[woodsyi]

So, is the hi-rez file 'remastered' using 24/96 bitrate? The higher quality is due to better remasterring, perhaps?

My example:  a FLAC hi-res file from HDtracks (Plant/Krauss) going through Beresford DAC 24/96. It has 4 inputs. So, one input is connected to MacBookPro (set at highest resoloution 24/96), second input is connected to Apple TV ( max resolution 16/44) The same file is converted by the dac from two sources: one hi-rez, one redbook. I started both files at the same time and was switching the inputs on the dac. no difference to report!

Maybe.  I think Chesky records everything on even higher rez digital.  From there he produces different formats.  Perhaps he is better with high rez then Redbook.  Or he just sucks with Redbook.  Because vinyl is better than Redbook as well.   Or could it be the format?

[jriggy]

My example:  a FLAC hi-res file from HDtracks (Plant/Krauss) going through Beresford DAC 24/96. It has 4 inputs. So, one input is connected to MacBookPro (set at highest resoloution 24/96), second input is connected to Apple TV ( max resolution 16/44) The same file is converted by the dac from two sources: one hi-rez, one redbook. I started both files at the same time and was switching the inputs on the dac. no difference to report!

It has been my experience that that type of A/B-ing is the perfect way to hear no difference. Flipping back and forth during a song, your brain will 'average' the differences in a sense (or just plain not pick them up).

Try playing one at a time all the way through and use your auditory memory to find the differences. Your brain should do better settling in to the sound of each.

[Art_Chicago]

Well, I guess there is a theory of 1-2-3 notes as the only way to hear any difference, but I do not want to start another dispute.
I did compare them over the long term, and if there is a difference, I would not swear if it was real or my imagination.
The A/B comparison worked pretty well for two different  DACs (Beresford vs AVA); a DAC and BD player, switching the inputs on the preamp. Granted, the difference is supposed to be siginificant for these components, and it was hard to miss even after a few notes.

[Rclark]

I just find it interesting that the people who hear wire and other "stuff" are either the ones who spent money on it, making money writing about it, or making it.

Doc.

I like Bruno Putzey's philosophy on wires. He's the designer of the Ncore. He says wire can make a difference but it shouldn't , and that ideally what you want are balanced connections with plain old quality cables. Any colorations used are just covering up bad source.

[jriggy]

I belive for some systems the difference between redbook and hi-rez is indeed significant -- and some not so much... This may be a factor that is behind half of the disagreements...    just a thought.

[Wayner]

It has been my experience that that type of A/B-ing is the perfect way to hear no difference. Flipping back and forth during a song, your brain will 'average' the differences in a sense (or just plain not pick them up).

Try playing one at a time all the way through and use your auditory memory to find the differences. Your brain should do better settling in to the sound of each.

I suggest that you have a friend do the switching back and forth, while you listen to the music with your eyes closed. This will remove a couple of activities from your brain, so you can do a better job at evaluation.

I also suggest that you listen to your music in a different way then you may have in the past. It's hard to do, but I try to listen to the air of the recording, like the reverb of it or the ambiance of it. Cymbal crashes, piano and female voices also can help to reveal some of the ambiance.

Dynamic range is a different subject. The fact is, lots of CDs are squished. However, some old Chesky Telarc records, like Holst - The Planets have zero compression, and a written warning on the CD itself.

In doing such comparisons, please also keep in mind the path each of these types of recordings went down. The CD is generally made to be played on any type of CD player and in the wrongs hands at mastering time, can be diluted quibble. The HiRez format already had a purpose, and was probably not compressed. Hence the problem. What we may perceive as a difference we hear between different formats may be the result of fiddling fingers at mastering time, and not a true reflection of the formats capabilities.

I believe that this single factor alone will discount most listening sessions, blurring the conclusions of medium or recording engineer.

Wayner

[doug s.]

...The final product is what the user makes with the given tool...  ..A Maserati driven by my mom will still hog the right lane going at speed limit or less.   

don't feel bad, rim - this is a huge improvement, compared to those who hog the left lane going at the speed limit or less!       your mom rocks, for knowing proper lane discipline!   

doug s.

[acresm22]

It has been my experience that that type of A/B-ing is the perfect way to hear no difference. Flipping back and forth during a song, your brain will 'average' the differences in a sense (or just plain not pick them up).

Try playing one at a time all the way through and use your auditory memory to find the differences. Your brain should do better settling in to the sound of each.

Everyone's experience is different I suppose, but I have to disagree on both counts. Auditory memory (like all sensory memory) is notoriously unreliable. Switching back and forth on the fly is, in my experience, a much better way to pinpoint differences with any accuracy and/or consistency. And as Wayner said, having someone else do the switching is better yet.

[Devil Doc]

Sensory memory is unreliable for a reason. If it was any good, no woman would have more than one child.

Doc

[acresm22]

Good one, Doc. But you're forgetting the euphoria the mother experiences in the moments after child birth. That, according to a reliable source, trumps any of the negatives.

