+- Devialet Chat (https://devialetchat.com)
+-- Forum: Devialet Chat (https://devialetchat.com/Forum-Devialet-Chat)
+--- Forum: Tweaker's Corner (https://devialetchat.com/Forum-Tweaker-s-Corner)
+--- Thread: The HD-Audio Challenge II (/Thread-The-HD-Audio-Challenge-II)
RE: The HD-Audio Challenge II - David A - 14-May-2020
I don't know if I'm confident that wide bandwidth makes a difference or not, I do think it can, but I do believe that mastering makes a difference. The problem is we've really got no way of telling whether a high res version of an album comes from a different master or if it's an upscaled version of a low resolution master. The original SACD of Norah Jones' "Come Away With Me" apparently used a DSD conversion of the CD master for the SACD layer so there was no audible difference between the layers. I've heard that that SACD has since been reissued with an actual high res mastering for the SACD layer.
What I can say is that if I have a choice between buying a high res download and a 44.1/16 download, I will buy the high res version because of the possibility that it will come from a better quality mastering. I may be wasting money in some or a lot of cases but I don't get the opportunity to compare both before buying and if it's music I like, then I'd rather have it in the best possible version and I've yet to come across a high res version that I thought sounded worse than 44.1/16.
I remember reading a comment by Michael Lavorgna some years ago on Audiostream that what he wanted wasn't high res versions, what he wanted was versions at the original resolution of the recording, whatever that was. I agree with that sentiment, I'd rather have something as close as possible to the original recording/master as possible. Failing that it would be nice to be told whether the 44.1/16 version of an album and the high res version are simply different resolution transfers of the same master or actually derived from different masters.
RE: The HD-Audio Challenge II - Confused - 19-Jul-2020
I happened to stumble across this today, a YouTube clip of the "Slide" track mentioned by David A. It is not exactly pleasant to listen to, but the "in your ear" intermodulation effect is interesting. (and captured nicely by a low bit rate YouTube clip)
https://youtu.be/fH3nXdRZtbM?list=OLAK5uy_lnbXW-Pc0Q0esqrhVHBaeJ8qCn5p2SmEA
RE: The HD-Audio Challenge II - David A - 19-Jul-2020
(19-Jul-2020, 11:46)Confused Wrote: I happened to stumble across this today, a YouTube clip of the "Slide" track mentioned by David A. It is not exactly pleasant to listen to, but the "in your ear" intermodulation effect is interesting. (and captured nicely by a low bit rate YouTube clip)
https://youtu.be/fH3nXdRZtbM?list=OLAK5uy_lnbXW-Pc0Q0esqrhVHBaeJ8qCn5p2SmEA
It is available on Tidal as a 44.1/16 stream on the album "Our Lady of Late"..
In her earlier recordings such as this one Meredith Monk explored a number of "interesting" techniques besides this intermodulation effect, including the African "click singing" technique originally heard by most of us old enough to remember on Miriam Makeba's recordings, and also overtone singing. I think if you want to find an artist who has explored what can be achieved with the voice, either a single voice or a group of voices, Monk is someone you should listen to but the vocal sounds on some material, especially in her earlier recordings, are not always pleasant and her musical style is definitely rooted in the avant grade classical traditions of the last half of the 20th century which is also not to everyone's taste. I like her music but I don't play it often and I play her later music more often than I play her earlier music such as this album.