Qobuz Downloads - Optimum HiRes Format (Sublime Subscription)

[Peter Stockwell]

I just bought a HiRes version of a Hank Mobley album, on blue note, from 1957. It cost me 4€19, much cheaper than any CD version I could buy.

I downloaded the 24/192. version. This makes for a file size of 1.3 gB. The 24/96 version was a few cents cheaper.

As this came from analogue tape, I can see going better than 16/44 is maybe a better option, but I can't help feeling that I'd get audibly the same result from 24/96.

So what do you think ?

 

[AndyU]

I just bought a HiRes version of a Hank Mobley album, on blue note, from 1957. It cost me 4€19, much cheaper than any CD version I could buy.

I downloaded the 24/192. version. This makes for a file size of 1.3 gB. The 24/96 version was a few cents cheaper.

As this came from analogue tape, I can see going better than 16/44 is maybe a better option, but I can't help feeling that I'd get audibly the same result from 24/96.

So what do you think ?

You could take a copy and downsample it to whatever resolution you fancy and see if you can hear a difference. Maybe the 1957 tape-hiss, print-through, wow and flutter, hysteresis and other distortions will be affected.

 

[Geoffreybombom]

Generally I prefer 24/192, seems to have more body to the sound, only an opinion though.

 

[Peter Stockwell]

You could take a copy and downsample it to whatever resolution you fancy and see if you can hear a difference. Maybe the 1957 tape-hiss, print-through, wow and flutter, hysteresis and other distortions will be affected.

Just done that with Jriver. Down to 24/48, I’ll see how that sounds.

Edit: I can't realistically tell any difference between 24/48 and 24/192 on this Hank Mobley (originally BLP 1568 "Hank Mobley") release from 1958.

 

[stecko]

Just done that with Jriver. Down to 24/48, I’ll see how that sounds.

Edit: I can't realistically tell any difference between 24/48 and 24/192 on this Hank Mobley (originally BLP 1568 "Hank Mobley") release from 1958.

Similar here, tbh I prefer a decent 16/44 all day

 

[tuga]

Having compared PlayClassics' (purposely made) files at different bit depth and sample rates I am confident that I can hear an improvement in both 24-bit over 16-bit and 96KHz over 16/44.1.

I sometimes buy the high resolution version when it's on sale, if the digital master was made at high resolution and only of Classical music. I've purchase maybe a dozen albums? (none of them over 96KHz)
For analogue Classical, Jazz and other genres I only buy Redbook (16/44.1).

 

[tuga]

You could take a copy and downsample it to whatever resolution you fancy and see if you can hear a difference. Maybe the 1957 tape-hiss, print-through, wow and flutter, hysteresis and other distortions will be affected.

I wouldn't trust any SRC with that task, it is likely that many of them will introduce audible artefacts.

 

[marshanp]

I did the downsampling thing when I acquired my Auralic streamer/server and TEAC UD-503 DAC; the whole range from 24/192 to 16/48 and 16/44, plus 320kbps and lower resolution MP3 (and corresponding AAC) bitrates. All were created via dBpoweramp. The originals were the best available classical recordings from the Trondheim Soloists on the 2L label, plus some others from BIS and the Chicago SO label. I wouldn't have bothered with analogue originals (too many confounding factors).

Outcome: 16/44 (or 16/48) was clearly superior to any compressed format - but it wasn't a marked difference with high bitrate compression, which was found to be acceptable for material only available in that format. 24/96 (or 24/88) was marginally preferred to CD quality, but the difference was only detectable in A/B comparison. Higher bitrates were not audibly different.

A separate exercise with material ripped from SACD (Channel Classics) to 24/88 PCM files showed that there is nothing inherently superior about the SACD format. The PCM files through the TEAC DAC sounded noticeably better than the SACD played on a Marantz Pearl Lite player, possibly because the TEAC is closer to the DAC state of the art than the player's DAC.

