John Duncan said:
That brings up the interesting question of where the price should be set, so it gives value to the consumer, and reasonable profit to the provider? :?
-
Discs or streaming? How do you watch your favourite films and TV shows?
That brings up the interesting question of where the price should be set, so it gives value to the consumer, and reasonable profit to the provider? :?
JD and Cno, that's not the point with pricing. The point is that if the same master were to be used and if the compressed version sounds the same as the 24 bit version, then there is no need to sell the larger file. The fact that the files have been manipulated / differently mastered indicates to me Linn knows full well the mp3 would sound as good, but would make them less creamy profit.
Cno, your point that their tracks sound great is a perfectly fair one. It must be taken in the context that the mp3s also sound excellent, and apparently as good as the 24 bit.
Cno, your point that their tracks sound great is a perfectly fair one. It must be taken in the context that the mp3s also sound excellent, and apparently as good as the 24 bit.
It’s not too difficult to understand. If you have the right equipment to decode 24bit from Linn you will get the full ‘Monte’ 16bit is more compressed (constraints ) as is MP3 what is hard to understand about that Upgrade you equipment lads there are lots of hifi companies making good digital streamers. At least you now know proper 24bit sounds better than 16bit.
Now back to the orignal thread Loudness 🙂
Now back to the orignal thread Loudness 🙂
OK. After this latest response from Linn, what I'm getting so far is this...
When purchasing a Linn Recording, in order to procure the best quality of said recording one has to (a) Purchase the recording directly from the Linn Store and (b) Purchase the 24bit Studio Master version.
Having done so, one can then convert this 24bit FLAC file into 16bit FLAC or MP3 whilst maintaining the dynamic range of the original version (leaving aside the issue of compression artifacts, the audibilty of which is a questionable factor).
On the other hand, if one were to purchase either (a) A CD or download from a third party vendor or (b) Purchase a 16bit FLAC or MP3 directly from the Linn Store, then you are receiving an inferior (though still great sounding) product.
Given the above, I'd feel a little wary purchasing a Linn Records CD* in future.
*I purchase all my music on CD and convert to both FLAC and MP3 myself, for storage and portable use respectively.
When purchasing a Linn Recording, in order to procure the best quality of said recording one has to (a) Purchase the recording directly from the Linn Store and (b) Purchase the 24bit Studio Master version.
Having done so, one can then convert this 24bit FLAC file into 16bit FLAC or MP3 whilst maintaining the dynamic range of the original version (leaving aside the issue of compression artifacts, the audibilty of which is a questionable factor).
On the other hand, if one were to purchase either (a) A CD or download from a third party vendor or (b) Purchase a 16bit FLAC or MP3 directly from the Linn Store, then you are receiving an inferior (though still great sounding) product.
Given the above, I'd feel a little wary purchasing a Linn Records CD* in future.
*I purchase all my music on CD and convert to both FLAC and MP3 myself, for storage and portable use respectively.
chebby
Well-known member
- Jun 2, 2008
- 1,257
- 34
- 19,220
Yes, but your signature system sort of shows which mast your Kolours are Knailed to 🙂 Are you completely impartial regarding all things Linn?Mirren Boy said:
(And it's 'full monty'.)
Mirren Boy said:
The jury is still out it seems.
Mirren Boy said:
Isn't the thread still dealing with 'loudness'? I thought Linn were being asked why - at least - some of their MP3 downloads have added 'loudness' whilst their 24 bit downloads don't.
BenLaw said:
The point about pricing is a spin off area, as it relates to whether 24 Bit is worth the premium......and whether there is a difference between MP3 and 24 Bit is far from conclusively decided.
BenLaw said:
JD makes a good point about larger files taking up more storage space, however, it still doesn't address the size of the price difference between 24bit and 16bit downloads nor the fact they're more expensive than a CD purchase.
Upon completing a project it can now be uploaded onto the internet for the consumer to purchase via a storefront website (as Linn and other companies/individuals are doing).
No further processing (or mastering) to produce 16bit files, no CD pressing plant, no printing booklets.
Just one FLAC file and one JPEG/PDF file uploaded onto a website, the hosting and maintaining of which would cost less than the above (as many High Street retailers are discovering).
6th.replicant
Well-known member
- Oct 26, 2007
- 294
- 0
- 18,890
Irrespective of whether they're your cuppa assam or not, Muse's latest costs £11.99 as a 24/96 and Massive Attack's Blue Lines remaster costs £14.99 as a $12 for 24/96s and $16 for 24/192s.
Time for Linn to wake-up and smell the Blue Mountain?
Time for Linn to wake-up and smell the Blue Mountain?
CnoEvil said:
Yes, new technologies often come with a premium price tag attached during early adoption. But in this instance I don't think that's an apt analogy.
