Quote from: BearcatSandor on 11 November, 2010, 10:52:53 AMThere's something i don't get about this thread and something i don't get about the audiophile industry. It may be because i live out in the wood practically speaking and most of my neighbors are deer, but who are the "they" people are referring to? People who read Stereophle? I'm the only one i know that does. I live in a town of 2k people and i'd bet i'm the only one in town who knows what HDCD is.Last time I saw an estimate, it was that the high end audiophile market in the US was composed of about 200,000 people. That is about 3/4 of one tenth of a percent of the population. That you are the only audiophile in a town of 2,000 seems about right. There might be one other in town that you don't know about.
There's something i don't get about this thread and something i don't get about the audiophile industry. It may be because i live out in the wood practically speaking and most of my neighbors are deer, but who are the "they" people are referring to? People who read Stereophle? I'm the only one i know that does. I live in a town of 2k people and i'd bet i'm the only one in town who knows what HDCD is.
I agree.All of which makes it surprising that this isn't common place.But in a record company I suppose any new idea has to get past the very people who caused the loudness wars in the first place. It's probably taken them this long to "get it".Cheers,David.
I know this recording from back in the 70s and wonder why it needs 24bit at all? Jet sounds like recorded thru a telephone line, i doubt 24bit will change that. Besides that i was already unimpressed by the way EMI "remastered" The Beatles. I seldom hear critics about that and wonder why i don´t like their sound but i can´t help. I bet some japanese at Warner Japan would have conjured some more sparkle on these
I suspect they were constrained by the expectations of listeners. I mean, messing with something as sacrosanct as the sound of the Beatles is a bit like messing with the formula of Coca-Cola, and we all know how that turned out. Also, let's face it, many of those recordings sounded pretty bad in the first place. George Martin wasn't known for favoring clean sound, and probably couldn't have achieved it if he'd wanted to in the more track bounced albums.
In fact since it's most likely mastered/edited in 24-bit anyhow it's actually an extra step to turn it into 16/44.1 isn't it?
I just got my hands on these 96/24 files of BOTR. They sound sweet No compression at all...wonderful but i agree they should have put out a 44.1/16 version...and thats what I want to have ...a16 bit version. i have foobar and I have Audacity...can someone give me a short step by step how to down convert these...I am not too sharp about the dithering aspect of this...Why or why not dithering etc. Thanks in advance...
Nice and Short Thanks
You know I have had my doubts...that 16 bit was gonna sound just as good as 24 bit...logically it seemed that with 24 bit you were just gonna have more sound info and it was gonna sound better.Warmer, More analog..you know all the audiophile claims. See I grew up with this Band on the Run and by far this uncompressed version is the best sounding 24bits that is. But I am a poor guy you know and all 2.2 Terabytes of my storage is stuffed to the gills with flac and 320 mp3 so I thought I would take a chance and compare the 16 and 24 bit sound and see if I could justify only keeping the 16 bit version. So I converted it to 16 bit w/dither....drum roll....There is no audible difference...none that I can tell thru abx testing( only ran one series of the tests with 12 different comparisons but...I see no need for further tests I AM CONVINCED THERE IS NO AUDIBLE DIFFERENCE. Which to me means that all the sacd and dvdaudio sound better because they have been mastered better that their Redbook counterparts. Not because of a larger bit rate. My 16 bit version sounds every bit as sweet as the 24 bit version. So I am now really starting to understand the limits of my hearing.
I understand the concept, but I don't think it's a good idea to give them the impression that we're willing to pay more for recordings they haven't wrecked.
On the other hand, I think it is a good idea to give them the impression that we're willing to pay less for recordings they do wreck.