+48V
hi-fi or die
I've nothing left to say other than, from my shoes, you really don't know what you're missing.
Fair enough.I just prefer better when it is available.
What makes you pick a particular Music format?
- Thread starter Condorsat
- Start date
I've nothing left to say other than, from my shoes, you really don't know what you're missing.
JoeESP9
ESL's & tubes since 83
Lossy is lossy. Throwing away part of the music IMO/E rules out considering any such recordings as HQ. Do higher bitrate files sound better than lower bitrate ones? Well duh, of course they do. Does that make them HQ (high quality)? IMO/E the answer to that is no.
Better than CD quality is what usually is classified as HQ. Any file using lossy compression is of lower intrinsic quality than the original.
Nightwisher
Farer In The Goldilocks Zone
The official term is "Hi-Res". Even has a nice little logo now that there's formal support behind it. (Just as a side note, Hi-Res has different classes and CD-quality, 16/44.1, is the lowest of them.)
Perhaps its time for you to actually look up the definition for that cute logo devised by Sony. Click here for the full explanation on their website.
Now onto the definition provided by Sony:
"High-Resolution Audio refers to a collection of digital processes and formats that allow the encoding and playback of music using higher sampling rates than the standards used in CDs. There is no single standard for High-Resolution Audio, but the most commonly used specifications are 24 bit/96 kHz (3.2x more data transmitted than CD) and 24 bit/192 kHz (6.5x more data transmitted than CD)."
Wikipedia agrees.
"There is no standard definition for what constitutes high-resolution audio,but it is generally used to describe audio signals with bandwidth and/or dynamic range greater than that of Compact Disc Digital Audio (CD-DA). This includes pulse-code modulation (PCM) encoded audio with sampling rates greater than 44100 Hz and with bit-depths greater than 16,or their equivalents using other encoding techniques such as pulse-density modulation (PDM)."
When you choose the "Hi-Res Store" at HDtracks, you find another source that agrees with the first two. Their choices range from 88/24 to 352/24 and do not include the many 44.1/16 titles they stock.
CD quality is well, CD quality. Hi-Res is necessarily higher.
Last edited:
I have bought one album in hi rez, 24/96 from HD Tracks and a sampler that they were giving out. With my old DAC I wasn't that impressed but this new Schitt multibit has really opened things up, and I have to say that 24/96 FLAC music I downloaded seems to have something special over the CD rips I have. As for 24/192, I don't think my equipment or ears would benefit, but the only way to know for sure is to try I suppose.
Nightwisher
Farer In The Goldilocks Zone
I was referencing a Sound & Vision article I saw a while back where they listed out the levels. They must have got it wrong.
I agree that it makes much more sense for it to be greater than CD-quality because CD-quality is, well, CD-quality.
MJB1959
Super Member
In defense of Lossy, there is a good reason to have some music in the lossy format, you might have a portable music player that prefers that format for transferring files, another, is while all of this development and improvement in the technological advancements in digital formats, as well as the affordability of massive storage capacity, there are many mp3/ogg or whatever lossy files I have obtained through sharing, with folks that have some rare and obscure recordings, while these are not of value to most people, they are to me, and I absolutely love that I actually can just discover and hear music that has been ripped from old wretched rare vinyl albums, and able to send them in a small package for my listening pleasure.
As far as audiophilia, there is an audible difference in the quality of any lossy file and a lossless file IF the music source is the same (same CD for example), anyway, at the risk of starting something trivial, the lossy file to me is what the AM/FM tuner has become, a source for discovery.
As far as audiophilia, there is an audible difference in the quality of any lossy file and a lossless file IF the music source is the same (same CD for example), anyway, at the risk of starting something trivial, the lossy file to me is what the AM/FM tuner has become, a source for discovery.
Well, as most sources indicate, there is no one answer, but I think the consensus is always above CD quality. Once I scrolled down on the HDtracks website (where I have purchased many a title), I see they include 44.1/24 as such. As for me, I find that "higher", but not high in any absolute sense.
Perhaps even S&V are not consistent because the samples I find are all of higher than CD quality in this article. Look at their definition found on the following page.
When I was your age, Sound and Vision was called Stereo Review and Julian Hirsch was the (deaf) guru there who always liked everything and was amazed by sheer mediocrity.
Last edited:
Lossy compression has its place. E.g. my car's built in ICE doesn't recognize FLAC but does MP3 so I transcode my library to MP3 320 for road trip use. Yes it might sound better if it natively supported FLAC but the wind and exhaust noise might drown out any nuance anyway and I don't care enough to "fix" the "problem" I just have better places to spend my money. But I do rip all my CDs to FLAC for archival purposes because I might want to listen to them in a more critical setting.
I would agree that with sentiment which is why I subscribe to XM radio - lossy but provides exposure to new music.
I purchase lossy content only when that is all that is available.
Poinzy
Super Member
It's whatever gives me the greatest flexibility. Right now that's wav files at 24/48.For me ... far back as I can remember ... it was what ever hard media seemed to be prevalent and readily available/affordable to me at the time.
When I was crumb cruncher ... Vinyl ... teenager (just got my license) 8 Tracks .... later cassettes ... 8 Tracks became obsolete ... then CD's became commonly available/affordable .
In 2000 ... visiting the thrifts ... dollar bin days (plentiful & inexpensive inventory) .. got back into Vinyl ... CD's became more affordable used (in mass) ... started to buy more of those.
MP3's in cars ... streaming web sites becoming popular .. in 2012 started setting up streaming rigs.
Anyway ... the audio systems I've put together ... have always been the cart being pulled by the media horse.
mjw21a
Super Member
Vinyl or Cd for chilling out, MP3 or radio for background music
So 2 x record players, 1x Cd player, 1x DAB+ radio and 1x media centre. The tower media centre will likely make way for a used Mac Mini at some point, provided they can stream 2k content no worries (I can't see the difference between 2k and 4k, though the difference between HD and 2K is large)
So 2 x record players, 1x Cd player, 1x DAB+ radio and 1x media centre. The tower media centre will likely make way for a used Mac Mini at some point, provided they can stream 2k content no worries (I can't see the difference between 2k and 4k, though the difference between HD and 2K is large)
+48V
hi-fi or die
The official term is "Hi-Res". Even has a nice little logo now that there's formal support behind it. (Just as a side note, Hi-Res has different classes and CD-quality, 16/44.1, is the lowest of them.)
Just for the FWIW/rectification dept.. Perhaps it's most proper to use this logo and definition for what qualifies as Hi-Res music as devised by the RIAA... considering the actual scope & interest of this discussion.
"High Resolution Music is officially defined as “lossless audio capable of reproducing the full spectrum of sound from recordings which have been mastered from better than CD quality 48kHz/20-bit or higher." Click here for the full explanation on their website.
-->Hi-Res Audio is the sticker for gear.
-->Hi-Res Music is the sticker for...music.
Last edited:
That is consistent with everything I've posted and references linked to.
hifitommy
Super Member
of course, vinyl still rates as hi rez even though the designation was intended to mean for digital sources. mark waldrep at AIX denies that LPs are hi rez but he is mistaken and i have had solid confirmation from robert harley whom is every bit as qualified to make such a statement.
+48V
hi-fi or die
Simply cleaning up some muddy details and bearing mate. God forbid things get all murky when discussing Hi-Res & “transparency”. LOL
You with Nighwisher in tow inadvertently missed the mark so to say.
We are discussing music formats here right?