Jump to content

hdlistener

  • Posts

    29
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Country

    United States

Retained

  • Member Title
    Newbie
  1. I know the MoFi SACDs sound good compared to the redbook versions, but I would be really surprised if you A/B'd the HDTracks version of this album with the MoFi and found you preferred the overall sound of the MoFi.
  2. I think the Mofi of Toulouse Street is lifeless, as are some other SACDs I've purchased by them lately. DR might be better on the SACDs but overall the HD downloads are mastered much better, IMO.
  3. There are parts that sound muffled to me as well, although they've always sounded that way, for instance the vocals on Teach Your Children.
  4. I've read these were done on the same machine that did the Eagles and Joni Michell transfers, which means they're 18-bit, not 24-bit at 192.
  5. I've been following this issue closely, hoping that the zero-padding issue for the LOTC 24-192 was a result of Grundman's equipment not being able to master higher than 18 bits. I purchased both the 192 and 96 versions, and I think the 192 might be a bit better, not worse. I wouldn't say the 96 is better, which means it's possible both files are really just 16-bit, as I was hoping the 96 would be truly 24-bit (but doesn't seem to be). However, the HDTracks LOTC still sounds better than the redbook IMO, at either resolution. Most of her classic period albums on HDTracks sound quite good. Just wish what I think is her best one was mastered properly, with the right bit depth resolution.
  6. HiResSteve, have you ever tried testing the 24-192 version? I wonder if the method of testing you did on the 24-96 would indicate there are wasted on the 192.
  7. You're correct that HDTracks doesn't do the transfers themselves, but they are aware that they have to pay the record companies for each license purchased for transfers made at different sample rates. I believe they tell the public all they know about each release, which generally isn't much, unfortunately.
  8. Thanks for explaining further, I appreciate the information. I have been told that each version (96k & 192k) is a separate capture for every title, as there is a separate license purchased by HDTracks for each capture of a title. Therefore it's very unlikely the 96k version of LOTC is a downsample, but was actually captured as true 24/96. Can anyone here who owns the 96k version of LOTC see if those files show any obvious zero-padding?
  9. Hi. How do you know the LOTC is 16- and not 18-bit? Do you know for sure if the 96k version is truly 24-bit? Thanks!
  10. I've heard from a source who is knowledgeable about this (but prefers not to be named) that LOTC was likely mastered by Bernie Grundman, which if true, could explain why a false 24-bit reading is being detected on this release from HDTracks. If it's true that Grundman's equipment is only capable of 18-bit mastering, as has been claimed by some regarding his work on the Eagles remasters, this would make sense regarding LOTC. This would also explain why replacement files have never been offered by HDTracks for this release. Speculation, but logical. I've read elsewhere that the Eagles HDTracks releases at 96k are truly 24-bit, and have also read that LOTC is truly 24-bit at 96k, so this would further lead me to believe LOTC is actually 18-bit at 192k, like the Eagles releases are.
  11. Thanks for your reply David, much appreciated. I'll check these out myself, as I'm a big fan of their music. I wonder how the debut album sounds compared to the recent Hoffman remaster in SACD? Also curious where someone who posted above thinks they'll be buying this collection in HD if not from HDTracks.
  12. Hoping someone here has already taken the plunge with the new HDTracks WB America collection... Please tell us what you think of this set if you have it and have listened to it. Thank you
  13. foobar2000 1.2.9 / Dynamic Range Meter 1.1.1 log date: 2013-11-27 10:32:42 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Analyzed: Crosby, Stills & Nash / Crosby, Stills & Nash -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DR Peak RMS Duration Track -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DR8 -0.20 dB -10.48 dB 7:23 01-Suite: Judy Blue Eyes DR8 -0.20 dB -9.90 dB 2:38 02-Marrakesh Express DR10 -0.20 dB -13.74 dB 4:39 03-Guinevere DR11 -0.20 dB -12.71 dB 2:45 04-You Don't Have To Cry DR9 -0.20 dB -10.39 dB 2:58 05-Pre-Road Downs DR7 -0.20 dB -9.51 dB 5:28 06-Wooden Ships DR11 -0.20 dB -15.64 dB 2:38 07-Lady Of The Island DR10 -0.20 dB -12.91 dB 2:41 08-Helplessly Hoping DR6 -0.20 dB -7.56 dB 4:19 09-Long Time Gone DR8 -0.20 dB -9.35 dB 5:06 10-49 Bye-Byes -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Number of tracks: 10 Official DR value: DR9 Samplerate: 192000 Hz Channels: 2 Bits per sample: 24 Bitrate: 5237 kbps Codec: FLAC ================================================================================ Pretty much the same as the 24/96 version with regard to DR, with a slight improvement on two tracks. Still, this one sounds much better to me...
  14. I have Audacity, but don't know how to use it to measure DR. If anyone here can offer assistance with that I'll be happy to check the files and report back.
×
×
  • Create New...