gfxgfx
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
logo
 
gfx gfx
gfx
680601 Posts in 27601 Topics by 4068 Members - Latest Member: Dae Lims March 29, 2024, 03:28:37 PM
*
gfx*HomeHelpSearchCalendarLoginRegistergfx
gfxgfx
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.       « previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 Go Down Print
Author Topic: SMiLE Sessions on hdtracks.com in 24 bit / 88.2 kHz  (Read 12080 times)
AlFall
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 58


View Profile
« on: May 22, 2012, 01:08:56 PM »

https://www.hdtracks.com/index.php?file=artistdetail&id=10078
Logged
AlFall
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 58


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: May 22, 2012, 01:10:14 PM »

Use promo code "smile15" to get 15 % off
Logged
runnersdialzero
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5143


I WILL NEVER GO TO SCHOOL


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: May 22, 2012, 01:12:29 PM »

Aren't these kids notorious for fucking these sets up, often times the downloads just being upsampled? Not that I'm gonna buy it, but yeah.
Logged

Tell me it's okay.
Tell me you still love me.
People make mistakes.
People make mistakes.
AlFall
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 58


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: May 22, 2012, 01:29:36 PM »

Discussion on the upsampling topic:

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/music/197454-nirvana-nevermind-24-96-remaster-hdtracks.html
Logged
GeorgeFellInHisHorn
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 133



View Profile
« Reply #4 on: May 22, 2012, 01:45:49 PM »

Very cool! Wish they had a WAV/AIFF option, FLAC has never quite rubbed me the right way. But i'm still considering...
Logged

runnersdialzero
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5143


I WILL NEVER GO TO SCHOOL


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: May 22, 2012, 02:20:39 PM »

Very cool! Wish they had a WAV/AIFF option, FLAC has never quite rubbed me the right way. But i'm still considering...

FLAC is so easy, I don't know why folks think it's some crude, unmanageable format. Any decent media player (i.e. not iTunes) comes with a plugin to play them, and hunting down a program like dBpoweramp that converts them to any format you could possibly want in mere seconds is pretty easy, too, all while retaining tags, filenames, etc. I've been dealing with FLAC files on a daily basis lately - editing, tagging, converting to and from with absolutely no problems. WAV is a huge waste of space.
« Last Edit: May 22, 2012, 02:23:37 PM by runnersdialzero » Logged

Tell me it's okay.
Tell me you still love me.
People make mistakes.
People make mistakes.
Myk Luhv
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1350


"...and I said, 'Oatmeal? Are you crazy?!'"


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: May 22, 2012, 02:24:47 PM »

Yeah, if this isn't upsampled -- news to me that HDtracks did that at all actually (does it affect all their releases?) -- I'd be definitely interested in picking it up...

edit: runners knows what's up Cool
Logged
runnersdialzero
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5143


I WILL NEVER GO TO SCHOOL


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: May 22, 2012, 02:39:27 PM »

Yeah, if this isn't upsampled -- news to me that HDtracks did that at all actually (does it affect all their releases?) -- I'd be definitely interested in picking it up...

edit: runners knows what's up Cool

I don't know if it's all their releases - one would think they'd have been shut down by now if that were the case. I just know I've read people talking about it on a few different sites that a specific release was indeed just upsampled and it wasn't the first.
Logged

Tell me it's okay.
Tell me you still love me.
People make mistakes.
People make mistakes.
The Shift
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Online Online

Gender: Male
Posts: 7427


Biding time


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: May 22, 2012, 04:04:33 PM »

Quote
Your search for the smile sessions   returned results
 
Featured Albums
 
No records matching your search were found.
Logged

“We live in divisive times.”
GeorgeFellInHisHorn
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 133



View Profile
« Reply #9 on: May 22, 2012, 04:30:03 PM »

Very cool! Wish they had a WAV/AIFF option, FLAC has never quite rubbed me the right way. But i'm still considering...

FLAC is so easy, I don't know why folks think it's some crude, unmanageable format. Any decent media player (i.e. not iTunes) comes with a plugin to play them, and hunting down a program like dBpoweramp that converts them to any format you could possibly want in mere seconds is pretty easy, too, all while retaining tags, filenames, etc. I've been dealing with FLAC files on a daily basis lately - editing, tagging, converting to and from with absolutely no problems. WAV is a huge waste of space.

It doesn't have anything to do with the manageability.  It's just something about the sound, there's just something weird to me, I can't put my finger on it.  It's just a personal opinion, not a stab at the format.  And for the right songs, WAV is definitely not a waste of space.
Logged

runnersdialzero
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5143


I WILL NEVER GO TO SCHOOL


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: May 22, 2012, 04:43:20 PM »

Eh? FLAC is a form of lossless compression, or at least it should be if you're doing it roight. In other words, a WAV of a song and a FLAC of a song should be 100% indistinguishable from one another. I don't mean that as in "lol people cant even hear what 128kbps mp3s take away, you snob", I mean literally, mathematically, they should be 100% indistinguishable from one another in terms of what comes out of the speakers and into your ears. Correct me if I'm wrong?
« Last Edit: May 22, 2012, 05:51:10 PM by runnersdialzero » Logged

Tell me it's okay.
Tell me you still love me.
People make mistakes.
People make mistakes.
?
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 534


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: May 22, 2012, 05:43:20 PM »

Correct me if I'm wrong?

You are not.
Logged
RadBooley
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 97


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: May 22, 2012, 05:50:45 PM »

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't really see how this is going to make much of a difference. We're talking about recordings from more than 45 years ago that were probably not treated terribly well over the years. How much more audio definition are you supposed to get out of them?
Logged
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10030



View Profile WWW
« Reply #13 on: May 22, 2012, 06:13:09 PM »

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't really see how this is going to make much of a difference. We're talking about recordings from more than 45 years ago that were probably not treated terribly well over the years. How much more audio definition are you supposed to get out of them?

It varies. But they can only sound better at higher resolutions (if they are mastered properly of course; by the time material gets to this level of "high rez", it's usually being mastered by the types who know how to wring the most fidelity out of the recordings). The question is what type of gear it takes and what types of ears it takes to hear a significant difference.

I've listened to some high-rez audio on modest to middle-of-the-road systems, and I think it sounds better but would probably sound even better with higher end gear that takes at least hundreds if not thousands to invest in.
Logged

THE BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE IS ON FACEBOOK!!! http://www.facebook.com/beachboysopinion - Check out the original "BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE" Blog - http://beachboysopinion.blogspot.com/
Awesoman
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1830


Disagreements? Work 'em out.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #14 on: May 22, 2012, 08:19:31 PM »

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't really see how this is going to make much of a difference. We're talking about recordings from more than 45 years ago that were probably not treated terribly well over the years. How much more audio definition are you supposed to get out of them?

It varies. But they can only sound better at higher resolutions (if they are mastered properly of course; by the time material gets to this level of "high rez", it's usually being mastered by the types who know how to wring the most fidelity out of the recordings). The question is what type of gear it takes and what types of ears it takes to hear a significant difference.

I've listened to some high-rez audio on modest to middle-of-the-road systems, and I think it sounds better but would probably sound even better with higher end gear that takes at least hundreds if not thousands to invest in.

What gear would you need to play these files anyway?  I don't believe you can burn them to CD without compressing the sound quality, and these things don't play on iPods and other MP3 players. 
Logged

And if you don't know where you're going
Any road will take you there
runnersdialzero
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5143


I WILL NEVER GO TO SCHOOL


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: May 22, 2012, 08:27:13 PM »

What gear would you need to play these files anyway? 

A computer! ^_^
Logged

Tell me it's okay.
Tell me you still love me.
People make mistakes.
People make mistakes.
Awesoman
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1830


Disagreements? Work 'em out.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #16 on: May 22, 2012, 09:40:15 PM »

What gear would you need to play these files anyway? 

A computer! ^_^

...zing!

Seriously though, I guess I am specifically talking about playing them on something other than a computer.  Like an iPod.  Don't think high-quality files are compatible with it. 
Logged

And if you don't know where you're going
Any road will take you there
Al Jardine: Pick Up Artist
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 298

I am an asexual walrus


View Profile WWW
« Reply #17 on: May 22, 2012, 09:48:58 PM »

What gear would you need to play these files anyway? 

A computer! ^_^

...zing!

Seriously though, I guess I am specifically talking about playing them on something other than a computer.  Like an iPod.  Don't think high-quality files are compatible with it. 

Convert them to Apple Lossless (m4a) or WMA with a free converter at 320 kbps. Seriously, there are so many converters out there it's insane.
Logged

Which song: Inappropriate relationship with sister-in-law

Which song: Gonna straight up bang you with "the wood".

Which song: Weather conditions make me horny

Which song: Lack of proper shoes leads to potential blood poisoning and death.

Which song: Who needs church? Let's do it on the couch.

Dennis: "Holy sh*t, Al, you're finally showing signs of developing facial hair!!!"
?
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 534


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: May 22, 2012, 10:23:54 PM »

What gear would you need to play these files anyway? 

A computer! ^_^

...zing!

Seriously though, I guess I am specifically talking about playing them on something other than a computer.  Like an iPod.  Don't think high-quality files are compatible with it. 

A Squeezebox would be your best bet.  They sound really nice.
Logged
jeffcdo
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 217



View Profile
« Reply #19 on: May 23, 2012, 05:49:19 AM »

You can convert FLAC flies to Apple Lossless for use in the iTunes world, they will play in iTunes or on your iPod but only at 16bit.  Squeezebox is an excellent option for playing high res files.  If you take a HD Tracks download and convert it to ALAC, the same file will play at 16bit via iTunes or 24bit via the Squeezebox.  It's great to have a high-res option available, I'm disappointed it's the 2 disc version and not the entire box.
Logged
mammy blue
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 252


View Profile
« Reply #20 on: May 23, 2012, 07:41:06 AM »

Has anybody had the chance yet to A/B this with the CD release and give us an idea of how much sonic improvement can be heard?
Logged
MaroonMike
Smiley Smile Newbie

Offline Offline

Posts: 7


View Profile
« Reply #21 on: May 23, 2012, 09:35:28 AM »

These appear to all be stereo (not mono) versions/mixes as well.
Logged
jeffcdo
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 217



View Profile
« Reply #22 on: May 23, 2012, 12:11:38 PM »

Regarding mono/stereo the HDtracks download is all the same as the 2 CD version (minus the bonus tracks).  I A/B'd a few tracks and the difference is really subtle, I hear it as very slightly richer sibilance. I wouldn't say this merits re-purchase.  Here are Spek graphs of Cabinessence...


http://jeffcdo.com/images/2012/cabin1.jpg


http://jeffcdo.com/images/2012/cabin2.jpg

As I understand it based on viewing other recordings, that band around 29 kHz is noise from the tape machine itself.  You can see there is definitely new information above 21 kHz so it's not simply upsampled.
« Last Edit: May 23, 2012, 12:14:00 PM by jeffcdo » Logged
mammy blue
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 252


View Profile
« Reply #23 on: May 23, 2012, 12:51:29 PM »

Thanks Jeff, I really appreciate your analysis. I'd love to just up and purchase this, but Paul McCartney has my wallet right now and I wish I had more to go around!
Logged
AlFall
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 58


View Profile
« Reply #24 on: May 23, 2012, 01:24:57 PM »

If you want to hear brief clips of Wonderful (mono) and Heroes and Villains (stereo) comparing the 16 bit CD with the 24 bit hdtracks, click here: http://98.131.169.2/SC
Logged
gfx
Pages: [1] 2 Go Up Print 
gfx
Jump to:  
gfx
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Page created in 0.866 seconds with 22 queries.
Helios Multi design by Bloc
gfx
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!