HD Tracks and other high res sites?

Discussion in 'The Sound Hound Lounge' started by Teleking, Apr 7, 2015.

  1. Teleking

    Teleking Supporting Member

    Messages:
    2,403
    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2008
    Been thinking about giving a few of these a spin just to see if I hear much difference in some of my favorite records.

    Which site do you recommend?

    Also, there's so much information out there, and so many claims that X record was mastered from the original tapes. Blah......

    Is there an easier way to research to find out which records actually does sound better?

    I'm into all kinds of music, from the 50s to now. Is 24/196 on a newly recorded record going to sound any better than the 16/44 that a CD offers?

    Just curious what others experiences are.

    I did download one record for HD Tracks, and I haven't had a chance to listen yet, but wondered which site is the best for quality, service, price, and if there was a place to sift through all the BS and find good info on which records actually do sound better?

    Thanks
     
  2. Teleking

    Teleking Supporting Member

    Messages:
    2,403
    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2008
    Nobody?

    Thought at least some of you would be into this?

    I listened to the album I bought, although through my iMac headphone port with very quality headphones---not sure that's the best example of digital and analog conversion.

    Didn't hear much difference, if any at all.

    Just curious what others' experience might be? Thanks
     
  3. BrewDrinkRepeat

    BrewDrinkRepeat Member

    Messages:
    2,555
    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2007
    a. You need a pretty decent stereo or headphone setup to really get the differences in hi-res. The headphone jack on the iMac really doesn't qualify.

    b. Be sure to manually set your resolution in Audio/MIDI setup, otherwise OS X is going to resample to whatever you have it set to, likely 16/44. iTunes does NOT do this automatically, one of the greatest annoyances about using a Mac as a media server.

    c. Resolution isn't the end-all, be-all; I'd rather hear an album that was recorded, mixed and mastered well at 16/44 than some overcompressed pile of crap at 24/96 or higher. For me, the best bang-for-the-buck has come from older, well-recorded albums @ high-res -- the Pink Floyd Immersion sets, for example, are stunning in high-res. I've downloaded some really well-done high-res needledrops that are amazing as well.
     
  4. tiktok

    tiktok Supporting Member

    Messages:
    19,715
    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2009
    Location:
    Seattle
    I did a comparison with an HD version of Mark Knopfler's "Shangri La" (i.e. a well-recorded album that I'm quite familiar with) from HD Tracks to the CD and the AAC version, and I couldn't hear a difference on my living room or home studio system, and certainly not on my usual iPhone/car listening environments. People will say that you need to upgrade your hardware (DAC, speakers, etc.) to hear the difference, but I'm quite happy with the way my stuff currently sounds, and I'm not in the business of spending money to make things sound...worse. HD files are large and expensive, so they'd have to be the difference between VHS and HD to get me to spend a lot more money.
     

Share This Page