Like I said Tim, that is the responsibility of whomever controls the rights to the recording. HD Tracks has to have permission and pay for what they do. The last thing HD Tracks wants is to get embroiled over pirating substandard copies of recordings for profit. They have a good thing going, why ruin it. Within the normal realm of recording quality I have been very pleased with their product so far. Of over a thousand files there have been two clinkers that I can think of and I do not think it was their fault. If there is an issue with the download they have always made it right. One more thing, any transfer at 24/192 ( the studio standard) is totally invisible. It is not like analog where everything you do adds damage. |
Hold on there Tim. Most music after 1990 is recorded in hi res digital.
Older issue may still be analog but much of that has been digitized. Yes, there are companies that specialize in very high quality recording. I get D2D discs from Bandcamp and they are excellent if you like the music. If you don't like the music how it was recorded means nothing. The question becomes what version of the album that I want sounds best? So you check out what is available. If it is an older analog recording I will go with the Vinyl if it is available. With a newer digital recording I'll go with the highest resolution I can get or Vinyl. You would be surprised at how much better some 16/44.1 discs sound when you oversample them and move the filters up out of the way. I find that HD Tracks does an excellent job for the most part and I would bet the record companies get the lion's share of responsibility for how the recordings are transferred. It is not like HD Tracks is trying to do this under the table. Most of my new material comes from HD tracks. The industry is obviously learning to trust them as a very legitimate storefront. As for which format sounds best? That has more to do with other issues than the sampling rate and bit depth. |
dhite, I would have to say your choice of digital equipment might be...not great. I have plenty of Hi Res digital files that are as good or even better than anything you will get out of vinyl and I use very particular electrostatic speakers. I love records, but totally dissing digital program sources is incorrect. You are cutting yourself off from a great way to collect music particularly modern digitally recorded music. I prefer to keep older analog recorded music analog and newer digitally recorded music digital but I do have some amazing 24/96 downloads of older analog stuff that is wonderful. There is so much stuff out there presented in so many different ways that making generalizations is a big mistake. |
Anyone who generalizes insisting that one format is ALWAYS better than an other is usually OTL. Digital obviously has a large advantage over any analog format including R2R. This does not mean that analog sources can not sound superior under the right circumstances. So, as many of us insist, it depends. There is no question that digital is more convenient but if convenience is your main issue then you might as well buy a table radio.
Acoustic Sounds did not stop offering Digital Downloads because of declining sales. I stopped buying downloads from them because I find HD Tracks site much more convenient. I do buy a lot of records from Acoustic Sounds. I really think they are quite happy selling vinyl as they have increase their presence by buying Classic Records.
For certain Streaming is taking a large segment of the market. I think young people like this format. I do not. I prefer collecting music. I do not to have to filter through a forest of awful music.
I love turntables. I grew up with them so, there is an emotional connection that I will never give up. |
That is odd audio2design, I thought you liked listening to eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee. That folks is the Beatles White Album :-) |
Talking about 78's I just got given what looks like several hundred 78s!
A person we know is moving out of his grandfather's house into a condo and in cleaning up and out he found these in a closet in the basement. He just wanted to get rid of them and I just happened to be in the line of fire:-) Just ordered an AT Vm670SP to play them.
I have no idea what happed to you antigrunge2. Maybe an older version of Pure Music, bad usb conversion. Lord knows. Michael Fremer uses the very same system and programming and is thrilled with it. The conversion the SPDIF and clocking are very important and the Alpha USB is special. My front end is entirely digital which may make a difference. In this day and age the only critical points are the USB conversion/clocking and the analog section of the DAC. Otherwise it is just numbers and numbers do not lie.
As far as the Mac mini itself is concerned as long as you have a SSHD and a lot of memory there is nothing you can do to make it sound better other than up sampling which Pure Vinyl (contains Pure Music) does for you. But, the better sound is coming at the output of the DACs which can use better filters with the higher sampling rate. The DACs are on the other side of my preamp. Within the Mac Mini it is only numbers not sound. The Mini's DACs are not involved at all. The Alpha USB is important because it is clocking the data so the preamp can "understand" it. By all accounts it is superlative at this job. If I download a CD to the hard drive and sync the digital outputs of my CD player and the Mac Mini it is impossible to tell them apart.
