When is Hi-Res not really Hi-Res?

rbbert

Well-Known Member
Dec 12, 2010
3,820
239
1,000
Reno, NV
As has been discussed almost endlessly here and elsewhere, fault lies with HDTracks only in the sense that they are not posting detailed spectrographs of their offerings. The fault (as usual these days) lies with the labels and what they give to HDTracks. There are a lot of very well mastered (and good sounding) albums at HDTracks, and there are a lot that aren't. The vast majority of their "hires" offerings sound as good or better than any other digital source from the USA (I'm specifically excluding things like the Rolling Stones SHM-SACD's of their post-ABKCO albums).
 

Bruce B

WBF Founding Member, Pro Audio Production Member
Apr 25, 2010
7,006
512
1,740
Snohomish, WA
www.pugetsoundstudios.com
As has been discussed almost endlessly here and elsewhere, fault lies with HDTracks only in the sense that they are not posting detailed spectrographs of their offerings. The fault (as usual these days) lies with the labels and what they give to HDTracks. .

Please, I'm begging now, please teach me how to listen with my eyes!

A SPECTROGRAPH IS NOT, I REPEAT, IS NOT GOING TO TELL YOU HOW A FILE SOUNDS.

It is a tool to verify hi rez content.
 

rbbert

Well-Known Member
Dec 12, 2010
3,820
239
1,000
Reno, NV
Please, I'm begging now, please teach me how to listen with my eyes!

A SPECTROGRAPH IS NOT, I REPEAT, IS NOT GOING TO TELL YOU HOW A FILE SOUNDS.

It is a tool to verify hi rez content.

I'm not necessarily advocating it, just saying that could possibly obviate complaints from the naysayers. And it does give an idea of the dynamic range and whether or not peak limiting is used, although that is definitely not the only indicator of audio quality.
 

dallasjustice

Member Sponsor
Apr 12, 2011
2,067
8
0
Dallas, Texas
Please, I'm begging now, please teach me how to listen with my eyes!

A SPECTROGRAPH IS NOT, I REPEAT, IS NOT GOING TO TELL YOU HOW A FILE SOUNDS.

It is a tool to verify hi rez content.
I know you aren't responsible for what labels do or what HDtracks does. However, when the customer isn't given any objective assurance or other data to pursue the provenance issue, the customer will use whatever tools he has at his disposal, no matter how imperfect. This is no different than any other business.

If bought an amp and found out it wasn't as good as I hoped it would be, isn't it okay for me to say so in a public place so as to inform other potential customers even if the manufacturer doesn't agree with my opinion? This is the capitalist feedback loop at work.

Bruce, i am thankful we have somewhere to bitch about this stuff and I don't hold you responsible for Hdtracks' representations. I just hope that somebody that could take responsibility for the quality is reading these posts and realizes that it might be in their financial best interest to be a little more up front about the product sold on HDTRACKS.
 

Bruce B

WBF Founding Member, Pro Audio Production Member
Apr 25, 2010
7,006
512
1,740
Snohomish, WA
www.pugetsoundstudios.com
I'm not necessarily advocating it, just saying that could possibly obviate complaints from the naysayers. And it does give an idea of the dynamic range and whether or not peak limiting is used, although that is definitely not the only indicator of audio quality.

A spectrograph is not going to show you dynamic range or peak limiting. That's what workstations and other tools are made for.
 

rbbert

Well-Known Member
Dec 12, 2010
3,820
239
1,000
Reno, NV
A spectrograph is not going to show you dynamic range or peak limiting. That's what workstations and other tools are made for.

I guess I wasn't using exactly the term I wanted. What I mean is the typical workstation graphic views, specifically "waveform" views as posted above, and the "frequency" response view (of which there are many choices, but almost any would be adequate).
 

Orb

New Member
Sep 8, 2010
3,010
2
0
A spectrograph is not going to show you dynamic range or peak limiting. That's what workstations and other tools are made for.