[WC]

On the Home Theater Geeks podcast, guest Allan Parsons talked a lot about mastering. He mentioned that master for CD and Vinyl will most likely be different due to the inherent issues with each type of media.

[Wayner]

On the Home Theater Geeks podcast, guest Allan Parsons talked a lot about mastering. He mentioned that master for CD and Vinyl will most likely be different due to the inherent issues with each type of media.

I talked to Kevin Gray on the same very topic (via email) and it was the same conclusion. Vinyl, tho very dynamic by nature, can't handle the extended range that a CD can (by principal).

Wayner

[jriggy]

I suggest that you have a friend do the switching back and forth, while you listen to the music with your eyes closed. This will remove a couple of activities from your brain, so you can do a better job at evaluation.

I also suggest that you listen to your music in a different way then you may have in the past. It's hard to do, but I try to listen to the air of the recording, like the reverb of it or the ambiance of it. Cymbal crashes, piano and female voices also can help to reveal some of the ambiance.

Dynamic range is a different subject. The fact is, lots of CDs are squished. However, some old Chesky Telarc records, like Holst - The Planets have zero compression, and a written warning on the CD itself.

In doing such comparisons, please also keep in mind the path each of these types of recordings went down. The CD is generally made to be played on any type of CD player and in the wrongs hands at mastering time, can be diluted quibble. The HiRez format already had a purpose, and was probably not compressed. Hence the problem. What we may perceive as a difference we hear between different formats may be the result of fiddling fingers at mastering time, and not a true reflection of the formats capabilities.

I believe that this single factor alone will discount most listening sessions, blurring the conclusions of medium or recording engineer.

Wayner

Thanks Wayner!
 I do most of that and personally can hear a good amount of difference between a 16/44 and 24/96 source in my system. But thanks for the suggestion to have a friend do the switching! "turning off" as many things (actions) in the brain as ya can, helps.

You other points in this post are can jive with as well

[Brett Buck]

I talked to Kevin Gray on the same very topic (via email) and it was the same conclusion. Vinyl, tho very dynamic by nature, can't handle the extended range that a CD can (by principal).

 Oh, my goodness, is someone still arguing that point, too?! When you have a medium that loses high frequencies after a few plays, and whose frequency response depends on *temperature*?  Do we need experts to "confirm" this for us - in the year 2012?

     I love hi-fi arguments!

   Brett

[Wayner]

Oh, my goodness, is someone still arguing that point, too?! When you have a medium that loses high frequencies after a few plays, and whose frequency response depends on *temperature*?  Do we need experts to "confirm" this for us - in the year 2012?

     I love hi-fi arguments!

   Brett

Your own conclusions are incorrect. I'm not going to go down the vinyl road, but those statements of record wear are also getting real old.

Wayner

[Wayner]

Here is the problem I have with CD v. Hirez stuff. I have some stellar recordings on CD that are incomparable in quality, dynamics and emotional involvement. Two that come to mind are Telarc's Aaron Copland - The Music of America (CD-80339) and The Brian Setzer Orchestra on Hollywood Records (HR-61565-2).

To condemn the CD format simply doesn't make any sense. I've have been recording on one format or another for the last 45 years. Lots of live stuff. The one thing I learned then, is that there simply is a lot of luck involved in pulling off a great recording.

We can safely say that there are no 2 studios that are exactly alike. They all have different boards, processors, mics, power, recorders and a host of other variables that make even the studio itself, unique. It's not like Burger King, where the Whopper is supposed to be the same, no matter where you get one. So even if we A/B the what we think is the same music from the same process, only listening to it on different formats, is almost certainly never the case, and Brett, that is why the vinyl thing got brought up.

You can't compare apples to apples with any music in the digital domain, because the process to get to these formats is not described, nor is it identical. The source material is for the most part, unknown.

Wayner

[saisunil]

In the end it is all about do I / you hear any differences that I / you deem worthy the cost / experience or not ...

The whole idea of worshiping a record player is considered insane by some audiophiles (or non) and worth it for others ...

I would like to believe that hi-rez is not worth it - as it is too expensive to start with .... 

It's a hobby in the end ... let's have fun ...

[Wayner]

Agreed. The good news is that as DACs and transports improve, the CD collection only gets better. I've heard some fine CD playback at Frank's place and I know what resolution the system is capable of.

Wayner

[audiobat]

Anyone who "believes" digital is better than analog... Is doing it wrong.

[kip_]

Anyone who "believes" digital is better than analog... Is doing it wrong.

All generalizations are wrong. What do you mean by "better"? Easier to playback? Nope. Better sounding? Arguable and gear dependent. For someone like me who is 29 years old and has owned zero records and never touched a record player I can't imagine going through the hastle of buying a turntable, finding records, changing them, and storing them.

Once you've used a music server and can instantly hear any song in your collection it's hard to go back.