know. Otherwise, you can keep these upsampled files for the time being and then download the 96/24 files for free (we will provide you with a 100% discount code).
Regards,
The HDTracks Team
Follow Ups:
so what confidence do we have that anything else is > 16/44.1 if they were deceived on this one?
What is even more disturbing is that I bought a Herbie Hancock from them and even though it appears they admit it was a scam they have not notified me.
.
.
Music Is The Bridge Between Heaven & Earth
So Verve or what ever record label Upsampled the material themselves and sent it to HDT...or just somehow HDT paid for 24/96 files and the record label sent them 16/44.1 files then an upsampling Elf upsampled the file on their hard drive.
Bottom line is somehow, some way files were upsampled....HDT says the record label did it.
You guys sure are trusting...
Music Is The Bridge Between Heaven & Earth
I am anxiously awaiting Bruce B's response to this.
From my understanding studios record at 24/96 then downmix the material to 16/44.1 for RB-CD. How could a studio even have upsampled material?
Music Is The Bridge Between Heaven & Earth
I tried emailing Mercman about this but the AA system wouldn't let me.
I notified HDTracks about this and they pulled them off the site.
You definitely stated that all files were native hi-rez (not upsampled) because you supplied them\\
now we see one/some that may have been upsampled\\
After buying probably 10 titles at close to $200 at his point I will no longer buy one of these downloads unless they can prove the source and how it was transferred.
It is really sad that what appeared to be the wave of the future may be a scam.
.
We receive these SACD's from the label. We have no way of knowing how they were recorded unless the label discloses this.
We are now in the process of checking every single SACD that was transfered to see if it was indeed hi-rez.
Now... if it was recorded at 16/44.1, upsampled, and then mastered through analog equipment at hi-rez... then most of the time we're just guessing.
Mercman and all need to get off this crusade of persecuting HDTracks. If a label tells us it's hi-rez, then we have to give them the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise.
When you deal directly with the label you don't just "get" the discs like how we retail customers have to buy and hope for the best. You have the responsibility and ability to check with the label if these SACDs are really from hi-rez masters. If the label won't say, why do you do business with them?
Mercman and all need to get off this crusade of persecuting HDTracks.
I think you make a fair point: however frustrating the situation for customers, is it reasonable to attack HDTracks in a public forum under conditions in which it is all but impossible for it to defend itself?
By all means express one's feelings in private correspondence but, I'd argue, it is only fair to give it time to get its act together before hitching up the tumbrels.
That said, the format ambiguities raise what to me is an interesting point. If, as we have been told here time and again, 16/44.1 is an obsolete format and offers by modern standards a diminished listening experience, how come it doesn't jump out at folk (who are after all experienced listeners with SOTA kit) that something is amiss?
In fact, had HDTracks not done the decent thing and pulled suspect product (leaving recalls to one side for now), who among the at-times vocal users of Hi-Res formats would ever have known?
So - red books or just red faces?
Only asking . . .
The last purchase that I made from HD Tracks was a BIS album (Osmo Vanska's much-vaunted recording of Beethoven's Symphonies No. 2 and 7). I was expecting something special, as special as a number of other albums I had purchased from HD Tracks. However, there was clearly nothing special about the Vanska album. My Gunter Wand RBCD of the same music sounded better.
I asked about this on this forum and learned of the problems with BIS albums. I plan to contact HD Tracks about this and give them a chance to do what is right.
Cheers,
Bill
David Chesky is free to come to this forum to explain. The fact thay he doesn't speaks for itself.
fmak:
David Chesky is free to come to this forum to explain. The fact thay he doesn't speaks for itself.
No it doesn't; innocent until proven guilty, pleading the Umpteenth Amendment and so on. He's also free to come to our local agricultural show and tell the sheep farmers WTF's going on - but he hasn't.
What do I conclude from that? Nothing except perhaps that PR's not his strong point. Why come here or anywhere until he has something to say - people will only scream at him. (They're screaming at him when he isn't here.)
TL:
If the differences were really obvious then even Meyer and Moran would have been able to hear them.
