Ben,
I hope this thread will serve everyone, regardless of respective musical preferences, so my personal musical tastes are unimportant. What I *do* hope is that people will compare reissued recordings with the original Redbook before recommending the High Res version. The High Res version should be audibly better. If it isn't, I think we'd all be better off supporting new artists as opposed to supporting reissues that represent no improvement.
That said, I have no Redbook versions of the recordings posted so far but trust that most people buy reissues of recordings they've at least heard before and that their recommendations are based upon at least a comparison by memory. If *you* think it sounds "better" than how you've heard the recording sound before, then some improvement has probably been accomplished by those who produced the High Res reissue.
Posts like yours are extremely helpful, so please keep passing along your discoveries! |
Guys, this great! Keep 'em coming. I know some of you are wary about calling the " dogs" out but I think it's important...you can add as many provisos and disclaimers as you want to qualify a negative review such as " your mileage may vary" etc.
For me, one of the greatest disappointments was Raising Sand. The 96/24 dowload is not horrible, it just doesn't improve upon the Rebook, IMHO. |
2chnlben,
Thanks so much for all of the great links! |
I really like the 24/192 release of the Stones' Greatest Hits vol. I available on HDtracks. It is finely detailed and very "vinyl" in its presentation...quite a bit better than the Redbook. Bare in mind though, that there are serious flaws in many of the original recordings...distortion, etc.
The first McCartney solo album download on HDTracks is better than the standard Redbook, but I hear it isn't as good as the Gold DCC master from a few year's back....but that can't be had for less than $200 anymore. |
Thanks for the tip, Peter! |
I recently compared the 44.1 CD of Beck's "Sea Change" to Mobile Fidelity's 44.1 remaster. The original recording sounded great so I was not prepared for the DRAMATIC difference in the Mobile Fidelity reissue. The recording's soundstage, bass response and midrange have all been unveiled due to the remastering work of those involved in the project. The biggest reason for the improvement is that no compression was used. This reissue justifies a $25 purchase. I want to hear the same level of improvement when I spend that much money for a High Res recording I can otherwise buy for $9 on Amazon. HdTracks is offering a 24/88 download of this title. If anyone's compared it to the MoFi version I'd love to hear what you think. |
Neil Young's catalog has been re-mastered in 24/172 and the 44.1 releases of these remasters KILL the old CD releases. It'll be very interesting to see whether Neil eventually authorizes dowload sales of the high res masters themselves. If he does, we'll be able to do a direct comparison of Redbook's presentation of that material versus a high res dowload. |
Excellent idea, Ozzy. I second the idea and will start using your system myself. |
Ben,
Very interesting observations. I'm as curious as you are. I wish HDTracks would share the re-packaging details of all their releases. Many of them are merely downloadable versions of already available SACD titles or are merely upsampled from 44.1. Mr. Chesky, as far as I know, has never weighed in on this issue. I urge everyone to pester HDtracks to define their releases and to STOP putting a High Res badge on everything they make available. This should not be a crap shoot. I think they should use a quality designation such as "True High Resolution" for titles that are high res through the chain. Upsampled releases should be identified as such. Remember DDD, AAD and ADD labels for CD's? That's what you get when standards are set by legislation. The High Res world is the Wild West right now. Thar's gold in them thar hills partners! The problem is finding it. |
Sorry about the 24/172 typos ...I also suffer from dyslexia and the 176 versus 192 throws me off. :-0 |
It sure would be nice if more people could find some high resolution worth bragging about. It's tempting to conclude that there just aren't many qualifying titles out there. The Absolute Sound has just now begun a "trial" feature highlighting high res files worth downloading. It's a short list and not many superlatives were used. Let's hope they can unearth more gems in the future and that the attention will spur other musicians and producers to use the new technology in their releases. |
Bill,
I always appreciate your tips about things digital! The website looks good and I'll check out the rest of the music. Those Skandanavians *do* know great jazz! |
I wish it could sustain a pulse, but that's up to Audiogon members. ;-)
I have recently discovered the following downloads which I think are better
than Red book: Chet Baker's "Baker's Holiday" 24/192, Norah
Jones' "Feels like Home" 24/192 and Joni Mitchell's "The
Hissing of Summer Lawns" 24/192.
I like Bob Marley's Legend in 24/192 but actually prefer the original Island
mix and vibe....wish they'd used that for the remaster. On the download mix
there is actually a guitar fill missing from the opening track that you can
clearly hear on the Island CD. Weird.
In spite of the tempest in a teapot over source material, I actually prefer
Beck's Morning Phase in 24/96 over the CD...but only by a narrow margin. |
Goose,
I completely agree and share your incredulity with respect to the price of downloads. I only download sure bets as a result.
We seem to be stuck in this tug of war between people who think music is free (ridiculous and greedy) and music distributors who gouge wherever and whenever they can (shortsighted and greedy)
My only solution is speak up about it and only buy the very best at the lowest prices available. I wouldn't blame anyone for boycotting the whole affair. Perhaps Neil Young's Pono adventure will bring prices down to CD level, but I ain't holding my breath. |