For example, converting your home/business to utilise solar energy requires a large initial cost, but your future energy expenditure is then reduced.
Having replaced ones CD Player for an expensive Linn streaming device, why shouldn't you then expect to pay less for each new album purchase, especially in light of the reduced cost of delivering the product from the mixing desk to the end consumer?
And besides, High Resolution Audio Playback is not "new-fangled". Remember SACD and DVD-Audio? Being able to distribute 24bit audio via download should have made it more affordable, not more expensive.
People still seem to believe that 24 bit is superior for playback over 16 bit. :?
This thread (mainly Steves efforts) has already reconfirmed that 24 bit offers no real audible benefit over 16 bit. The answer is to offer better mastered music at CD quality for download and at a price below the physical medium, to include any artwork and sleeve notes. This would be the standard and then people could opt to download cheaper lossy formats sans artwork for more portable use.
That way, you get what you pay for, rather than seen off.
By all means a 24 bit 'master' could be sold, but it would offer nothing over 16 bit and should not cost disproportionately more. Storage and bandwidth costs should be the only premium on price and if JDs figures for the Amazon streaming and downloading service are correct, then even at a factor of ten, the extra costs for 24 bit would be miniscule.
This thread (mainly Steves efforts) has already reconfirmed that 24 bit offers no real audible benefit over 16 bit. The answer is to offer better mastered music at CD quality for download and at a price below the physical medium, to include any artwork and sleeve notes. This would be the standard and then people could opt to download cheaper lossy formats sans artwork for more portable use.
That way, you get what you pay for, rather than seen off.
By all means a 24 bit 'master' could be sold, but it would offer nothing over 16 bit and should not cost disproportionately more. Storage and bandwidth costs should be the only premium on price and if JDs figures for the Amazon streaming and downloading service are correct, then even at a factor of ten, the extra costs for 24 bit would be miniscule.
AL13N said:
Your point is fair, but if you go out to the "man in the street", 24 bit is still far from mainstream.....certainly where I'm from anyway.
Particularly in the AV area, technology bursts onto the scene, and those wanting to be the first to have it, pay a premium.....then wait a while, and the price plummets.
I'm all too well aware of green energy, where it often doesn't give the promised savings. I put in solar panels on the promise of 50% grant, which I subsequently didn't get, as the fund ran out of money. This project only had sensible payback with the grant.
I know of people who have put in geothermal systems, where the cost of the electric pump made the whole thing less economical than they were led to believe; and likewise with windmills for generating power, where the payback, was the life of the windmill.
There is also the fact that the fuel for wood pellet boilers where I live, has gone up from £113/T to £180/T, making it less enticing.....ie. nothing is as straight forward as it seems.
The price of 24 bit is simple economics ie, Supply and Demand...and as I said, until it is more readily available, I expect prices to remain high.
If I sound a bit preachy, I apologize, as I don't mean to.
Cno
6th.replicant
Well-known member
- Oct 26, 2007
- 294
- 0
- 18,890
Overdose said:6th.replicant said:
Very apt, I like it!
Another very expensive disappointment.
Ah, but not "expensive" if 'imported' in chums' hand luggage and never a "disappointment" if made strong - as, umm, Jah intended
CnoEvil said:
why don't you finally take up Steve's challenge then? you've got nice and shiny Linn's 24bit recordings. rip one into 320kbps mp3 and ask someone to play them for you. then you'll know the difference for sure (or that there's no difference at all). it's as simple as that.
"The price of 24 bit is simple economics ie, Supply and Demand...and as I said, until it is more readily available, I expect prices to remain high"..
Given what Steve has highlighted for us, the demand amongst people exposed to his info should now be a trickle. Unless of course you want the different mix that the 24bit downloads appear to be.
Still no word on all this from WHF then? Perhaps all the knowledgeable people are on Xmas shopping leave. :O
Given what Steve has highlighted for us, the demand amongst people exposed to his info should now be a trickle. Unless of course you want the different mix that the 24bit downloads appear to be.
Still no word on all this from WHF then? Perhaps all the knowledgeable people are on Xmas shopping leave. :O
CnoEvil said:
I don't think the usual supply and demand economics apply to digital downloads (supply being almost limitless). High res is more expensive, because it's marketed as a premium product in the same way that 24 carat gold is more expensive than 18 carat, only it isnt (high res being premium).
BTW. Photovoltaics are getting quite efficient at the moment. That's your best bet unless you have water running through your property, then water turbines offer excellent return. Ground source heat pumps are also quite good.
chebby said:
The response from Linn is quite clear that’s what I have wrote it’s easey to understand if you want to understand it.