I tend to agree a spectrograph is too crude a tool in quite a few ways.
TBH the only ones I know with a tool that can do the required level of analysing is Keith Howard/Paul Miller (both I think research scientist background who have been in audio for quite a long time and developed quite a few tools over that period), one tool identifies what you mention and critically digital anomalies IF (just emphasisng this point) they exist within the released download album.
Paul Miller some time ago was doing articles on digital downloads, were you ever made aware he tried to discuss this with HDTracks (also spoke to other studios-download services such as studio side of Naim-Linn-etc)?
Cheers
Orb
 

amirm

Banned
Apr 2, 2010
15,813
37
0
Seattle, WA
Please, I'm begging now, please teach me how to listen with my eyes!

A SPECTROGRAPH IS NOT, I REPEAT, IS NOT GOING TO TELL YOU HOW A FILE SOUNDS.

It is a tool to verify hi rez content.
Bruce, I hope we can agree that what HDTracks sells is on the basis of sound quality. There are metrics for that and they should set as their minimum bar and let their users know when they deviate. When they don't do that, they lose the trust of their customers and with it, business.

You and I discussed how a tool can be developed to find and characterize all of these issues. Clipping and lack of dynamic range is easily done as demonstrated here. Same with spectrum and true bandwidth. Using such a tool they can automate the process of tagging files. Not saying they should not sell the files if they get junk from the labels. But as a minimum, both them and the customer need to be informed if the "specs" on the file don't translate into objectively better fidelity specifications.

Leaving such discoveries to consumers on the web is not the way to do business. We can do better and we are not. Do you have any channel into them to convey the message and possibilities?
 

Bruce B

WBF Founding Member, Pro Audio Production Member
Apr 25, 2010
7,006
512
1,740
Snohomish, WA
www.pugetsoundstudios.com
Bruce, I hope we can agree that what HDTracks sells is on the basis of sound quality. There are metrics for that and they should set as their minimum bar and let their users know when they deviate. When they don't do that, they lose the trust of their customers and with it, business.

You and I discussed how a tool can be developed to find and characterize all of these issues. Clipping and lack of dynamic range is easily done as demonstrated here. Same with spectrum and true bandwidth. Using such a tool they can automate the process of tagging files. Not saying they should not sell the files if they get junk from the labels. But as a minimum, both them and the customer need to be informed if the "specs" on the file don't translate into objectively better fidelity specifications.

Leaving such discoveries to consumers on the web is not the way to do business. We can do better and we are not. Do you have any channel into them to convey the message and possibilities?

So what parameters do you suggest for fidelity??
The above parameters, hi-rez content, DR have no bearing on how good or bad it sounds. There are plenty of discs by FIM and Telarc that have clipping. Who are they going to appoint to be the subjectivist for all of these files.
HDTracks sells "hi-rez" files. They don't advertise "these files are uncompressed "
 

amirm

Banned
Apr 2, 2010
15,813
37
0
Seattle, WA
So what parameters do you suggest for fidelity??
The above parameters, hi-rez content, DR have no bearing on how good or bad it sounds. There are plenty of discs by FIM and Telarc that have clipping. Who are they going to appoint to be the subjectivist for all of these files.
HDTracks sells "hi-rez" files. They don't advertise "these files are uncompressed "
Well, I don't think we really want to go to "how good or bad it sounds." What sells HDTracks content is that it has better *specification*. And that is what people are objecting to: i.e. when the specifications are not superior to CDs. Once we assure the specs are better then customers can decide what value they put on that relative to what is audible.

Just thinking out loud, these are the things that could be characterized automatically:

1. The real bandwidth of the music and hence the effective sampling rate.

2. Detection of source of the content to some extent: it should not be hard to detect CD or SACD masters for example.

3. Detection of clipping. It is fine that clipping exists. What customers complain about is that they buy first and then realize it has clipping. Note that I am not talking about a single sample clipping in the whole file but rather, persistent maxed out spectrum.