I'm not going down the Meyer-Moran route again - their "experiment" was worthless. (Even people who might have heard a difference between RBCD and Hi-Res could not have done so given the procedure and apparatus used - it had nothing to do with "subtle" differences and everything to do with incompetent experimental design. The "study" is not relevant to this discussion.)
I for one would have caught HDtracks if I had purchased upsampled material.
Absent proof, that's an unsubstantiated assertion (that doesn't make it wrong but it doesn't make it right either). Second, if it takes, as TL suggests, years of working with esoteric formats and technologies to spot these oh-so-subtle differences, why should I (or anyone else in the mainstream) worry?
Mercman:
The problem is that I cannot return a title after I purchase it.
I thought the e-mails you quoted offered a refund. Sorry if I misunderstood.
All I can conclude when listening is that it didn't sound that great.
But did you conclude that at the time? Again, if I read your reports correctly, you didn't really know that something was amiss until HDTracks pulled the download.
You're damn right I'm red in the face and it's not embarrassment!
I can't say I blame you. You and others have spent money on something that turns out not to be as described.
In my defence, I noticed that few, if any, of several indignant folk reporting here had written, "As soon as I downloaded 'Mother Teresa - the Calcutta Years' from HD Tracks, I knew something was amiss. This wasn't 96/24 as I've come to know it". So I asked a question.
Phew!
Luckily, I've got the MT tracks on vinyl. A bit scratched perhaps . . .
Sure they will give me a refund. But if the title was truly 96/24 and I didn't like the sound; tough shit for me.
How the heck can I conclude anything about a download other than the sound. It is what it is.
All I can conclude about fugazi purchases are that they don't sound that great.
This is really a gray area. For some of the older analog recordings there may be no audible improvement at the higher sample rates, maybe only a small difference, or possibly not even that. Or it may be that a well made 44/16 transfer sounds better than a poor quality 88/24 transfer (e.g. made from a second generation analog tape and/or on a misaligned machine). The difference is not going to jump out at you if you have only one version of a recording. If you have worked with old tapes you will know what I am talking about. If the differences were really obvious then even Meyer and Moran would have been able to hear them. The differences are subtle.
I for one would have caught HDtracks if I had purchased upsampled material. I have been playing around with sample rate converters for several years and using various methods of forensic evaluation. My interest in that started on an archive project where some friends were going to contract out the digitization of 160 R-R master tapes located in Germany and I was given the task of evaluating samples from two vendors for quality. One of the first questions I was asked to answer was, "Are these transfers really done at 96/24". Now I have the job of listening to the resulting 1/2 TB of material and selecting tracks for release.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
The problem is that I cannot return a title after I purchase it. All I can conclude when listening is that it didn't sound that great.
You're damn right I'm red in the face and it's not embarrassment!
If a label tells us it's hi-rez, then we have to give them the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise.
I just reread that multiple times as I can't believe you said that. Knowingly or unknowingly we have been sold something that is not what they claimed it to be. The burden has always been on the seller to properly represent their products. If they did this knowingly then they should be prosecuted. If unknowingly they should loudly proclaim it and make it right. As consumers we should not have to prowl around internet forums seeking to uncover the truth.
They have my email. They know there is a problem. They should be take the high road and tell me about the problem.
try telling TL this again!
You totally miss the point Bruce. I don't blame HDtracks for incorrect product supplied by the labels. But it it the manner in which HDtracks has treated these sales by not contacting the customer or posting this information on their site.You seem to have a big problem with the ethics involved in these sales.
Edits: 05/29/10
Well, that's good to know. Boy, they had better have ALL tracks tested by you before they put them up for sale. Talk about critical. Any doubts could be catastrophic to their success. I hope they understand this.
As stated thousands of times... HDtracks doesn't "upsample" anything. All they do is convert to FLAC file. I give them them the hi-rez wav files and they convert to FLAC... end of story
I'm reading into that statement that Bruce B provides all of them since he doesn't qualify it any other way. If I am wrong please let me know.
If I am correct then how did they get an up sampled file?
.
These files were provided by the Verve label... not me. HDtracks sent me the files to verify if they were hi-rez. They were not.