I have owned Arcam –Cyrus –Niam all great hifi, whatever sounds best to the ears with a said budget. Just now it happens to be Linn for me not for everyone but for me. Anyone with a half decent pair of ears knows Linn own 24bit recording have a quality about them. Finally if you stop wripping the post I made into section and read it as it is meant a whole you will see I recomeded streamers from all different hifi makers.
The jury is only out in streamers if you don’t have one. Streamers is the future just like the car once was. Don’t worry you will catch on one day.
oldric_naubhoff said:
I have said before, and I will say again:
1. Even with Steve's kind instructions, i still have no idea.....I am far more inept with these things than people realize (true technopbobe). Though Oldric, if you find yourself in NI, feel free to call in and walk me through it.
2. I am delighted that Steve has taken up the cause, and will let this all play out to see where it ends......from the back seat..
3. As it stands atm, my different versions sound different, and if after Steve's efforts, MP3 sounds (to me) like 24 bit, I will be more than pleased. Also, IMO. though I can hear a difference between 16 bit and 24 bit (as Linn has mastered them), I don't think it's worth the current premium (£8 extra)
Overdose said:
I agree, if you are talking downloads in general, but the number of companies suppling 24 bit, are much more limited (though getting bigger), and certainly the material on 24 bit is limited (though getting bigger). It's still rare enough to command a premium (imo)
relocated said:
What hifi is a magazine for reviewing equipment and in a smaller scale music and movies that play on the reviewed equipment. It’s not a magazine with investigative journalism into hifi for those who use computers and can’t grasp a 16 bit recording to a proper 24bit recording.
If you read the magazine you will have read positive 24bit recordings being used on equipment being reviewed along with the same track on 16bit. In case you missed that particular copy. What hifi heard the difference. Like all good audiophiles do by the ears not measured graphs
relocated said:
It will be interesting to see if this will cause a "Starbucks Style" climb down, prompted by public pressure.....but somehow I doubt it, in the very short term. Compared to the music market overall, hi-rez must only make up a tiny percentage, so not enough to break the bank, so to speak.
Putting the technical arguments about 16Bit / 24Bit a side for a minute, the most important issue is stopping the loudness wars.
The response from the bloke who said he created two masters (24Bit / CD version) does demonstrate how Record Labels could release two versions a "HD / unlimited" version and a "normal" (compressed) version.
As downloads are the future, if the term "24Bit" is a way of differentiating the “Unlimited / uncompressed” version in the market place, then so be it. Whether it is technically correct, doesn’t matter, as it’s already established in the market place and in peoples mind as sounding better.
We just need to this to happen for mainstream music, which is what my petition is about – Now with almost 1500 signatures (but needs loads more).
Just a personal opinion - Comparing the dynamic range of one album to another by a different artist and then using that data to rate sound quality is pointless, as surely it would all depend on the individual music piece. If it naturally stays within a certain level without huge swings then, it’s not going to have a large dynamic range. I guess a trained eye and ear looking at the sound spectrum graphs is going to tell you more, than just a number.
The response from the bloke who said he created two masters (24Bit / CD version) does demonstrate how Record Labels could release two versions a "HD / unlimited" version and a "normal" (compressed) version.
As downloads are the future, if the term "24Bit" is a way of differentiating the “Unlimited / uncompressed” version in the market place, then so be it. Whether it is technically correct, doesn’t matter, as it’s already established in the market place and in peoples mind as sounding better.
We just need to this to happen for mainstream music, which is what my petition is about – Now with almost 1500 signatures (but needs loads more).
Just a personal opinion - Comparing the dynamic range of one album to another by a different artist and then using that data to rate sound quality is pointless, as surely it would all depend on the individual music piece. If it naturally stays within a certain level without huge swings then, it’s not going to have a large dynamic range. I guess a trained eye and ear looking at the sound spectrum graphs is going to tell you more, than just a number.
Mirren Boy said:
If the material used for comparison was of the quality reviewed on this thread, then I'm not suprised there were differences, as the differences would appear to have been manufactured.
And as for your last statement. This thread amongst many other sources of information, show that what is audible is measurable, but not all that is measurable is audible. The graphs (waveforms) posted by Steve, illustrate this perfectly.
"Like all good audiophiles...." :roll:
Further info from the Hoffman forum, but predating this one as a bit of a well known issue (in as much as the marketing of hi-res). Second or third post in highlights the problem going back as far as the early 2000s for SACD and DVD-A.
http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/hd-download-debacle-investigation-published-on-hfn-rr-june-2011.250275/
http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/hd-download-debacle-investigation-published-on-hfn-rr-june-2011.250275/
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Question Digital audio output hdmi
- Started by cookiemonsteruk
- Replies: 4
-
-
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram