Dire Straits - Brother in Arms from HD Tracks

**bottlerocket** · 03-26-2012, 07:44 PM

Why the hard cutoff at 22Khz? This one looks suspect.

Click to enlarge

Click to enlarge

**Teresa** · 03-26-2012, 08:41 PM

"Brothers in Arms was one of the first albums to be directed at the CD market, and was a full digital recording (DDD) at a time when most popular music was recorded on analog equipment."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brothers_in_Arms_(Dire_Straits_album)

Depending on who you believe on the internet it was recorded on a Sony PCM 1630 at either 16/44.1k or 16/48k.

HDTracks should have chosen "Love Over Gold" instead as it is analog and sounds way better IMHO.

**bottlerocket** · 03-26-2012, 09:12 PM

I obviously did not know that. Why the hell HDtracks is selling it as 24/96 and 24/192 I can't understand. Time to get a replacement I guess.

**beetlemania** · 03-26-2012, 09:21 PM

1) F$%k! I'm downloading this even as I type!

2) "recorded on a Sony PCM 1630 at either 16/44.1k or 16/48k"
I don't get this. My vinyl copy of BIA is sublime . . . the sonics are superb. I considered it my best record on any format 'til recently when I decided that a 24/88 version of Ani DiFranco's Reprieve edges it out. If my vinyl copy is from a 16 bit digital recording, I'm going to have to say that I can't hear the diff btw CD and hi-rez!

Sigh . . . well, now I can just go back to CD resolution and save $$.

**AlainGr** · 03-26-2012, 09:48 PM

I talked to myself when I saw the spectrum... The sound is good though, but definitely not an original 24/192...

The lines indicating some frequencies over 20khz look as if they were "added" ???

**labjr** · 03-26-2012, 09:50 PM

I've known it was a digital recording pretty much since it came out. They were using that fact for a selling point back in the day. However, sample rates were pretty limited in 1984.

I'm surprised anyone would download this. I'm diasppointed the Chesky brothers would put that for sale on HDtracks. It proves they don't care about the quality of the stuff they sell. They can't claim ignorance on this one since it's common knowledge. Especially to anyone in the record business which they are.

**Thomas J** · 03-26-2012, 10:04 PM

but it sure sounds good, wow. The shakes in this business, hey?

**Thomas J** · 03-26-2012, 10:07 PM

to a 96K downsample of the 192, my system being out of commission for the moment with 192.

**wgscott** · 03-26-2012, 10:18 PM

"Why the hell HDtracks is selling it as 24/96 and 24/192 I can't understand."

P. T. Barnum said it best.

**Miska** · 03-27-2012, 02:23 AM

The lines indicating some frequencies over 20khz look as if they were "added" ???

The lines at 25k and 30k look like it has gone through analog. So my suspect is that it has been played back through something like the original recording equipment or other NOS/leaky DAC and then recorded back to digital at higher rate.

Vertical lines look like digital clipping in the original recording.

**bottlerocket** · 03-27-2012, 08:11 AM

Hopefully enough people will check here before buying.

**beetlemania** · 03-27-2012, 09:25 AM

I just started CA in December, and have only bought about 20 hi-rez albums so far. And they've all sounded good (some flat out sound outstanding). Checking the spectrograms in Audacity, they all appear to be genuine hi-rez. I've been quite happy.

'til now, I thought the reports of HDTracks' misdeeds were overblown on these threads. I figured it was just a handful of albums and the problems were all in the past.

Given the history and the visibility of faux hi-res albums from HDTracks, this strikes me as unforgivable because it demonstrates a lack of integrity. At this point, how can they distribute bogus material? I will sadly join the ranks of those boycotting HDTracks . . .

One silver lining for me is that I now have more evidence that CD resolution is actually pretty good (to my ears, my systems, etc). My vinyl version of BIA sounds superb and, from what I can discern, it must be derived from a 16/44 master. Wow! I've long thought that vinyl (and hi-res digital) was, on average, only slightly better than CD and this just cements the deal for me. I'll just go back to buying CDs and save some money.

**cfelliot** · 03-27-2012, 09:34 AM

Brothers in Arms was re-masterd in 2005 by Bob Ludwig of Gateway Masters. This was sold as a DVDA/CD with both a surround mix and 2 channel version. It was labeled as the 20th Anniversary Version.

The re-master was nominated for a Grammy that year.

If this is not that version, which I believe was remastered at 192k/24b, it is a rip off!

**labjr** · 03-27-2012, 10:06 AM

"If this is not that version, which I believe was remastered at 192k/24b, it is a rip off!"

I don't care which remaster it is. The original recording is 16 bit and early digital recording sucked.

**cfelliot** · 03-27-2012, 10:17 AM

Whatever..............

I just know this, I own both the original CD and the DVDA version. The DVDA in 2 channel(96/24) blows away the original CD!

