High res music question

vintage 5.0

vintage 5.0
Subscriber
I want to down load some good music and pay for just the high res down load. What is a good site. I do not want to pay a monthly fee to stream I just want to download.
 
You may not find the music you want all in one site so keep open to several. HD tracks is probably the one I use most but it is far from a complete selection.

Sometimes high Def music can be downloaded from artists own sites or labels can have their own too.

Mostly with hi def you'll see "album only" so not able to download individual songs.

With HD Tracks I find music I'm interested in, put it in the cart and wait for their 20% off sales and buy and download then in whatever resolution I want, usually 24/96 flac.
 
I agree with @Alobar on HD Tracks.com

I use that site, Acoustic Sounds, Linn Records, the artists website and the label websites.

I also ripped all my CD's into FLAC lossless format plus I still buy CD's from time to time and do the same with those.
 
There's a bit more to do to make it all work but find some music to download, then we can talk about how a digital system can work.
 
I am in my mid 50s. So I am not really up on computers. The good thing is my son who is 25 builds them since he was like 10. He also installs cameras and alarms all over our city. He even made me a good computer jack in the wall behind my main system. He is going to do it for my other two as well. He got me on line and gave me the site I need to run the music on. He has all that covered I just wondered what was a good source to get the music from. He even built a really cool computer in a old Sansui TU999 case. It looks just like the tuner and lights up but is the computer that is hooked to our TV for net flicks.
 
Basically a computer to store your music files, some software to manage your music, a digital to analog converter and a bit of cabling is all you really need.

It's not hard but some of the terms may be a bit confusing to those who haven't delved into a digital solution yet. I know I was initially confused. LOL

But man, it is worth it. High resolution music, even CD quality ripped files, impart a definition and sound quality that's hard to recreate with other media over and over and over again.

Here is a link to a music server that works well. I built my own and I've NEVER built a computer before.

https://www.computeraudiophile.com/...ter-audiophile-pocket-server-c-a-p-s-v3-zuma/

I'm sure your son, with his experience, could build a server for you.
 
Yamaki do you then down load all of your own music files. Do you think using like Tidal is a good way to do it. I know they have some master recordings. Just curious.
 
Yes, I download files I have purchased online. Almost all of the online high resolution music sellers have a downloader tool you put on your PC. Once you make an online purchase, it pops up and you select where you want to download the files to on your computer.

Tidal standard streaming is 320 kbps, the highest MP3 spec. Tidal "HiFi" streams at standard CD spec, 16 bit / 44.1 kHz spec. Tidal is a good way to find new music you'd be interested in. I don't use Tidal but I believe they have a "store" for downloads. I don't know what resolution the music is but I do know you can get either mp3 or FLAC codecs. I looked at Tidal briefly tonight and see they sell digital FLAC albums for about $18. That would be a competitive price but I believe the downloads are 16 bit / 44.1 kHz spec'd FLAC and not the 24 bit/96 or up kHz spec'd files available for the same price at other sites, such as HD Tracks.

I could not find any info on "master recording" specs on Tidal.
 
Yes, I download files I have purchased online. Almost all of the online high resolution music sellers have a downloader tool you put on your PC. Once you make an online purchase, it pops up and you select where you want to download the files to on your computer.

Tidal standard streaming is 320 kbps, the highest MP3 spec. Tidal "HiFi" streams at standard CD spec, 16 bit / 44.1 kHz spec. Tidal is a good way to find new music you'd be interested in. I don't use Tidal but I believe they have a "store" for downloads. I don't know what resolution the music is but I do know you can get either mp3 or FLAC codecs. I looked at Tidal briefly tonight and see they sell digital FLAC albums for about $18. That would be a competitive price but I believe the downloads are 16 bit / 44.1 kHz spec'd FLAC and not the 24 bit/96 or up kHz spec'd files available for the same price at other sites, such as HD Tracks.

I could not find any info on "master recording" specs on Tidal.
Master recording is MQA, the first level of "unfolding " comes via software with tidal Hi fi subscription. To get more unfolding you need a dac that is MQA compliant.
 
That I did not know. Thanks for the info, @Alobar,

So Tidal Master Recordings can be streamed up to 24 bit/96kHz, which is good resolution, as long as the DAC is MQA compliant. Or you have desktop software that will "unfold" the codec shell that encases the MQA portion of the file.

Might be easier with 24/96 FLAC and a good DAC if you don't want to rely on the current MQA partner offerings for hardware of software.
 
So if my dac will do it and I think it will. I have a couple PS Audio Nu wave dacs I could just pay the price and steam the his res from Tidal. I do not really need to own them all but would like to listen.
 
Yes! For $20 a month you can stream in high rez from tidal.

I looked at the nu wave dac and didn't see anywhere that it said MQA compliant so you may need a new dac to fully unfold the Tidal files. I believe a MQA dac will have some sort of light indicator that tells the listener it is playing an MQA file.

As for the software from tidal, it comes with the free player that is downloaded from them. Seems like if you paid for the hifi service there is a indicator, but this doesn't fully unfold the file.

I know, it's confusing! how much better sq the MQA dac adds I don't know.
 
If it turns out your PS Audio dac isn't MQA compliant I think instead of looking for one that is i would look into this. . https://www.qobuz.com/gb-en/discover
Not sure if it's available in the US yet but they have announced it will. They offer high resolution streaming without MQA and they also have a download store so if you want to download what you hear it's instantly available in high resolution flac.

I understand that streaming hi rez without MQA isn't that much more bandwidth but if you have a very limited data plan then MQA may be a better choice,
 
If I do not do MQA what is the rate I can stream at.

