High Rez files, is this a joke?

Pettyofficer - you are sounding like a broken record. Which computer audio companies gave you bad service? Was it more than one?

You need to do things a certain way for good results, namely:

1) rip using dbpoweramp and accurate-rip on a PC, preferably to .wav files - use a good C2 correcting ripping drive, such as:

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?PHPSESSID=1pkurvtqrrg8usakaavtdq6uvmb2sr39&topic=68223.0

2) Use a Mac with Amarra 1.2 for playback (the old one) - run 64-bit mode

3) Get a better USB DAC that does no internal upsampling and drive your amps directly with a good volume control in the DAC (not digital), this will make all the difference in clarity, dynamics and S/N ratio. Eliminate the preamp.

This is not unlike getting an expensive turntable and then putting the wrong stylus on it or a poor phono preamp. Everything is important here.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio

"Digital will never sound as good"

A computer audio room at last RMAF got best sound of show. I think it has potential.

If you had the wrong stylus on your turntable, you might thing vinyl is crap....

Steve N.
Empirical Audio

Benjie - since the PW DAC has all those digital inputs, why not try a modern external low-jitter USB converter?

Petty officer just made the wrong choices for Computer Audio IMO, so now he's preaching against it. Performance of USB and Firewire DACS and interfaces runs the gamut. All USB and Firewire interfaces are not alike and all DACs are not equal by a long shot.

I'm not arguing that vinyl cannot be superb, but computer audio can also be superb. TAS 2010 best sound of show was a computer audio room.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio

Okay, I downloaded 24-bit Gaucho. I already had good rips of the SD CD's that I have even played at shows.

I would say that the 24-bit download is less compressed and a bit more detailed than the 44.1 CD rip. Still not a shining example of a good digital audio track however. I dont know if it was the mastering or what. I had high hopes that Babylon Sisters would be significantly better, but it wasn't.

In most of the tracks, there was still a lot of monkeying around in the mixing room I believe, causing the drums and cymbols to sound wrong. Other tracks, such as Time out of Mind have very good cymbols and drums. In most tracks, the cymbols quench immediately, with no sustain. It seems to be inconsistent with this album, as if the tracks were transferred or recorded at different times or with different engineers, maybe even changing the settings and equipment midstream. Babylon Sisters sounds compressed still and some of the other tracks are less so.

I frankly dont expect The Who, Steely Dan or the Stones to sound as good as modern hi-res tracks. If they did, I would be pleasantly surprised. They are still very enjoyable for me to listen to.

If you want to hear a well-mastered modern hi-res track try this:

Kodaly mov3 - 24/192 Cello solo
http://www.unipheyemusic.com/Details.cfm?ProdID=43&category=6

Steve N.
Empirical Audio

Jimc555 - What you describe is much worse than these tracks are. They are actually quite dynamic and listenable. Very full sounding, particularly time out of mind. It may be your master clock at fault. This can easily turn any digital into fatigueing sound. I agree that the cymbols are not very live sounding though, except maybe Time out of Mind. What is your front-end?