I'm enjoying the 24/96 stuff I've bought from them...but this situation begs the question: I wonder if anyone could even tell that they were upsampled vs. native 24/96?
"...but this situation begs the question: I wonder if anyone could even tell that they were upsampled vs. native 24/96?"
Interesting question. Being new to the high-res downloading concept, such a question is one reason that I’d want to purchase a 24/96 file… to see if I can discern the difference. But, if I can’t be sure of the nature of my test material, I will never know whether I can tell the difference between native and upsampled.
"But, if I can’t be sure of the nature of my test material, I will never know whether I can tell the difference between native and upsampled."
Here you go.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
"I wonder if anyone could even tell that they were upsampled vs. native 24/96?"
Ha Ha!
Answer is: it depends....To hear a difference you need a good recording, a decent system, a little training and an open mind.
It is also possible to perform forensic analysis of the 24/96 files. In some cases I have done this and identified upsampling. I have also identified 24/192 files as having been sourced at 96 kHz, and was proven right after the engineer involved fessed up. Forensic analysis is much more reliable than guesswork based on listening.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
Ha Ha Ha!Tony, I am thinking that one of the TV networks could pick up your concept here. A version of CSI - The Audio Files could ensue where a soft-boiled gum-shoe character based on your own forensic adventures would routinely uncover the record-town nasties and bring them to hard justice so that all the mums and dads at home could be assured that their hi-rez download was consistently ahead of the inferior iTunes offerings as found on their four year old's ipod.
On a serious note: if you or Mercman (or even the omniscient Dynaudio) are able to tell the difference then certainly HDTracks can. Everyone is allowed one mistake but if this kind of thing has happened before (as you seem to concede in other posts) then it is not so much a mistake as incompetence or deceit. I have to think that HDT could put in place a process to verify ALL their product (after all, their catalogue isn’t that big). Like you, I would like HDT to succeed but Mercman’s adventure is telling me that they ought to do better and not simply blame their suppliers when they are found out. Their product has to be rock solid.
Edits: 05/29/10
There are two issues: mislabeling or fraudulently upsampling low resolution material and minor glitches in content due do a defective transfer or upload.
As to the mislabeling. It's sad that some record labels are dishonest. IMO if a label fraudulently sells material and holds the copyright a suitable punishment would be to put the material automatically into the public domain. They've broken their faith with the listeners and deserve no more.
As to the minor glitches. If you want to pay for extra Q/C then these can be avoided. However, this will mean higher prices or a reduced selection of titles. It takes over an hour of skilled label to vet a transfer or rip (I am talking Q/C here, not looking for fraudulent upsampling). This may be economic with high volume titles, but for low volume titles that may sell only a few copies this is simply uneconomic. Do you want a large volume of titles available for download at affordable prices? That's the issue. I run a site that sells low volume downloads so I know what's involved. We sell downloads at $10 an album and most of the money goes to the musicians. So far we've not had any Q/C problems beyond typos on the id tags on each track, but that's just because I'm a bit fastidious. This pricing model works only because I do this on a volunteer basis. If you want just top 40 and warhorse recordings, then fine. Personally, my tastes are highly eclectic and so I am concerned about variety and price.
By the way, I've noted the most problems with HDtracks only because they have the largest selection of titles and have gotten the most business. I have noted problems with three other download sites and in all cases have communicated via private email and received satisfactory treatment. Now that my critical listening skills have been sharped I hear many glitches with CDs that have been in my collection for years, so it's not just downloads that have problems.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
Thanks, Tony. Well, I do hope they (HDTracks) sort out the issues.
It seems they are trying to make it right. That's a good sign.
Happiness is a clean record, and warm tubes!
They always make it right. The problem is what if I had not contacted them about this purchase? Would they have contacted me to let me know there was a problem? In the past, they have not contacted me. I have to initiate the inquiry.
This is why I won't buy from them.
Mercman, I had a thorough and well written response all ready to go then you go and delete the post while I write. ;-)
I'll sum it up. They should be more proactive.
Happiness is a clean record, and warm tubes!