 

[Woodface]

The Hi Res stuff always seems ‘louder’. I tend to notice a bit more kick on stuff downloaded from Bandcamp which is ‘HD’, it’s not a huge difference though.

 

[Peter Stockwell]

Similar here, tbh I prefer a decent 16/44 all day

Interesting thought. Probably there'll be no, readily, audible difference between the 24/48 and the 16/48.

 

[AndyU]

I wouldn't trust any SRC with that task, it is likely that many of them will introduce audible artefacts.

Wouldnt whether you could hear those artefacts be one of the points of making a comparison?

 

[Hound]

I have an upsampler in my system, and I can hear a big difference between standard red book, and when I upsample it to say 24/96.
Once I go above that the difference is much harder to pick out.
But everything gets much larger, sound stage, detail, depth, it just sounds much better and real.

 

[ToTo Man]

For analogue Classical, Jazz and other genres I only buy Redbook (16/44.1).

I'm intrigued by this given your preference for upsampling to high rate PCM/DSD using HQPlayer. If you subscribe to the view that digital filter ringing is audibly harmful to sound quality, then surely it makes sense to minimise the amount of ringing that's already baked into the recording by purchasing analogue recordings that have been digitised at as high a sampling rate as possible? Or are you working on the premise that the artefacts from analogue tape will mask the amount of digital ringing that's baked-in at 16/44?

 

[tuga]

I'm intrigued by this given your preference for upsampling to high rate PCM/DSD using HQPlayer. If you subscribe to the view that digital filter ringing is audibly harmful to sound quality, then surely it makes sense to minimise the amount of ringing that's already baked into the recording by purchasing analogue recordings that have been digitised at as high a sampling rate as possible? Or are you working on the premise that the artefacts from analogue tape will mask the amount of digital ringing that's baked-in at 16/44?

Many analogue recordings from the '60s and '70s roll off below 20KHz and have a high-ish noise floor. Newer digitalisations are likely to be better (if the mastering is decent) but not because they're made at higher sampling rates but because better modern equipment is used and also Dolby de-emphasis when required.

Upconverting Redbook to DSD produces less (audible) artefacts which are probably the result of a more accurate reconstruction.
Upsampling is particularly beneficial or adequate for Redbook, for rates higher than 4fS you can almost get away with no oversampling and just an analogue low pass.

But the reason is mostly to do with cost/benefit.

 

[Peter Stockwell]

Just done that with Jriver. Down to 24/48, I’ll see how that sounds.

Edit: I can't realistically tell any difference between 24/48 and 24/192 on this Hank Mobley (originally BLP 1568 "Hank Mobley") release from 1958.

Scromph! I think my methodology, if you can call it that, is not good. I was doing my "tests" with roon upsampling active. Back to the drawing board.

 

[tuga]

Wouldnt whether you could hear those artefacts be one of the points of making a comparison?

Only for that particular SRC, which may be audibly 'transparent' bt ot representative of what's used by the industry.
Different engineers/labels will use different SRCs and we don't know which.

Two things at play here: audibility of Redbook vs. High Res and downsampling artefacts.

 

[stecko]

Interesting thought. Probably there'll be no, readily, audible difference between the 24/48 and the 16/48.

I've tested some files on tidal. Still prefer 16/44. Just sounds better for me. When I upsample (lumin) standard 16/44 to higher sound going to "soft" side. Lack of dynamic, boring

 

[Peter Stockwell]

I've tested some files on tidal. Still prefer 16/44. Just sounds better for me. When I upsample (lumin) standard 16/44 to higher sound going to "soft" side. Lack of dynamic, boring

I'm playing with the roon options right now. My first impression was that when I took out the upsampling, on a Shelly Lynne song, it seemed my ears were eating a mouthful of lemon! OTOH, the track I used had an overall different sound to the rest of the album.

Anyway, since I installed the Eversolo DMP-A6, and I can send up to 384 kHz to the dac, that's what I've been doing (with roon). I need to attach a CD player to the dac and see how that goes.