4. Proper analysis of dynamic range.

Put another way, high resolution is supposed to bring two things:

1. > 16 bits worth of sample data

2. > 22.05 Khz of real music bandwidth

3. Potential freedom from dynamics compression (my main interest by the way in high res)

We should be able to get to above information far better than today.
 

boh10

New Member
Jan 30, 2013
8
0
0
This all sounds like a good start, however I have to agree with Bruce to some extent :))), you can’t listen to music with your eyes. For me the absolutely most effective (with minimum investments for HDTracks) is to allow customer ratings. This allows for all kinds of feed-back, technical and non-technical, and it actually works…
At stated previously, what triggers my concern is such a simple thing as when a “hi-rez” version has significantly lower DR than the existing CD. If I buy a blu-ray, with 1080p and 7.1 uncompressed DTS I do expect it to be of much higher quality than my DVD, and a recording with lower DR just doesn't send that message (even if of course DR is not the ultimate/key metric).
Cheers, boh
 
Last edited:

Orb

New Member
Sep 8, 2010
3,010
2
0
Or Amir/Bruce.
You look more closely at what Paul Miller and Keith Howard developed for measuring high res downloads as part of an albums review :)
TBH it makes it very easy even for the average person to critically study an album from its chart, and for the more technical shows a heck of a lot more.
Just this month here are a couple of examples of high res albums reviewed that PM describes from using said tool:

This is evidently an analogue recording, sampled at 96khz, but the high level of background white noise renders the 24-bits quantisation rather moot.
Still, such analogue 'dithering' has been shown to exert some subjective benefit.

Next album:
Sensitively recorded - clean,dynamic,free of artifice - this ECM download enjoys a huge dynamic range although the full 40khz+ bandwidth is only utilised when the band is in full flight such as in 'Parting Ways' as visualised above.

One of the worst this month:
This ECM recording is mislabelled, for while the FLAC files will light the '96khz LED' on your DAC, they look to be native 48khz recordings, upsampled to 96khz.
Tracks 7-9 also contain fixed (digital) ultrasonic spuriae [black trace in above chart].

Interesting ECM has one of the best and also worst this month.
And in previous review with the test some strange quirks have been noticed, which would not from a more standard software tool.
Just my take anyway.
Cheers
Orb
 

Bruce B

WBF Founding Member, Pro Audio Production Member
Apr 25, 2010
7,006
512
1,740
Snohomish, WA
www.pugetsoundstudios.com
This all sounds like a good start, however I have to agree with Bruce to some extent :))), you can’t listen to music with your eyes. For me the absolutely most effective (with minimum investments for HDTracks) is to allow customer ratings. This allows for all kinds of feed-back, technical and non-technical, and it actually works…
At stated previously, what triggers my concern is such a simple thing as when a “hi-rez” version has significantly lower DR than the existing CD. If I buy a blu-ray, with 1080p and 7.1 uncompressed DTS I do expect it to be of much higher quality than my DVD, and a recording with lower DR just doesn't send that message (even if of course DR is not the ultimate/key metric).
Cheers, boh

Well if you go by DR alone, then every single "remastered album" would be disqualified as hi-rez. It's a victim of the loudness wars. There are literally thousands of CD's from the 80's and 90's that have more DR than the music from 2000 and on.

The tools for digital file analysis are not new. Just seems when the digital downloads first started hitting the market about 5yrs ago, everyone wanted to jump on the bandwagon. Just as everyone can buy the tools to build a house, not everyone is qualified enough to know what they're looking at. I did not coin the phrase "Audacity Cowboy". It's taken me years and looking at thousands of files to know if something has been upsampled or if it came from an analog or digital source. Sometimes you just can't tell beyond a reasonable doubt. I can rip a CD, put it through some analog signal generators and filters and no one could tell if has been upsampled or not.

The best thing for this business is education. If the labels and distributors are not going to do it for us, then we'll have to band together and work through this. The forum CA has been good AND bad. Yes, it's been a thorn in my side. Sometimes I wish I had never answered the call from the labels to do this for them, but someone has to carry the flag. There were some new recordings that I was checking last night. Even now, in 2013, some studios are still recording in 16/44.1 That my friend is sad.......
 

Andre Marc

Member Sponsor
Mar 14, 2012
3,970
7
0
San Diego
www.avrev.com
. There were some new recordings that I was checking last night. Even now, in 2013, some studios are still recording in 16/44.1 That my friend is sad.......