HDtracks has been scammed by some of the labels in the past. Or at least this is what it appear like. It is reasonable to assume that HDtracks has been vetting selected material on their own, and certainly they do so in the case of customer complaints.
In my opinion the popular music business has long been fraudulent, but sad to say fraud has infiltrated other genres, including jazz as well as classical.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
Yes, HDTracks sends me all the hi-rez content they receive from the labels to verify if it is indeed hi-rez.
Did I miss something? Did I misread what you wrote above?
Yes, HDTracks sends me all the hi-rez content they receive from the labels to verify if it is indeed hi-rez.
If you "verified" all of the files and they then turn out to be upsampled you obliviously don't know what you are doing.
.
Did it perhaps occur to you that HDtracks.com started sending material to Bruce for evaluation after they realized they had been scammed by a record label?
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
Bruce B saidYes, HDTracks sends me all the hi-rez content they receive from the labels to verify if it is indeed hi-rez.
That seems pretty clear to me. He verifies everything. all the hi-rez content
If they all came through him, he verified they were real, and they then turned out not be then he evidently doesn't know how to verify them.
.
Edits: 05/29/10
I suggest you read what Bruce wrote more carefully. Hint: he used the present tense.
My guess would be that Bruce was given the job of policing the pasture and verifying that all the gates were closed some time after a bunch of horses managed to escape.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
He said "HD Tracks sends me all......."
That isn't present tense. I take that to mean they send them to him and always have sent them to him.
If you say I send my shirts to the dry cleaners that isn't present tense, it means it is ongoing, whatever tense that is.
If I took it wrong I apologize to Bruce.
Yes, HDTracks sends me all the SACD's and hi-rez files. It wasn't until 6 months or so ago that we started spot checking a few discs at a time. By that time, 1000's of downloads had already taken place. We assumed as well as you did as well that everything that we received from the labels was hi-rez content.
Now Verve states:
"Transfer of these Verve 96K masters has been done using a combination of the best new and vintage equipment available. The carefully chosen original analog masters were played back on vintage Studer 820 tape machines. These machines provide the most stable transport for handling these priceless analog tapes. The analog masters were converted to the digital domain using classic DCS 972 and Lavry analog to digital converters, recorded directly onto a SoundBlade Workstation with minimal processing, in order to allow the music to be formatted for digital distribution. The shortest signal path and highest quality cabling was used to prevent any signal loss, or additional noise to be introduced into the transfer. The entire digital process was driven with the Antelope Audio Atomic Clock, the industry leader in digital clocking technology. It enables the entire digital process to reference the same highly regulated clock master, preventing any loss in the digital signal due to jitter and clock degradation."
Why would we discount their claims? It wasn't until we started spot checking these also that we found upsampled files.
I can not check every single file that comes through here. It would be cost prohibitive for HDTracks to do this.
I can not check every single file that comes through here. It would be cost prohibitive for HDTracks to do this.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not accusing you or HDT of any wrong doing. I believe you when you say you took the labels at face value but now how can HDT continue without checking them? I can do an FFT on the analog output but I'm not really sure what that would tell me.
If you have a link or care to tell us how to analyze them I would appreciate it.
What about the Reference Recording title Bruce? I'm surprised that they would misrepresent their music to HDtracks.
I know nothing about that label. All RR recordings are handled by RR directly to HDtracks as well as 2L and Chesky's own.
Why can't they do it themselves?
They're a business, not a studio. It takes time, which I'm sure they don't have. It takes me about 10 minutes to verify each album. Multiply that by the 100's of hi-rez files they have and we're talking a lot of time involved.
How exactly do you verify that a file is not an upsampled specimen? Looking at the brick wall filter frquency?
This is not always the case as stated above. If it was recorded at low rez and then upsampled to master through analog equipment, we have to look at the patterns to determine if it's overtones or DSD digital artifacts. Most of the time, we have to raise the volume of the music and then look at spectral analysis. A few times I've spent almost a half hour on just one disc... at my own expense!
Best not to say too much, IMO. That will only help the more technically sophisticated scammers. Unfortunately this is a cat and mouse game.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
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: