[skunark]

I think most solutions will upsample and then downsample based on a common integer between 44.1 and 48k in hardware.  Those solutions are typically trade secrets so one might not ever know but I think you can guess from the dynamic range of the DAC.   Sadly most of these conversions only keep the 20-20k frequency range, so if the SACD had a 20-50k range to capture harmonics of certain notes, that would be lost assuming you had the means to play them back. 

Probably best not to have an "adaptive" DAC, but one that gives you the option to upsample or play at the source frequency.   I've always felt like less is more when it comes to this, sure it's fun to play around and you might notice a little bit of dynamics when upsampling, but that was introduced by the conversion. 

Sad that SACDs have DRM.

[ted_b]

Skunark, I think you misinterpret these conversions.  They are not on the fly, they are done within the Weiss Saracon software, and lose almost nothing in frequency response or dynamics.  24/176k is nearly identical in sample rate, bit depth and overall dynamic range capability to DSD64.  Spectrum analysis shows lots of energy way above 30k for these Stones 176k rips, and not just noiseshaping.  And no one is talking about upsampling these.  Play them native, as they lay.

[skunark]

Skunark, I think you misinterpret these conversions.  They are not on the fly, they are done within the Weiss Saracon software, and lose almost nothing in frequency response or dynamics.  24/176k is nearly identical in sample rate, bit depth and overall dynamic range capability to DSD64.  Spectrum analysis shows lots of energy way above 30k for these Stones 176k rips, and not just noiseshaping.  And no one is talking about upsampling these.  Play them native, as they lay.

Sorry, I wasn't arguing about why the frequency was chosen just that going from one multiple to another is possible by picking a common multiple between the two and upsample to that rate then downsample again.   I was trying to also note that DACs that upsample to 24/192k without regard the the source frequency will most likely filter anything outside the 20-20k range.   

Why not convert from the original tapes/pressing?   Where they lost here?   

[firedog]

Sorry, I wasn't arguing about why the frequency was chosen just that going from one multiple to another is possible by picking a common multiple between the two and upsample to that rate then downsample again.   I was trying to also note that DACs that upsample to 24/192k without regard the the source frequency will most likely filter anything outside the 20-20k range.   

Why not convert from the original tapes/pressing?   Where they lost here?

Because for the SACD  most of the work has been done and expense incurred. It's a lot easier and cheaper to just convert one digital format to another.

[skunark]

Because for the SACD  most of the work has been done and expense incurred. It's a lot easier and cheaper to just convert one digital format to another.

So why $30 an album.

[simon wagstaff]

Hd Tracks makes it sound like they are new transfers when they are not. their marketing seems a little intentionally deceptive to me. I am still not sure if Raising Sand is a true hi rez release or just some sort of upsampling.

I am leery of these guys.

I already have the SACDs so see no value to me of these releases.

Where is Sticky Fingers?

[ted_b]

To recap: you will not see anything later than Get Your Ya-Ya's Out (1970), as these are simply the conversions from the ABKCO SACD series from 2002-4.  The later albums, starting with Sticky Fingers, came out on their own label and were never part of the SACD project.

[dminches]

Hd Tracks makes it sound like they are new transfers when they are not. their marketing seems a little intentionally deceptive to me. I am still not sure if Raising Sand is a true hi rez release or just some sort of upsampling.

I agree.  After all, Frampton Comes Alive was recorded at 24/44.1 but sold at HDtracks as an upsampled 24/96.

[Mike Nomad]

So why $30 an album.

That would be due to ABKCO's licensing fee to HDtracks: License holders get top dollar for mega-acts.

[firedog]

I agree.  After all, Frampton Comes Alive was recorded at 24/44.1 but sold at HDtracks as an upsampled 24/96.

Frampton Comes Alive certainly wasn't recorded in 24/44.1, as it was recorded in analogue. I have no idea exactly how they did their version-it apparently was sourced from the digital version made by Doug Sax. Do you have knowledge that this source was "only" 24/44.1? I'd doubt it, as that's not a common way of making a digital conversion. Usually the digital conversion is done at higher res, and only downsampled later.

Their stated policy is that they either source from SACD (which they don't sell as 24/96 as it is a non-integer multiple/upsample of the source material), other existing hi-res digital files such as hi-res masters, or from analogue master tape converted to hi-res digital. They claim that they never knowingly source from "upsampled" material.

In the past they have had some problems with some upsampled material on the site (all done from SACD that they say was licensed to them as hi-res and they didn't know was itself upsampled), but in the past year or so they seem to have been diligent about eliminating all "upsampled" material from their catalogue. Bruce at Pugent Sound converts SACD's for them, and has stated in online forums (including this one) that he now thoroughly checks any SACD he converts to be sure that it isn't upsampled redbook.

As far as the price, I'm sure some of it is the licensing fees. They are quite high, and since number of units sold isn't very big, they have to recoup the investment. In addition, if people are willing to pay $30 for 176k, then they might as well sell it for that.