I think that all depends on the source. If it is tidal, I think without MQA but with the HiFi ($20 a month) plan you can get CD quality from it (16/44.1)

This is a interesting read. https://www.linn.co.uk/blog/mqa-is-bad-for-music I am not sure I am sold on the MQA. I just want to stream master recordings and the NU Wave will allow me to do that at 192. It also has a class A power supply. I think it will do what I need it to do welk=l.

There is a LOT written about MQA, both praise and scorn. The issues with MQA (as to what I read, I have no actual experience with it) is that it is a lossy format. I take that to mean when it is uncompressed it wont be the same as the original file. Others claim to hear an audible watermark on at least some of the MQA masters. Others (and Iam one of them) feels that this is a solution to a problem that no longer exists due to increased data transfer rates, and bandwidth that far exceeds what we had when MQA was first conceptualized. Others don't want another company with its hand out taking more royalties (both from the music industry and the DAC mfgs who have to pay Meridian for the rights to the MQA tech in their DAC.

Me not being much of a streamer, but more of a collector of music, I wouldn't ever be in the position of wanting a MQA anything. That said, I may try Qobuz when it comes out in the states (if it hasn't already) as I like the idea of streaming for music discovery purposes and the ease to being able to own that music simply by downloading it from them is appealing.
 
This is a interesting read. https://www.linn.co.uk/blog/mqa-is-bad-for-music I am not sure I am sold on the MQA. I just want to stream master recordings and the NU Wave will allow me to do that at 192. It also has a class A power supply. I think it will do what I need it to do welk=l.

MQA is an attempt to insert patented technology into the music making process, so that Merdian gets a check for every piece of music sold.

Currently there is NO objective evidence that a human being can hear the difference between standard CD quality music and hi-res music.

The other things to watch out for with these hi-res music outfits is the record labels themselves. These labels are just resellers. The record label provides them with hi-res files that they fingerprint and sell. They don't do any mixing or mastering. HDtracks used to sell a number of Phil Collins albums from the 80s (No Jacket Required and a few other ones) that were upsampled to 24/192. because the album was originally digitally recorded in 16/44.1. HDtracks did the right thing and yanked the album and refunded everyone their money. It wasn't their fault. It was the record label. They did the same thing with Dire Straits album "Brothers in Arms." also recorded in 16/44.1 (or perhaps 16/48). In that case the recording engineer that was in the studio came forward when he saw them in HDtracks and said he knows for a fact that those digital masters are only CD Quality.

If you want to get a sonicly superior experience, I would recommend seeking out old non-remastered CDs that were made prior to the loudness war, that still have the albums full dynamic range. That will give you a better listening experience that hi-res and it's dubious claims.

As a side note, there are unique masters that are only available in hi-res and MQA. These releases may be subjectively superior to the CD release. But they're completely remastered, so it's impossible to objectively compare them to the CD release. The two that I know of are Green Day's American Idiot and 21st Century Breakdown. Both albums were remastered in 2012 by Ted Jensen. He lowered the loudness on the album and removed ALL clipping. The album has more dynamic range than the CD release, and is ONLY available in hi-res on HDtracks. The drums on these album sound way better than the CD releases from the 2000s.
 
Here’s an article that discusses an attempt by the recording industry to establish voluntary standards regarding what is meant by “Hi-Res Music”: https://www.soundandvision.com/cont...w-guidelines-hi-res-music#UssXpmATMcGWkGz0.97

Ripping CDs does not magically convert them to "hi-res". Garbage-in / garbage-out.

I just posted my 2 cents regarding hi-res (including the relevance of genre) in a parallel thread: Blu-Ray audio

There are several approaches to hi-res playback. You do NOT need a music server, or external DAC. There are universal players (E.g., Oppo UDP-205, BDP-105, BDP-95) that include "audiophile-grade" DACs and analog circuitry, and provide the convenience of dropping a disc (e.g., SACD, Blu-ray) into the tray and hitting the PLAY button - and additionally provide an easy way to play hi-res downloads.

https://www.hraudio.net/ provides a list of some - but certainly not all - hi-res recordings.

There are several hi-res download sites. I only have experience with HDTracks: http://www.hdtracks.com/ (Last time I checked, HDTracks only offers stereo, NOT multi-channel downloads.)

Other hi-res download sites I'm aware of (some offer stereo and multi-channel downloads):


Hi-def audio/video (Blu-ray, Ultra HD Blu-ray) is relevant for opera, ballet, and a growing number of classical concerts.

Amazon sells SACD, Pure Audio Blu-ray, Blu-ray, and Ultra HD Blu-ray discs. These hi-res discs typically offer stereo and multi-channel.
 
Last edited:
MQA is an attempt to insert patented technology into the music making process, so that Merdian gets a check for every piece of music sold.
Yup. Pretty much like Sony and Phillips did with $ACD. ....next.
The other things to watch out for with these hi-res music outfits is the record labels themselves. These labels are just resellers. The record label provides them with hi-res files that they fingerprint and sell.
Finger-pointing is as finger pointing does. Think back just a moment about the conventional revenue chain... as to whom had/has the most opportunity to gain by up-sampling current redbook inventory. With no provenance clearing house, it was/is an immediate boon for the distributors to 'bit-bucket' files; the consumers and labels were still "asleep" and were had.

Things are staggeringly straitening up, but there's no denying the historical and lucrative caché of dirty deeds done on the dirt cheap; upon an eager audiophile audience.

Where the Hell was/IS our 'Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval'!? Wild West film at 11:15 for one and all number crazed consumers. Pass the whiskey. LOL
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom