advertisement


High Definition Audio - Can You Hear The Difference?

So, did you hear a difference?

  • Yes

    Votes: 27 32.9%

  • No

    Votes: 23 28.0%

  • I think so

    Votes: 13 15.9%

  • Probably not

    Votes: 22 26.8%
  • Total voters
    82
Acid?

P.S. Every time I see a picture of that Pono thing that Neil Young was shilling for, I am drawn to the lovely wooden box it came in.
 
Starting in the later 90s ... and for about ten years ... I purchased SACDs (in addition to CDs and vinyl). I had a very good Sony 777 which was upgraded several time using the Vacuum State upgrades ... Allen Wright's company. Playing SACDs did 'sound better' than the Redbook CD layer ... but the SACD circuitry was separate from the CD circuity. I also discovered that the SACD layers were often different (better?) masterings. Not exactly a fair comparison. And I also noted that sometimes great masterings on CDs sounded more musical than SACDs of the same sound recordings. Hmmmmmm......

I still have approximately 200 of those SACDs ... maybe 85% dual layer and 15% single layer. I listen to them through an OPPO 105 multi-format player. They sound very good. Maybe better than the CD layer? I don't much listen to compare that stuff anymore.

What changed was using DACs that minimize / get rid of jitter (and maybe some other digital nasties.) Very quickly I concluded that Redbook PCM, properly mastered and properly played back by my Apple computer, through Pure Music, into a Gordon Rankin DAC (Cosecant, then Crimson) ... sounded so good, so musical, that I no longer concerned myself with getting a better source. I've downloaded well over 2,500 Redbook albums over last five years ... and I rarely listen to them and then remove them from the library because they sound bad. They almost all sound authentically musical.

I highly recommend you read this web posting: https://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html

I am not technically qualified to criticize or even comment upon ... but the person that wrote this is sensible and pragmatic and effectively persuaded me (along with much listening to my computer library of Redbook quality CD downloads) that the 'mathematical sampling theory' that Sony and Phillips' engineers based the Redbook sampling rates on ... WORKS ... IF ... the implementation is superb.

Just sayin' ... of course my ears are 65 years old now ... maybe I'm missing 20% of the music these days ... but I'm enjoying it more for sure.

WTS
 
what is 'high definition audio'? how is it defined? are we talking 'traditional' 'hi fi' here? or do we have to get a Pono in order to vote?
 
Jonathan said:
what is 'high definition audio'? how is it defined? are we talking 'traditional' 'hi fi' here? or do we have to get a Pono in order to vote?
Click to expand...

In the context of this test, we are talking about 96/24 as opposed to 44.1/16. "Hign definition" is a very misleading term, but seems to be banded about quite a lot.
 
Fact is, to borrow W1A speak, Redbook CD can be perfectly enjoyable as long as it's been well mastered. And fact is, so can hi-res audio. And fact is again, both can sound simply awful if mastering has been buggered up. Fact is, don't worry about it and just enjoy the music.
 
There are so many potential variables that are out of our control or knowledge that separating out the single factor that a file is 24/96 rather than 16/44.1 is essentially impossible. However, I have 24.96 files that are better than any other version of that music I have encountered. I sometimes suspect that if the people producing the file know it's going to be used in 'better' hifi systems, rather than cheap earphones on the tube, they maybe take a bit more care about it. A bit like the fabled 'Japanese pressings' we sought out in the '80s.
 
My view after years of investigation is that there are circumstances where some can tell the difference on some kinds of material. However in all the tests I have encountered that have been set up with a modicum of care, the audible difference is very very small if it exists at all.

Hi-res is a huge disappointment, in terms of its ability to improve audio quality at home.

Of course it can still sound very good. As can SACD, DSD etc.

Tim
 
JemHayward said:
There are so many potential variables that are out of our control or knowledge that separating out the single factor that a file is 24/96 rather than 16/44.1 is essentially impossible. However, I have 24.96 files that are better than any other version of that music I have encountered. I sometimes suspect that if the people producing the file know it's going to be used in 'better' hifi systems, rather than cheap earphones on the tube, they maybe take a bit more care about it. A bit like the fabled 'Japanese pressings' we sought out in the '80s.
Click to expand...

Indeed. There seems to be a huge confusion about ideas of the superiority of the format (that can only be tested by comparing material where the source is definitely known to be exactly the same) and the better mastering/EQ that ends up on a "premium" format.
 
I was able to identify the high Res version of Playclassics demo files (the same files in 16/44.1, 24/44.1, 16/96, 24/96).
I had been listening to the Redbook version for a week and when I played the HR I quickly pinpointed a few differences/improvements.
The are exceptional 2 mic recordings of live performances with acoustics instruments and vocals.

I had tried AB'ing a few times before without success.

Despite this I still buy and rip CDs, unless the HR is at a discount and only for classical music.
 
tuga said:
I was able to identify the high Res version of Playclassics demo files (the same files in 16/44.1, 24/44.1, 16/96, 24/96).
I had been listening to the Redbook version for a week and when I played the HR I quickly pinpointed a few differences/improvements.
The are exceptional 2 mic recordings of live performances with acoustics instruments and vocals.
Click to expand...

Would be interesting to take one of their 24/96 files and downsample them with a good resampler (SoX or Audacity) to see if the differences are there or not.
 
I have never got the 'just enjoy the music' arguement. If that is really true (as my pal agrees it is) then just listen on your phone with cheap earbuds (like wot he does). He, oddly, is an excellent guitarist and jazz keyboard player. Still at least he follows up on his philosophy of 'kit doesn't matter'. But on a HiFi forum?
hm.
Anyway...my vote says 'probably not'...RB CD/Vinyl etc is just fine for me, Spotify quality is not, SACD just discernable as better.
 
Julf said:
Would be interesting to take one of their 24/96 files and downsample them with a good resampler (SoX or Audacity) to see if the differences are there or not.
Click to expand...

They provide all the files. Email them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top