 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
70.135.149.73
In Reply to: RE: RPi5 - the first month posted by E-Stat on December 27, 2023 at 11:43:37
...the same section of music. The "audio position" of the 44.1K/16 track shows 1 min 24 secs while the second image shows zero. Plus, the time runs of the two tracks are different. Then, the 44.1k/15 track shows 96K/24 on the side.
CD quality has around 96 dB of dynamic range while hirez can go to about 120 dB from a practical standpoint. Contrast that to analog tape or LP formats which typically struggle to get past 70 dB of dynamic range. There is no technical reason that a CD quality can't provide the dynamic range needed for uncompressed music playback.
Now, what the record companies and producers CHOOSE to do with respect to dynamic compression is a whole 'nother issue. If your two images do present a dynamic range difference between the two formats for the same recording, it is because they =wanted= to do that, not because it was due to technical limitations.
Follow Ups:
First of all, there aren't hundreds of remastered releases for that recent soundtrack. The time segment differences simply relate to adjusting the default view.
Hearing the difference between the master and the 44/16 version are profound. See my other response in thread for more on that.
I've got some really good CD content from labels like Telarc and Windham Hill. Just never as good as the best high sample rate 24 bit content. The world's engineers today really aren't fools as some suggest.
> > "The world's engineers today really aren't fools as some suggest."
No one said they or the producers were fools. They put out content that they think will sell -- mass market and audiophiles are two radically different audiences.
We have plenty of CD re-releases of the same album that vary widely in quality -- sometimes the newest "remaster" is the worst of the lot -- and all that happened without changing the recording format.
There are playback situations where too much dynamic range is an inferior listening experience -- for example in a car where the pianissimo sections vanish into the road, wind and engine noise.
That said, I still don't believe the two screencaps you posted show the exact same section of music even if they are from the same performance.
No one said they or the producers were fools
I reference the Estonian guy who challenged an inmate to...
see if you can hear the difference between high bit rate mp3, 16 bit audio and 24-96.
That's hilarious or truly sad for anyone to assert that lossy 44/16 is as good as it gets. Ask any recording engineer if they share that absurd belief see what they say. I met Jack Renner when I participated in the Telarc recording of ASO's Firebird . He told Dr. Stockham of Soundstream forget it if the good doctor was not able to increase the sample rate of his recorder above the CD standard. That's why the very first digital recordings were 50/16 and later ones in DSD. The 44/16 standard was fenced in from the outset with the limitations of the late 70s era 700 MB optical media available at the time.
I still don't believe the two screencaps you posted show the exact same section of music even if they are from the same performance.
You are welcome to create your own reality! While the original version runs a bit longer in the display, both start from the beginning of the track. Which in its uncompressed form can raise the hairs on your arm with the initial SLAMM! totally lost with the 44/16 version. If you have Tidal or Qobuz you can hear the latter version. You'll have to download the studio version from HDTracks.
View YouTube Video
I'll take your word that the screencaps are from the same section of the same track.
But you still seem to be missing the point that the CD version's more compressed rendering was an intentional editing choice made by the people who produced the CD. It was not =necessary= to compress it for the 44.1/16 format.
I'm not at home right now, but later this evening I have an experiment I plan to try with your track.
But you still seem to be missing the point that the CD version's more compressed rendering was an intentional editing choice made by the people who produced the CD.
Evidently, you haven't read this post in the thread.
I logged onto my Qobuz account and found both the CD quality and hirez versions of the Giacchino track you showed earlier. I captured the first 1 minute and 20 seconds of each version. The 44.1K version first, then followed by the 96K version on the right side of the image below. As you can see, they appear identical.
I ran some statistics on each of them in Adobe Audition. The quietest section of actual music occurs about 17 seconds into each track -- both are identical at about -34 dB from the 0 dB max. With CD's 96 dB dynamic range, this leaves 62 dB of range =below= the quietest section of music in the first minute and 20 seconds of this recording.
The only difference in dynamic range I was able to find occurred at the very obvious peaks -- the CD version peaks at -0.49 dB while the hirez version peaks at -0.38 dB. I'm not sure an extra tenth of a dB is going to add much to the startle effect. But, that is also not to say the hirez version won't have a bit more resolution, probably more due to the 24 bits versus 16 bits than from the higher sampling rate.
But this gets back to my original point on the images you posted -- what they did to your CD version was simply an artistic choice on the producer's or record company's part. In no way was it required by the CD quality file format. I've never said hirez can't be better than CD, but the example you posted has very little to do with the differences in file format and everything to do with the intentional choices made by producers and record companies.
to Zack.Note the new 44/16 version is the expanded version where a better choice was made. Years after the first take.
Edits: 12/28/23
-nt
learning that five years after getting that music and making those comparisons, Qobuz now has both and offers the extended version with new content!
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
