2. music
  3. 1313031323

HDtrack not necessarily better?

Im curious if anyone else has had this experience with HD tracks. The Eagles album "Hotel California" is an album I've loved since I first heard it in the late 70s playing on a Myer Emco floor system and heard countless times since on multiple systems. It's not a sonic spectacular but the midrange vocals, guitar just take me back to times past. I tend to use it as first pass to judge midrange harmonic integrity.
Recently I purchased the hi rez 192khz PC version and settled in with high hopes of hearing improvement and details that a CD rip didn't provide. What I got was top and bottom octave improvement but in the midrange the album became polite vs harmonically satisfying. My guess so far is that the DVD source (per downloaded artwork) used was a different mix from CD and that somone focused on a multichannel experience failing to do justice to a 2 channel listener recording. I've had this experience before with audio DVD.... would really not like to spend money on indifferently mixed 2 channel sound.

Thoughts? has anyone else experienced same? any good review reference points so that one can be sure the high rez download version doesn't disappoint?
davide256

Showing 1 response by levy03

levy03
442 posts
 
can't agree. am yet to buy anything from hdtracks that doesn't sound "as good" or "better" then the redbook versions. most have been "better" with only a handful being "as good" or nearly the same. all of the "as good" versions have been 96 or 88. most of the 88 and 96 have sounded "better" as well with only a few falling into the "as good" category. every 176 and 192 has sounded better with most putting the redbook versions to shame imho.

just my 2 cents...now on sale for a penny.
More to discover