Yes, this is a fact. There is SUCH a disconnect between what some of the snobs in this hobby THINK goes on and what REALLY goes on. That
is why I chuckle when we discuss DSD downloads when in the music biz, even among prominent artists, 24 bit/48 khz IS considered high resolution.

So, why do you think this is?

Here is another example of there being and almost non existent market...I jut got the new Richard Thompson album on CD, Electric...recorded
in analog..so why is there no freaking 96 Khz version for sale? I am SURE they sampled the tape at more than 44.1. It is because 44.1 is the DEFACTO
standard for digital music, period. We need to get it through our thick skulls.

Its not no different than "wishing" processed food can be good for you..that all that sodium, hydrogenated oil, high fructose corn syrup, and soy will one day disappear.
 

boh10

New Member
Jan 30, 2013
8
0
0
It's weekend so a great opportunity to listen to some music! This is a fantastic download and an awesome recoding;
Title: Jazz at the Pawnshop, Artist: Arne Domnérus, Bengt Hallberg, Lars Erstrand, Georg Riedel, Egil Johansen.
At almost $50 it is not inexpensive, but it is excellent value with 3h 25 min of pure music and sound excellence.

Cheers, boh
 
Bruce a question as I'm trying to learn something about these bit formats. My Mytek DSD dac indicates 32 bit conversion but what is really occurring up there ? is there actual music available or sound that I can hear that takes advantage of the chips capabilities ?
I thought human hearing was limited at a certain level.
 

Bruce B

WBF Founding Member, Pro Audio Production Member
Apr 25, 2010
7,006
512
1,740
Snohomish, WA
www.pugetsoundstudios.com
Bruce a question as I'm trying to learn something about these bit formats. My Mytek DSD dac indicates 32 bit conversion but what is really occurring up there ? is there actual music available or sound that I can hear that takes advantage of the chips capabilities ?
I thought human hearing was limited at a certain level.

32bit is in layman's terms is the dynamic range. 32bit has a theoretical noise floor lower than 24bit
16bit has a dynamic range of 96dB, 24bit has a dynamic range of 124db and 32bit has a theoretical dynamic range of 192dB... i say theoretical because the signal to noise of most equipment is only 120-130dB

When we talk about 32bit processing in software, the calculations and processing are using 32bit math. It's just more accurate.

32bit has nothing to do with hearing, what you may be referring to is sample rate. That's how high/low we can hear. And no, there is no commercially available music at 32bit.
 
32bit is in layman's terms is the dynamic range. 32bit has a theoretical noise floor lower than 24bit
16bit has a dynamic range of 96dB, 24bit has a dynamic range of 124db and 32bit has a theoretical dynamic range of 192dB... i say theoretical because the signal to noise of most equipment is only 120-130dB

When we talk about 32bit processing in software, the calculations and processing are using 32bit math. It's just more accurate.

32bit has nothing to do with hearing, what you may be referring to is sample rate. That's how high/low we can hear. And no, there is no commercially available music at 32bit.

Thank you Bruce
 

Bruce B

WBF Founding Member, Pro Audio Production Member
Apr 25, 2010
7,006
512
1,740
Snohomish, WA
www.pugetsoundstudios.com
To shed a little light and information to some of the misinformed. Was just reading a thread over at CA about making a list of "False Hi-rez downloads"

Someone mentioned that it only takes "seconds" to look at a file to determine if it's fake. I've been doing this for many years now and each file takes about 6-8 minutes to check.

1. Set up session
2. Load file into workstation
3. Load or highlight each track. Some classical titles could have 40-50 tracks!!
4. Render the track
5. Determine if it's a hi-rez or up sampled
6. If you can't determine, start changing gain and parameters to zoom in on 18k - 26k area

I know some of these longer SACD's have taken almost an hour. I think the quickest I've ever done a 'normal' 10-12 track SACD is around 5 minutes. I have found about 1-3% of the titles to have mixed sample rates.

Now a typical Mastering engineer may make $125 - $150/hr. , you can see where this may become cost prohibitive for a label.
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing