[Atlplasma]

Moody Blues on HDTracks. Anyone downloaded? Opinions?

[Nels Ferre]

Damn it!!!   

Off to download now.

How many times have I bought this album?   

Edit: I own multiple copies of this album.

1. Deram LP
2. Speaker's Corner LP Reissue
3. CD
4. Mobile Fidelity CD Reissue

The HD tracks version? Stunning. Well worth the $.

[HAL]

My first version of this album and the HDTracks version is sounding very good here. 

[ted_b]

No energy above 22k...likely means upsampled redbook.....faux hirez.  Buyer beware.

[Atlplasma]

That's really disappointing.  Thanks for checking it out, Ted.

[ted_b]

Well, your improved sonics must have an explanation, though.  It could be:
*  better headroom
*  your DAC's sweetspot is 24 bit/xxx
*  they used a better master
*  placebo due to spending $20 

[eclein]

I bought it last night and wasn't blown away like I thought I'd be, oh well, from now on I'll wait until Ted gives us the skinny!!
 

[DSD_Mastering]

Kinda' funny... there is a resident "expert" over on the CA forum spreading some bad info and thought I'd nip it in the bud. They're using Audacity, that has a known bug and they're listening with their eyes again. I've uploaded the graphs here.

http://www.pugetsoundstudios.com/photos/Moody.jpg

http://www.pugetsoundstudios.com/photos/Moody%202.jpg

[Atlplasma]

Can you post the graphs here so I don't have to register on another site?

[DSD_Mastering]

Can you post the graphs here so I don't have to register on another site?

I placed them on my server. Just click on the links now.

[Atlplasma]

So HDtracks isn't selling fauxhd, correct?

[ted_b]

Kinda' funny... there is a resident "expert" over on the CA forum spreading some bad info and thought I'd nip it in the bud. They're using Audacity, that has a known bug and they're listening with their eyes again. I've uploaded the graphs here.

http://www.pugetsoundstudios.com/photos/Moody.jpg

http://www.pugetsoundstudios.com/photos/Moody%202.jpg

OOPS!!  My bad.  Sorry, Buce, I wasn't even aware this was yours.  I copied the screens from the CA thread.

I apologize.  Guess there is good reason why most folks like them!!!   

[Nels Ferre]

Kinda' funny... there is a resident "expert" over on the CA forum spreading some bad info and thought I'd nip it in the bud. They're using Audacity, that has a known bug and they're listening with their eyes again. I've uploaded the graphs here.

http://www.pugetsoundstudios.com/photos/Moody.jpg

http://www.pugetsoundstudios.com/photos/Moody%202.jpg

Thanks for that. I was starting to question my ears (as well as my sanity) as I actually
prefer the HD Tracks version. I find it clearly superior to my other versions.

If there is a known bug with Audacity, I wish people would quit posting Audacity screen shots.

As far as those who may not be blown away, remember, this album was recorded in 1967, and the original master tapes were damaged sometime in 1978. Anything released from 1979 forward is what remains of the master tapes,  which are missing instrumental parts, as well as some harmonies. As a example, compared to an original LP, the intro to " The Day Begins" is shorter by about 4 seconds on anything sold from 1979 forward.  HD Tracks admits as much, the metadata shows a release date of 1979. Now you know why.

There is nothing that can be done about the situation. I wish there were a mother or stamper tucked away in great condition from the original master tape (or an original safety copy) that some record company somewhere could use somewhere for a killer digital transfer. I doubt that they exist.

[Atlplasma]

What a relief! Now I can rationalize spending $20 on high Rez instead of $1.98 for used CD off of Amazon. 

[ted_b]

I will discontinue any Audacity analysis immediately and ask that all on this Circle do the same.  Thanks.

P.S.  Bruce, is there a reasonably accurate fft analysis program that won't cost us $500?

[Nels Ferre]

I will discontinue any Audacity analysis immediately and ask that all on this Circle do the same.  Thanks.

I wasn't getting on you. It was directed at the armchair quarterbacks at CA. Sorry.

My concern was two fold- music lovers may miss out on good stuff because of inaccurate information, and I hope every record company jumps on the high resolution bandwagon. I'd hate to see anything slow the progress we are seeing, not only in new material, but reissues as well.

Again Ted, my apologies.

[ted_b]

I wasn't getting on you. It was directed at the armchair quarterbacks at CA. Sorry.

My concern was two fold- music lovers may miss out on good stuff because of inaccurate information, and I hope every record company jumps on the high resolution bandwagon. I'd hate to see anything slow the progress we are seeing, not only in new material, but reissues as well.

Again Ted, my apologies.

Nels, no apology necessary.  I am usually in frequent contact with Bruce (we have a good relationship since we met a couple years ago at RMAF), and I feel real bad that I potentially besmirched his work, even unknowingly, by taking the CA graphs and using them here as gospel.  Bruce is right, we need to listen with our ears, as well as use credible testing equipment.  He's been poo-pooing the freeware Audacity since day one.

Bruce has stated he gets about a 40% rejection rate on SACD/DSD stuff that is sent to him/HDTracks as real hirez.  It's bad enough that this kind of rejection rate occurs, so I feel worse that when he finds a good one (relatively speaking) and I call it "buyer beware".   

[DSD_Mastering]

Yes there is a bug in Audacity as well as Sound Forge 10. Another thing is when people get a hold of these tools and use them incorrectly, it spreads a lot of misinformation out there.

Ted's right, we need to start listening with our ears. I'm slaying dragons on the other end to keep the bad ones from creeping through.

There are several analysis tools we use and I haven't found one that is cheap.

http://www.masterpinguin.de/products/pg-am/brochure.htm

Also the one included with RME cards is good.

Here is a free one, but I haven't tried it yet.

http://www.synthtopia.com/content/2010/03/11/free-fft-spectrum-analyzer-for-mac-pc/

Here's another one that's free. I've heard good things about it.

Voxengo SPAN

http://www.voxengo.com/product/span/


For free recording software, I'd recommend Reaper

[Nels Ferre]

No problem, Ted. As far as the "good one, relatively speaking" comment, it is a good one. The fact that the master tapes were damaged can't be undone. It really is a great album (and Bruce did a great job.) I'm certainly not going to quit listening to it (or buying it, apparently) because of unfortunate circumstance. What we have now is still really good, just not quite complete.

As a reviewer, I was afraid I was caught with my pants down. I'd like my opinion to be worth something. One doesn't have to agree with me, of course, but this could have been personally embarrassing.

[firedog]

My experience: Audacity 1.2 had a bug; Audacity 1.3 works fine.

But yes, always test with another program before believing those Audacity screen shots. I use a free program download called "Sonic Visualizer" - seems to work reliably and accurately. http://www.sonicvisualiser.org/download.html

I've posted on similar threads at CA noting that some versions of Audacity have a bug like this. Basically I got a lot of grief from posters who said it couldn't be true, even when I gave them specific examples of Audacity 1.2 having silly results (like a hi-res file having no frequency above 6K!) and noting how at least 2 other programs and Audacity 1.3 gave the expected results (e.i., hi-res files did have hi-res).

Some people are so caught up in their objectivist mentality that they forget that a freeware program can have a bug, and that their "objective" results might be wrong.

Moral of the story: before you post that something "isn't hi-res", test it in 2 different frequency plotting programs, just to make sure they agree. Then it's highly likely your findings are correct.