Desplat13 1 Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 Has anyone else downloaded anything else from this site? www.hdtracks.comI just got Holst's Planets from there, and preliminary findings are amazing. It is 96KHZ and 24 bit, and the depth and kind of 3D-ness of the audio is simply stunning. Of course, it takes a ton of space. That album alone took up about 800 MB, but so far I am just blown away, and I have only had the chance to listen to a little of Mars. This is what has been lacking in all previous download options. Here is the link to the album I bought.http://www.hdtracks.com/index.php?file=cat...=HD090368023469 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChuckM 1 Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 Wow, they seriously need to slow down the side-banner on the homepage. I can barely see what the image is before it shifts to the next one...Oh, right, the music. So is this actually better quality than a CD? Otherwise, I don't see the point in paying that much for just a download. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,251 Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 Ok you download high quality audio adn then listen to it on your laptop speakers, right?If you burn it on CD you'll just lose the higher quality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desplat13 1 Posted July 18, 2009 Author Share Posted July 18, 2009 Audio CD = 44.1KHZ and 16 MBI have an external soundcard that can play high sample rates, and some pretty nice speakers hooked up to it. I listen to everything on my computer, a lot of times as a flac file, which down not lose any sound quality in the transfer from audio CD to computer. Of course, I listen to alot of AAC files in iTunes, too, just not when I am too concerned about audio quality.HDTracks' audiophile selection is the sort of audio quality you get out of an SACD or Audio DVD, but I have never had the right equipment to play those, so this is the perfect option for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,251 Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 Not really, since to get the full benefit of SACD audio quality, you'll need something better then computer speakers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desplat13 1 Posted July 18, 2009 Author Share Posted July 18, 2009 and some pretty nice speakers hooked up to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattris 314 Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 Nice that this music site exists, but the prices are too high. Buying the actual SA-CD disc would be a better investment, as would a DVD-A/SA-CD combo player.Which speakers are you using? For enjoying hi-res music from a computer, an alternative would be to use a good pair of headphones, from which you'll get much improved clarity. PM me for a specific model recommendations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,251 Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 and some pretty nice speakers hooked up to it.Pretty nice computer speakers really doesn't amount to much imo.You need to invest in a pair of high quality speakers if you want to experience the full benefit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koray Savas 2,095 Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 The album is $16, just buy the CD for the same price and rip it in whatever quality you want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry B 49 Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 The album is $16, just buy the CD for the same price and rip it in whatever quality you want.No, the digital download is higher quality than a CD. 96khz/24bit vs. 44.1khz/16bit.This download service looks very promising, and I hope more labels get on board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Penna 2,082 Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 Not sure if my machine would be able to play the highest quality ones, and my speakers definitely wouldn't care.You can buy flacs from that place though, that's definitely worth something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChuckM 1 Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 The thing is, I really can't tell the difference between a CD and 320 mp3s. I like to rip to flac just for sake of mind, but I really can't hear anything different. Am I really then going to be able to hear the difference in these super-flacs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Penna 2,082 Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 The thing is, I really can't tell the difference between a CD and 320 mp3s. I like to rip to flac just for sake of mind, but I really can't hear anything different.That's me, 100%Although I can generally tell when an mp3 has been badly encoded, - I've upgraded several albums from 128 to just 192 and noticed more oomph. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,251 Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 The album is $16, just buy the CD for the same price and rip it in whatever quality you want.No, the digital download is higher quality than a CD. 96khz/24bit vs. 44.1khz/16bit.This download service looks very promising, and I hope more labels get on board.It looks promesing, but the problem is that there really isn't a normal way that you can play these files and take advantage of the full sound quality.If you burn it to CD you'll convert it to 16 bit 44.1 Khz.DVD players generally don't reconize FLAC, or even WAV.You can play it on your PC but most speakers made for computers certainly are not configured for accurate and balanced music reproduction.You'd have to connect your PC to an external amp, which is connected to a couple of good quality speakers. Which for most of us is a bit of a hassle.Right now there really isn't much of an infrastructure in place for such a product. It's all geared towards MP3 and other compressed media which looks and sounds fine on your iPod. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry B 49 Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 The thing is, I really can't tell the difference between a CD and 320 mp3s. I like to rip to flac just for sake of mind, but I really can't hear anything different. Am I really then going to be able to hear the difference in these super-flacs?Yes. This music isn't CD quality, it's beyond CD quality. Most of us don't even know what greater than CD quality sounds like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,251 Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 Most of us will have heard music performed live at some point.That's how music should sound like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koray Savas 2,095 Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 The thing is, I really can't tell the difference between a CD and 320 mp3s. I like to rip to flac just for sake of mind, but I really can't hear anything different.Same here, but I don't waste HD space for sake of mind. I can tell the difference between something really low like 160 and 320 though. Or maybe not, the only things I notice are the level of hiss, which could very well be from my speakers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marian Schedenig 5,520 Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 If anything, hiss will decrease with lower bitrates, because it gets phased out with all the other details. There are more serious differences between 160 and 320 kbps files.You'd have to connect your PC to an external amp, which is connected to a couple of good quality speakers.Which is just what I have. And I believe it'll become more and more common over the next years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desplat13 1 Posted July 19, 2009 Author Share Posted July 19, 2009 Stefan (and anyone else interested), my setup is:MacBook Pro laptop, Edirol FA-66 external soundcard connected via firewire 400, with options to play audio at sample rates of 44.1, 48, 96, 192, and has many different output options. I use two quarter inch gold plated monster cables going to Blue Sky EXO 2.1 speakers (read more about them here ), which retail for about $350. While they do not have as much name recognition as something like Bose, they are a smaller company geared toward professionals (actually recommended to me by someone who works developing the Vienna Symphonic Library samples), and the EXO has been Blue Sky's attempt to create a budget version of the high fidelity and full range monitoring of their high end versions. I have test run quite a few nice speakers, and these completely blow anything in the same price range out of the water (and quite a few FAR above this price range).Also, I use Cog to play flac files.Really, listening to this high quality music makes the other options seem pretty flat compared. Not flat as in musically, but this high fidelity seems to make it almost 3D. Like the instruments have more room to breath in the space. You can pick them out easier, and imagine where they are on stage, how far away from others, hear tiny nuances is how they are played. It is just amazing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry B 49 Posted July 19, 2009 Share Posted July 19, 2009 Stefan (and anyone else interested), my setup is:MacBook Pro laptop, Edirol FA-66 external soundcard connected via firewire 400, with options to play audio at sample rates of 44.1, 48, 96, 192, and has many different output options.Hah, you don't say. I have a MacBook Pro and an Edirol FA-66 too. However, I've found the FA-66 to be horribly unreliable. Most of the time it either doesn't work or it works terribly slowly and all but locks up the computer. Seems this is a common problem in Windows, but never with Macs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desplat13 1 Posted July 19, 2009 Author Share Posted July 19, 2009 Hmm, that is odd. I have no problems to report. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Mark 2,924 Posted July 19, 2009 Share Posted July 19, 2009 they look like good speakers to me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry B 49 Posted July 19, 2009 Share Posted July 19, 2009 $700, though. Damn. I'm not that professional yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desplat13 1 Posted July 19, 2009 Author Share Posted July 19, 2009 Um, are you talking about mine? I got them for $350...BTW, tech support is ridiculously amazing, too. Never seen anything like it. Longest it took them to respond was like a couple of hours.....on a Sunday. Had a problem, they shipped out a brand new amp for the woofer, along with a little upgrade thingy to put on the back of the woofer's speaker, all for free. I didn't have a receipt or anything. Amazing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry B 49 Posted July 19, 2009 Share Posted July 19, 2009 Um, are you talking about mine? I got them for $350...These speakers, aren't they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChuckM 1 Posted July 19, 2009 Share Posted July 19, 2009 The thing is, I really can't tell the difference between a CD and 320 mp3s. I like to rip to flac just for sake of mind, but I really can't hear anything different.Same here, but I don't waste HD space for sake of mind. I can tell the difference between something really low like 160 and 320 though. Or maybe not, the only things I notice are the level of hiss, which could very well be from my speakers.I can definatley hear the difference with mp3s below 320, just not above that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry B 49 Posted July 19, 2009 Share Posted July 19, 2009 The thing is, I really can't tell the difference between a CD and 320 mp3s. I like to rip to flac just for sake of mind, but I really can't hear anything different.Same here, but I don't waste HD space for sake of mind. I can tell the difference between something really low like 160 and 320 though. Or maybe not, the only things I notice are the level of hiss, which could very well be from my speakers.I can definatley hear the difference with mp3s below 320, just not above that.Okay, but 96khz/24-bit is not CD quality. It's better than CD quality. If we were talking about CD quality FLAC downloads at 44.1khz/16-bit (which this web site does offer, but they're not the most interesting of its catalogue) the MP3 comparison would be valid. However, if you have the proper equipment, the improvement in 96khz/24-bit should be quite obvious. Even 48khz as opposed to 44.1khz is significant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChuckM 1 Posted July 19, 2009 Share Posted July 19, 2009 Well, I guess I'd have to listen to one to find out. Do they have any free sample tracks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry B 49 Posted July 19, 2009 Share Posted July 19, 2009 No, only CD (lower) quality samples. It's a leap of faith, I guess. You can take it from anyone who's listened to such high fidelity music, though, that the difference is marked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desplat13 1 Posted July 19, 2009 Author Share Posted July 19, 2009 Um, are you talking about mine? I got them for $350...These speakers, aren't they?No, these. There is a difference between the EXO and the Media Desk versions. I have the EXO setup, and they are awesome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now