I'm quite glad they convert SACDs, as I don't have an SACD player and have no plans to get one. So if they provide me with FLAC converted from SACD, I'm quite happy to have it. I'll probably buy a couple of the later Stones titles when they come out in the summer. Obviously, if you already have the SACD, no reason to get these other than the convenience of having the hi-res on your server.

[rbbert]

Many current albums are mastered (or remastered in the case of analog originals) at 24/44.1 (for example the recent Beatles catalogue remasters), and it's very likely both Frampton Comes Alive and Steely Dan Gaucho are merely upsampled 24/44.1 digital masters.  Bruce Brown of Puget Sound Studios is involved in many transfers for HDTracks, but not those two.   He has stated that the spectrum analysis for Gaucho (at least) looks like upsampled 24/44.1, and Frampton Comes Alive has a very similar appearing spectral analysis.

[Nels Ferre]

To recap: you will not see anything later than Get Your Ya-Ya's Out (1970), as these are simply the conversions from the ABKCO SACD series from 2002-4.  The later albums, starting with Sticky Fingers, came out on their own label and were never part of the SACD project.

That's too bad. I don't own a SACD player either, so I didn't pay attention the SACDs when they came out.  I was really hoping for a high rez "Some Girls."

[DSD_Mastering]

Many current albums are mastered (or remastered in the case of analog originals) at 24/44.1 (for example the recent Beatles catalogue remasters),

The recent Beatles remastered catalog was captured from analog at 24/192. I'm sure they will be offered at a later date after they have exhausted all they can from the 24/44.1 files.

[jamesg11]

Can we get some kind of confirmation, or otherwise, on the 'upsampled' status of HD's Gaucho at 24/96?

Bought this one, & it sounds kosher ... of course, the Steely Dan guys were pretty serious recording studio people, with high SQ.

[TONEPUB]

Many current albums are mastered (or remastered in the case of analog originals) at 24/44.1 (for example the recent Beatles catalogue remasters), and it's very likely both Frampton Comes Alive and Steely Dan Gaucho are merely upsampled 24/44.1 digital masters.  Bruce Brown of Puget Sound Studios is involved in many transfers for HDTracks, but not those two.   He has stated that the spectrum analysis for Gaucho (at least) looks like upsampled 24/44.1, and Frampton Comes Alive has a very similar appearing spectral analysis.

When I interviewed Peter Frampton last year, he said the HD Tracks files were made from his original analog master tapes and captured at 24/96.  That's straight from the horses mouth.

[firedog]

Many current albums are mastered (or remastered in the case of analog originals) at 24/44.1 (for example the recent Beatles catalogue remasters), and it's very likely both Frampton Comes Alive and Steely Dan Gaucho are merely upsampled 24/44.1 digital masters.  Bruce Brown of Puget Sound Studios is involved in many transfers for HDTracks, but not those two.   He has stated that the spectrum analysis for Gaucho (at least) looks like upsampled 24/44.1, and Frampton Comes Alive has a very similar appearing spectral analysis.

Again, the Beatles analogue masters were captured at 24/192. The master for release was done in 24/44.1 and then dithered down for the CD master. I don't think these days anyone would capture analogue tape in less than 24/96.

[simon wagstaff]

Unfortunately for all the mixing and editing and processing, whatever it was that was done for the Beatles remasters, was all done at 24.44.1.  If they are ever going to release a higher res version they will need to go back and re-do all that was done.

I don't see that happening.

And extra-unfortunate is the fact that 24/44.1 is not compatible with the DVD-Video standard. If you want to burn discs you have to do it as DVD-audio discs.

I don't know if this was short-sighted or done on purpose.

[rbbert]

When I interviewed Peter Frampton last year, he said the HD Tracks files were made from his original analog master tapes and captured at 24/96.  That's straight from the horses mouth.

You know, I don't have the HDTracks Frampton (although I do have Gaucho), but spectral views posted on other web sites have the same "dive" in frequency response at just over 20 kHz, with a subsequent slow rise (that looks like quantization noise) above that which also characterizes Gaucho's spectral view.  If this is not actually the case, I stand corrected.  Analog transfers done at higher-res and not further processed (e.g., like the SACD of Steely Dan Aja) show a gradual drop in high frequencies to over 25 kHz with a gradual rise above that.

[rbbert]

Again, the Beatles analogue masters were captured at 24/192. The master for release was done in 24/44.1 and then dithered down for the CD master. I don't think these days anyone would capture analogue tape in less than 24/96.

capture, yes.  master, not necessarily, and there is ample and readily available commentary on the fact that the Beatles were mastered at 24/44.1.

[Mike Nomad]

The recent Beatles remastered catalog was captured from analog at 24/192. I'm sure they will be offered at a later date after they have exhausted all they can from the 24/44.1 files.

+1. That's why I didn't buy any of this round of the remastered Beatles. What's that line by Agent K in Men In Black: "I get to buy the White Album again"?