So I went and bought myself a shiny new DAC (an Mdac), which even has a nice display showing the bit rate of the song playing etc. MDAC supports "24-bit/192kHz". Next I went to Itunes (10) and did an AIFF rip of the Bon Jovi Greatest hits CD and prepared to do an A/B comparison of the AIFF files playing from the computer via the DAC and the same CD playing in the CDP. While the A/B testing is still going on, I am quite shocked my CD only has "16 bit/44.100" resolution. Its not just the rip, even when I am playing the cd, the Mdac says "16 bit/44.100". What does this mean exactly? I thought buying CDs from the store meant I got high quality files, now it looks like I've been buying low quality files. Am I missing something here guys?
I am confused..
- Thread starter admin_exported
- Start date
PeterDs said:
If you buy a CD is usually a 16/44. Only few websites will let you buy master records versions at 24/96 or 24/192 (Linn for example).
> Am I missing something here guys?<
In a word, yes. CDs are produced to the 'Red book' standard which is 16bit, 44.1Khz sample rate. You may have a 24/192 capable DAC, but you'll need to download hi-rez material, not rip CDs, if you want to get 24/96 tracks. There's hardly any 24/192 material about.
In a word, yes. CDs are produced to the 'Red book' standard which is 16bit, 44.1Khz sample rate. You may have a 24/192 capable DAC, but you'll need to download hi-rez material, not rip CDs, if you want to get 24/96 tracks. There's hardly any 24/192 material about.
Thank you guys.
Now I feel like a fool, for buying all those cds...
Another stupid question; when I play back any high rez material via my Dac, then it should sound a lot better than the cds of the same music rght? difference like night and day or subtle?
One more! Where can I buy high rez versions of say Bon Jovi, Michael Buble, Mariah etc?
Now I feel like a fool, for buying all those cds...
Another stupid question; when I play back any high rez material via my Dac, then it should sound a lot better than the cds of the same music rght? difference like night and day or subtle?
One more! Where can I buy high rez versions of say Bon Jovi, Michael Buble, Mariah etc?
PeterDs said:Thank you guys.
Now I feel like a fool, for buying all those cds...
Another stupid question; when I play back any high rez material via my Dac, then it should sound a lot better than the cds of the same music rght? difference like night and day or subtle?
One more! Where can I buy high rez versions of say Bon Jovi, Michael Buble, Mariah etc?
Don't get yourself too much into hi-rez stuff...some people are able to hear the difference, some others not...it also depends a lot on your system. Enjoy your music...
PeterDs said:Thank you guys.
Now I feel like a fool, for buying all those cds...
Another stupid question; when I play back any high rez material via my Dac, then it should sound a lot better than the cds of the same music rght? difference like night and day or subtle?
One more! Where can I buy high rez versions of say Bon Jovi, Michael Buble, Mariah etc?
You probably can't, 24-bit is still quite rare. You shouldn't think of CD as being low quality either, it's as good as it gets for most stuff.
Did some internet searches.
FLAC is just a format right? a FLAC file could be just a rip from a CD? Or does it mean it is a high rez file (24/96 or more) for instance?
FLAC is just a format right? a FLAC file could be just a rip from a CD? Or does it mean it is a high rez file (24/96 or more) for instance?
PeterDs said:
FLAC is indeed a format. I have all my CDs ripped in FLAC and stored on an hard-disc (NAS). Again...don't get too obsessed by hugh-rez files...CDs are very good if are well recorded (this is the most important thing)
Pop/Rock hi-rez material is only really 'better' if it's been remastered to use a decent dynamic range, so much is slammed against the limiters that there's no benefit over CD.
Hi-rez is really benefiting classical with the likes of Linn Records releasing material which is definitely superior to CD, always assuming your streamerampspeakers aren't entry level.
Hi-rez is really benefiting classical with the likes of Linn Records releasing material which is definitely superior to CD, always assuming your streamerampspeakers aren't entry level.
amcluesent said:
Of course with some companies the only 'Entry Level' thing is the price, so something else not to get too hung up about!
My two systems:
1) "Vintage, nice, warm detailed " sound
Conrad Johnson PFR Pre
Conrad Johnson 2300MF Power
Paradigm studio 100 Reference speakers
Chord Carnival silverscreen+ Cobraplus interconnect
2) "lean and mean" sound
Naim XS
Neat Motive 2
Naca5 cables, Chord Cobra+ interconnect
Source: MacPro with Itunes 10/ AIFF rips from CDs, SBT, M-Dac
I think I should be able to tell between a normal and high rez file with these!
1) "Vintage, nice, warm detailed " sound
Conrad Johnson PFR Pre
Conrad Johnson 2300MF Power
Paradigm studio 100 Reference speakers
Chord Carnival silverscreen+ Cobraplus interconnect
2) "lean and mean" sound
Naim XS
Neat Motive 2
Naca5 cables, Chord Cobra+ interconnect
Source: MacPro with Itunes 10/ AIFF rips from CDs, SBT, M-Dac
I think I should be able to tell between a normal and high rez file with these!
i would forget all about hi-res, red book cd is more than good enough. the only reason i can see for hunting out hi-res recordings, is you might get a better master.
PeterDs said:
Yes, if there is any difference to hear.
Have a play with various ripping quality settings with iTunes. I use 256 VBR, but you could use Apple lossless or an mp3 codec in a selection of compression settings.
A lossless codec, as the name suggests, will be indistinguishable from the original CD and you may find that quality is audibly unchanged down to moderately compressed bitrates.
I use lossless for archving my music and as I have mentioned, 256/260 KbPS for carrying around.
PeterDs said:
Not necessarily. As mentioned previously its the quality of the recording/mastering that matters. Its like he SACD debate. Just because its on sacd doesn't mean its nailed on to sound fantastic although many of mine do some definitely don't. Take a look at the Linn catalogue there is plenty there only its not IMHO the sort of thing likely to appeal!
I think the OPs response was to answer any doubt as to the capability of his equipment and not about any problems with the format.
As has been mentioned, it would seem that differences heard on high res formats are largely down to mastering differences.
As has been mentioned, it would seem that differences heard on high res formats are largely down to mastering differences.
Just as a test I managed to get hold of some "SACD" rips, but when I converted the FLACs to AIFF or Apple lossless (XLD), then went to Itumes and right clicked on a file, and clicked get info it says "Bit rate 738 kbps Sample size 16 bit Sample rate 44.1 khz" Oh dear...
I checked my preferences in XLD; For both AIFF and Apple lossless (I tried both), my prefernces are sent to (for sample/bit rate) "Same as original".
I willl try to find more high rez files, just need to hear for myself.
I willl try to find more high rez files, just need to hear for myself.
if you are using itunes, it won't switch sample rate automatically. instead it makes you prat about. you have to exit itunes, open audio midi setup (applications -> utilities) and change the bit depth to 24 (you may as well leave it permanently on 24 as it will just pad a 16 bit file with zeros) and the sample rate to match the file, then open itunes again. you have to exit itunes and restart after any changes in audio midi, every time you make a change for the change to have any effect!
Do you mean I had to change the Audio input and output figuresin the Audio midi application BEFORE I added the sample high rez file I downloded to the Itunes library?
That would explain why i am still getting the same 16/44 info for all the files!
That would explain why i am still getting the same 16/44 info for all the files!
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram