High Definition

edited May 2011 in Music
I just got round to downloading a couple of purchases from HD tracks, one of which is the Bill Evans Trio's last night at the village vanguard. I already have this as part of a triple disc set, and it isn't often one can compare a redbook file with a start-from-scratch 24/192 re-master.

So in the spirit of nerdiness, leaving aside the pure enjoyment of the music (which is glorious), what is the difference?

Not a lot actually, which is hardly surprising when the original is well done in the first place. I thought I might get more texture from the High-Rez - and perhaps I do. The instruments really do sound just a little more natural.

The stereo image initially seemed a disappointment, it was almost dual-mono for a minute - until all the trio started playing. The players actually took up their position on the stage more realistically, the drums in particular are better placed than in almost any other recording I know, with realistic bleed across the stage.

There is a notable lack of compression as well - the recording seems quieter but is really more dynamic. It sounds much improved when turned up a little. However, the dynamic compression on the original disc actually makes the record pretty accessible and isn't really a bad thing imo.

So, an interesting comparison. Nice to have - yes, but essential? Not even nearly.

Comments

  • FWIW, I have similar feelings about the HDtracks version of Coltrane's A Love Supreme.

    I wonder if it's worth having hi-res versions of old/classic recordings.
  • I reckon you need to be lucky with what version you've bought in the past there are some pretty dodgy re-issues. It can be hard to get a specific release on places like Amazon. If you have a good one then I tend to agree with your question.
  • edited May 2011

    Interesting comments Alan. I think it shows that red-book when well recorded is very good and usually hard to beat. Coincidentally I was listening to Bill Evans 'Alone' an excellent red book recording with a live feel - sublime !

    Or could it just be your pointy ears creating vulcan resonances !!

  • HD Tracks do 'Gaucho' as a 24/96 high-res download, so I paid for it and eagerly sat down, expecting some sort of special experience (as is often the case with high-res stuff from Linn that I've bought).  The (supposedly) high-res 'Gaucho' download sounds very ordinary indeed; certainly way inferior to my vinyl copy.  I suspect that many of these high-res releases are nothing more than upsampled and requantised CD files - something highlighted by Keith Howard in the current issue of HFN.  When I can work out how to convert one of the 'Gaucho' tracks from FLAC to WAV, I'll run it through Keith Howard's freeware analyser and I'll be surprised if there is much frequency content above 22kHz.

    I would say that this should be a matter for 'buyer beware' but the trouble is that you simply don't know what the high-res music files are going to sound like until you play them.  The cynic in me thinks that certain music providers are knowingly taking the p$ss (Linn and 2L being very notable exceptions).


  • Given that much of the older stuff will have been sourced from tape masters there's little chance of there being much over 20k on there, not through any fault of of HD Tracks, most microphones just don't go high enough with enough level to put anything other than vague nose down there.

    If original masters were 24/96 digital or better then we could expect to see more above 20k, but a lack of 22k data isn't proof of 'poorly managed source material'. You'd need to look for the upsampling tell tales at higher frequencies for that, 44 and 48k noise bands for example and dips down to these spikes.

    The Keith Howard article is a good place to start.

  • Do you have a link to the Keith Howard article Si? The whole area seems quite interesting, and it might be prudent to learn a bit before spending more.
  • It's in print this issue of HIFI news.

    To be honest, it's the quality of recording and processing/mastering that count. Honesty and transparency in this process is for me just an indicator or potential quality in the material, hence my like of 2l.no and dislike of HDtracks.  I don't doubt that I probably can't tell 16/44 and 24/96 apart in an ABX. I'd like to think I can, but I'm a realist, i probably can't...

    Doesn't stop me buying them though...
  • Amen! :-D

  • To be honest, it's the quality of recording and processing/mastering that count. Honesty and transparency in this process is for me just an indicator or potential quality in the material, hence my like of 2l.no and dislike of HDtracks.  I don't doubt that I probably can't tell 16/44 and 24/96 apart in an ABX. I'd like to think I can, but I'm a realist, i probably can't...

    Doesn't stop me buying them though...
    Yup. I think I go along with most of that - especially with the recording/mastering quality remark.
Sign In or Register to comment.