2. music
  3. 1359598503

Is HDtracks really selling you Hi-Rez music?

I just purchased Santana Abraxas in 176KHz 24 bit resolution from HDTracks that has just been released this week. It was uploaded in AIFF format.

I purchased the 1998 remastered CD which I uploaded in AIFF format in ITunes for comparison and what a disappointment the HDTracks download was. I could not hear any difference between the 2 versions. Seems that the original master tape was not of great quality to start with. I had the same experience with Beach House 'Bloom' hi-rez download for which I previously purchased the CD version as well.

On the other hand I downloaded great hi-Rez albums from HDTracks which were like having the original master under hand. A good example is Kenny Burrell's 'Midnigth Blue' hi-Rez download that just kills the remastered CD version.

It would be great if HDTracks would publish purchaser's review of their downloads like Amazon.com. This would avoid audiophiles paying top dollars for poor quality downloads. I am really annoyed and feel I was screwed by HDTracks! Any similar experiments?
128x128dasign
m_snow
57 posts
 
I sent them an email asking them why they don't let us write reviews - and why they don't let us purchase individual songs. Thus far I've gotten ZERO response.

I imagine it comes down to their bottom line - and both would potentially hurt that.

HDTracks has the potential to be great; key word -- potential.
wildoats
339 posts
 
The reviews I've read on hi-rez downloads and/or HDtracks specifically is each recording is hit or miss. Meaning, just like everything, some are good some aren't. It's another way to get you to buy something you already have, not saying that sometimes the sound won't be better.
levy03
442 posts
 
i've had this happen a couple of times but only recently. first couple of years at HDT were great. ran up some large tabs and everything purchased sounded much better then the redbook version. maybe i was lucky with my selections but every download blew me away (even more so if burned to dvd in WAV imho).

it's become hit or miss for me but only during the last year or so. downloading much less no-a-days. agree with sgr. there needs to be some kind of disclosure/explanation on what was done to make it "hi-res". i think we're all in agreement that a turd can't be polished enough to be seen as attractive. the same would apply to music and the original cut.

not so sure allowing an audition would help?....at least not for me. even with decent speakers....my pc sounds like crap. would highly doubt being able to make a good call using my pc.

Cheers
tom6897's avatar
tom6897
1,484 posts
 
Any time I have bought something from HD Tracks that was not up to my standards I asked for and received a refund. You do need to decide right away if the download sucks or not.

The buyer has a right to expect that they are purchasing music that lives up to the marketing that is provided on the website. When it does not, let them know about it.

Pay by credit card. If they give you any "SHIT", just dispute the charge. Problem solved. If you don't get what you paid for (misrepresentation), don't you usually get a refund???? When enough people show their dis-pleasure HD Tracks will up their game and do a better job.
mingles
799 posts
 
Has anyone else noticed HD Tracks high rez to be louder than Redbook? I noticed it with Fleetwood Mac Rumors and verified my hunch with an spl meter. The high rez version is 3 dB louder than cd. There are folks in the forums who swear that ALL high rez versions are significant improvements over Redbook. I wonder if loudness is winning them over.
More to discover