**lastgoodbye** · 03-27-2012, 10:39 AM

Concurred. I have some CDs in my collection that were recorded well, with great dynamic range and little compression that rival a lot of my hi-res stuff. Most of the time, cds are just fine if not an excellent solution!

**Priaptor** · 03-27-2012, 11:10 AM

about every release and while I no longer listen to vinyl (my prior favorite), the XRCD latest release of this, if you don't mind the price, is quite excellent.

While I didn't download this, I unfortunately did download "Sailing to Philadelphia" an absolute nightmare compared to a "special edition" English version pre-release rebook CD I got. I was quite amazed at how one of the best redbooks I ever heard could be so destroyed in the HDT release.

I now download with care. Some stuff is excellent and others, well it has all been said before.

**bdiament** · 03-27-2012, 11:27 AM

**"...Depending on who you believe on the internet it was recorded on a Sony PCM 1630 at either 16/44.1k or 16/48k..."**

Perhaps I've just forgotten since I haven't used a 1630 in well over a decade but as a dedicated CD mastering device, I don't recall a 48k option. Again, perhaps I've just forgotten but as far as I recall at the moment, the Sony system was 16-bit, 44.1k.

It was improvable using the retrofit filters from Apogee, which were on the system I used at Atlantic as well as the systems I used after I left Atlantic to form BDA.

But if it was recorded to 1630, that would mean it was recorded direct to two-track. Were there no multitracks for this album? Or might it have been recorded to analog multitrack and mixed to 1630? This was not uncommon in those days.

Best regards,
Barry
www.soundkeeperrecordings.com
www.barrydiamentaudio.com

**Synfreak** · 03-27-2012, 12:04 PM

AFAIK, it was recorded digital onto a 24 track Sony machine and mixed to stereo to the 1630.

There was an article somewhere out in the internet-universe where a lot of the tehnique used for that album was recovered (SSL desk ...), but I couldn't locate it at the moment.

The '20th anniversary' edition is VERY limited and compressed in stereo, but the multitrack (5.1)remix is stunning.

For the stereo version, just listen to one of the first editions (Warner or Vertigo - different mastering!), which has stunning dynamic range, and just sounds really good (to my ears).

I will try to get hold of the announced SHM-SACD, which may be transfered from the analogue safety master tape - but as the multitracks have been recorded with 48 or 44,1 and 16 bit, I don't expect large improvements over the early CD editions.

Cheers
Harald

**latitude94941** · 03-27-2012, 12:38 PM

I believe the album was recorded on a Sony PCM-3324, which is 24 track 16/44 or 16/48. Multiple recorders can be synced together for 48 track.

Circa 2005, Chuck Ainley remixed this for DVD-A and SACD. He likes to mix analog and then transfer back to digital at high resolution. So, while not a high resolution recording, the mixed master could be charitably regarded as high resolution if one wanted to stretch it. While I don't have BIA, I do have the DVD-A of Sailing to Philadelphia which he did using this method, and it sounds very, very good. (One difference: the drum tracks of Sailing were recorded analog, while I believe BIA was recorded all digital).

I understand from comments here at CA that the HDtracks version of Sailing has not gotten positive reviews, but I can recommend the DVD-A.

**bdiament** · 03-27-2012, 12:58 PM

I think Chuck Ainley has done wonderful work on all of Mark Knopfler's solo albums, which to my ears, are among the best sounding pop records in my collection.

I just have the old Vertigo CD of "Brothers In Arms". I have a feeling there is much more to be heard on this album than that particular mastering allows.

Best regards,
Barry
www.soundkeeperrecordings.com
www.barrydiamentaudio.com

**The Computer Audiophile** · 03-27-2012, 01:03 PM

Hi Guys - Look for a response and information about the album from HDtracks in the next day or so.

**beetlemania** · 03-27-2012, 02:00 PM

less than a new policy wherein they check the validity of all their files *before* offering them for sale. This should have happened a long time ago when these issues first came to light. As a CA newbie, I figured these issues were ghosts of the past and were merely indicative of CA's infancy. It now appears that HDtracks is careless to the point of negligence. Using Audacity, even a bozo like me can make a reasonable check of a "hi res" file in just a couple of minutes; why cannot HDtracks do the same?

**Kimo** · 03-27-2012, 02:19 PM

I suppose that many releases could benefit from a new transfer. Also, I have noticed that when I up sample files from 24/44.1 to 24/96, I always end up preferring the latter. Not sure if this just a pleasant coloration or the result of pushing the filtering up.

**lmc** · 03-27-2012, 04:23 PM

Here's a link to an article on BIA that has som info on how it was recorded:

http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/may06/articles/classictracks_0506.htm

Clearly 16 bit ....

Thread: Dire Straits - Brother in Arms from HD Tracks

LinkBack

Thread Tools

Search Thread

Display