2. music
  3. 1311029996

Which High Res releases are worth buying?

A number of A'goners have said they'd like to start a running database of releases that are worth buying. We've all discovered High Res downloads and discs that don't even live up to Redbook standards. Others are a definite improvement. Here's your chance to weigh in on the winners as well as the dogs. Inevitably, you may post a recommendation others may disagree with. Debate is good, but let's keep it clean and courteous. If we do, this could provide everyone with a great resource.
vhiner
vhiner OP
544 posts
 
Neil Young's catalog has been re-mastered in 24/172 and the 44.1 releases of these remasters KILL the old CD releases. It'll be very interesting to see whether Neil eventually authorizes dowload sales of the high res masters themselves. If he does, we'll be able to do a direct comparison of Redbook's presentation of that material versus a high res dowload.
2chnlben
595 posts
 
Oh I definitely want to get a hold of some of those. Let us know when/where to purchase hi-res files from Neil's 24/172 catalog...
ozzy's avatar
ozzy
7,557 posts
 
How about a rating system ???
Suggest
Ratings 1-10
10 being the best in sound quality and 5 meaning that it is equal to the Red Book version.

Based on that rating, SHM-SACD's I own so far.
Who's next. 6.5
Sticky Fingers 6.5
Its only Rock and Roll 5.5

High Rez Downloads
Paper Airplane- Allison Krauss 5

Hope that helps.
vhiner OP
544 posts
 
Excellent idea, Ozzy. I second the idea and will start using your system myself.
2chnlben
595 posts
 
Does anyone know exactly what HDTracks does when processing/converting old releases to hi-res?

I went ahead and downloaded the Deep Purple, “Machine Head” 24/96 release even though I wasn’t that thrilled about the Doobie Brothers’, “Captain and Me” 24/192 release. Hey, it’s Machine Head, I had to try it. Any way the thing sounds like it’s been remastered (i.e.: altered). There’s a definite audible difference in clarity – the 24/96 being quite a bit more resolving than the 16/44 version that I ripped from the hybrid layer of the Machine Head SACD (which is truly a very good 16/44 file).

That said, I don’t know that the 24/96 version is “better.” During the first guitar solo in the song, “Lazy,” the 16/44 release portrays Blackmore in between the speakers (good central image…albeit slightly to the right), but during the same solo the 24/96 release has his guitar planted firmly in the right channel only…Odd...?? The snare drum sounds more realistic via the 24/96 release and Gillan’s voice is definitely more pronounced, but the 16/44 version, on the other hand, just has a better overall balance. It’s as if someone has literally remastered some of the original settings.

On a positive note, Blackmore’s guitar is audibly clearer via the 24/96 version.

I wonder what it is that the HDTrack guy(s) do during the process…??
More to discover