Qobuz Hi-Rez Not Necessarily the Best Sound


Hello:

I stream Qobuz using Roon into a Bricasti M1SE DAC/Streamer into a Benchmark HPA4 headphone amp and then into various Kennerton or RAAL headphones.

Lately I have been comparing different versions of recordings on Qobuz.  For instance, lately it has been Depeche Mode but also Pink Floyd, Steely Dan, and Supertramp.  Oftentimes there are several versions of titles, usually Hi-rez files of 24/192 or similar, versus the standard 16/44.1 resolution versions.  Sometimes there are remastered versions in various resolutions.  

Quite by accident I have found that the highest resolution versions are not necessarily the best-sounding versions, often preferring the remastered and/or standard resolution recordings.  Today, for instance, I was listening to DM's A Broken Frame.  The 24/192 sounded a little sharper with perhaps a little more detail and spaciousness but was amazingly dynamically compressed.  The difference was not subtle.  Going from the 24/192 to the 16/44.1 remastered version was going from a bland recording to one that came alive.  I guess it goes to show that higher rez files are not necessarily superior sonically.

Anyone else found this to be the case in their streaming?  Thanks.

rlawry

@designsfx yup me too. I buy CDs, rip them to disk then store them away. Have not played a cd in years. I use a small desktop pc to rip and store and use Plex and Plexamp to stream. Good stuff! I also do same with vinyl ie play once, convert to digital and store on pc, then use audacity to do some basic processing and separate tracks, then Picard to auto tag the files. Also dbpoweramp tag editor if manual tagging needed.

@p05129 

I might agree with you on Hi Rez sounding better but until this day I’ve only been able to playback within the limits of my Dac. I’ve used Native DSD’s site and have heard some really interesting music there but ultimately had to downsample to DSD 128 to avoid DOP playback.

I had considered purchasing a T+A Dac earlier this year to experience more of the DSD stuff but even that was limited for me because of the Mac OS. I don’t see going into a windows machine or some other device grouping as a value spend. I hope that changes in the near future as it would be interesting to experience artists using that format of recording/mastering. Honestly the only difference I’ve heard (with true mastered hi res- not just up conversion) is a little more air in the presentation- but it wasn’t life changing.

@mapman 

So how has the vinyl conversion been working out in whole with the process you described? Do you find yourself still acquiring new titles or purely archiving your previously purchases albums?

There are a few high res internet radio stations I can stream via my Cambridge evo 150.  The intent of these stations is to provide good sound quality via higher than cd resolution and in general these sound very good,  maybe better than cd res in general.  Have not compared enough yet to say for sure or how much it matters. 

@designsfx I still buy records but usually only when I find good quality interesting releases on the cheap. I already have way more albums than I will ever be able to listen to. The conversion process to digital is time consuming to do right compared to ripping but I do it occasionally when I have some spare time. But my large digital music library alone can keep me busy for years. I’m very spoiled and blessed with so much to listen to. Then there is Spotify which I use mainly to audition new things and maybe buy. Music lovers should thank the heavens. It’s all at your disposal and most of it can sound really good. Best time ever to be a music lover/hifi kook.

 

When I convert vinyl to cd res digital the results are hard if even possible to distinguish from the original. If anything is lost it is of no real consequence. I do apply a noise and click filter in audacity so that is a difference.  Also I often apply dynamic range normalization which helps make best use of the bits available.