24/96 files for M2tech hiFace

I am no expert, but I think you need DVD-A ripping software to rip DAD.

Another test you can try is to use Foobar to play a 24/96 file and then have it down rez it to 16/44 for comparison. I use Kent Poon's free downloads as samples of 24/96 audio. He also has 16/44 and 24/192 files of the samples.

Hi RezDown loads

They are aiff files , but you can convert them to wave or flac. I think I did the conversion with dbpoweramp batch converter.

DTC,
Thanks for this response.
I would have thought others might contibute or be interested in this topic. I found a Norwegian free download site and got it to play in Foobar 2000, but since I have no Redbook source to compare, I don't know if it is worth the effort. I did connect the hiFace to the coax input of the Cary 303-200, and it shows the input and output (if upsampling is done)freq. I alo was able to play some DVD-As, but am not sure which layer is being read.

I think the lack of response may be because DAD is not all that common. I did find a DVD extractor that has a free 30 day trial period. I have not used it but it sounds like it should be able to extract the audio tracks from a DAD disc and output them as wav files. It could also extract the audio from your DVD-A discs.

DVD Audio Extractor

DVD Audio Extractor

To compare your Norwegian files as Redbook CDs, you could burn them to a CD and listen to that CD. The burning software would have to down rez the file. dBpoweramp Batch Converter is a free program and can convert to pretty much any format you wish. You could also try burning a DVD with the 24/96 files.

I'll probably try some of this myself, as I do have some DVD-A that I would like to get to Digital format.

I am very interested in your comparison of using the HiFace versus the Cary as the transport for 24/96 files. I think others will be also once you figure out how to do it.

I just installed DVD Audio Extractor and extracted some DVD-A tracks to wav files. It was very easy, although I have to add the tag information. Now I can compare the 24/96 files to the 16/44 files. Also, I can now compare the 24/96 files from my PC (with HiFace) to the vinyl versions - something I have wanted to do.

So far, so good.

If I wanted to determine the or any, noted diffs from two identical tracks with one being provided in 24/96 or higher, vs. one of lower word and sampling rate, I'd do the download of the high res file, and then buy the CD of it, as one example. The CD would of course have to be ripped onto the hard drive securely, to help or outright overcome the jitter induced by the rotating disc itself.

Another way might be to use DVD audio Extractor to rip native high res tracks off a DVDA disc, DVD disc, or HDdAD. Thereafter, as was said, rip to CD if desired.

There are some other concerns here too I feel.

Recording quality for one. Just 'cause the Disc has the apporpriate numbers like 24/96... or 24/192, doesn't mean the end product is top shelf. Normally it is better as a rule, but I'd not be blind to the issue of recording quality, even when it comes to HD audio.

I'd also say if you are upsampling, or trying to upsample music from Red Book to some higher numbers.... Do remember, the end result is usually not going to be actual improvments, but rather, mere change.

Unless I am way off here, once a file is captured into a particular word length and sampling rate, there is a defined, predetermined amount of info contained within that file. You can't add to it later on. you have only that level of data with which to contend. you can embelish it, alter it or change it, but you can't add to the amount of information already in it.... and that's where the HD in High Definition comes from... natively capturing the music/tracks, with as high an initial resolution as is possible.

For my own money... dealing with 'ready rolled' music files, I'd suggest 'leave 'em alone'. They are what they are. We can condense them, compact them, compress or reduce them, but it's doubtful if at all, we can increase or imporve them, by re-recording them into higher rates.... you're just making larger reproductions of the same thing and eating up disc space inordinately.

Upsampling has it's worth... during the actual recording... thereafter it's more or less a gimick IMO.