Other benefits are not only can you steam music but Movies, TV and You Tube. I can shop online while listening to music. I can listen to music samples on HD Tracks before buying, etc. All this at very significant savings over the Aurender. |
mglik, that is an interesting distinction. I have a feeling it has to do with the type of music you play in a working atmosphere vs the type of music you might play head banging with yourself. In my universe that distinction does not hold but hey why should I care.
This topic comes up and some very odd notions are expressed that should be addressed for what they are. This is a discussion. Very few of us have any irons in the fire or conflicts of interest. Those that have more knowledge on the subjects at hand should correct misunderstanding before some id--t try's to make a profit on it. |
Audio2design, that is the answer you would expect by theory. No big surprise.
Jeecc, If you like DVD and Blu Ray then you should check out sites like HD Tracks and Acoustic Sounds were you can buy and download Hi Res digital files to your hard drive.
Antigrunge2, the beauty about computers is that they do not pay attention to noise. They only know about numbers. They ignore noise. I use a Berkley Audio Design Alpha USB which keeps any noise from the DACs which if built correctly should ignore noise anyway. I had a very expensive Aurender in my system for a week and there was absolutely no difference between it and the computer. My own take on the noise issue in digital equipment is that it is more audiophile mythology. Noise is only a problem with analog units and sections. You take a Mac Mini with a big processor, lots of memory and a big hard drive with Channel D's Pure Music program and you get the same performance and much more capability than a $22,000 Aurender. |
I would just like to add that you do not need to spend $50K on a vinyl playback system to get SOTA performance. $30K will do the job nicely. The only problem with this other than most people still can't afford it is that a SOTA digital file playback system costs $4K. They are trying to juice it with dedicated Streamers and rippers but nothing beats a Mac Mini and a big hard drive. People with limited resources can get excellent sound from very inexpensive digital equipment. Why spend so much more on a vinyl rig? The extra money would be better spent on upgrading loudspeakers. Those of us over 55 grew up with vinyl and have an emotional attachment to it. While there are young people getting into vinyl
it is a very small minority compared to the young people who only listen to their phones and computers. I think vinyl took off again because those over 55 have discharged their children an now have extra money to burn and they want to relive their younger day playing vinyl. Once we are gone what happens? Will vinyl survive in the end? I won't be around to find out.
Will manual transmissions survive? I say no. Not enough cars around to learn on.
Sous vide then Torch!! |
Skyscraper, thanx for that explanation! I always thought that the background noise on vinyl "dithered" our brains but I did not know there was a term for it! My thinking had been that in natural environments there is always back ground noise and the background noise on vinyl tricked our brains into thinking the vinyl more realistic. Stochastic resonance, go figure |
Teo, I believe the "fundamental flaw" you are talking about is Quantization Error. This is the error that occurs when a voltage falls in between the smallest digital values. The ADC then has to round the voltage off to the nearest value. These errors are dithered into noise. The signal to noise ratio of a 24 bit ADC is 120dB! That is seriously quieter than any signal you are going to get off a record, by at least a factor of 2. In other words, vinyl's "fundimental flaws" are a lot worse than digital's. Brick wall to what? Once any information is recorded permanently in any format it is "Brick Walled." You can not add or subtract anything from either format. You have to repeat the performance.
If you like the sound of vinyl better then just say it. Nothing to be ashamed of. But coming up with absurd explanations just does not cut it.
I have an old copy of the Byrd's Turn Turn Turn. It is a bit noisy to say the least. I digitized it and put a copy on my hard drive. I make like I'm playing the record but in reality the input selector is on the hard drive which I surreptitiously cue up at the same time as the record. One friend in particular was floored when he discovered it was the computer. With volumes matched nobody can tell the difference reliably.
It is not the format which determines sound quality. It is the way the recording and mastering were managed. If you love music throwing all your eggs in one basket is cutting off your nose to spite your face. |
mkgus, you will hear arguments on both sides. If noise bothers you most than there is no question CDs sound better but you'd better get yourself a computer and a big hard drive because CD's days are limited. In the future all music will be downloaded. As far as sound quality goes vs analog it depends on the mastering. Because of the loudness wars many CD are uni volume, the loudest they can make it with severe dynamic compression. If the album is remastered specifically for vinyl it will have a more realistic dynamic range along with the distortions that make vinyl endearing. I but vinyl and hi res files. No more CDs for me. |
