Hi-Res Download News (HDTracks, ProStudioMasters, Pono, etc.) & Software/Mastering Part 12**

Discussion in 'Music Corner' started by Gary, May 9, 2015.

  1. shadlet

    shadlet Forum Resident

    Location:
    PA
    Hello,
    This question was posed way back in part 9 and I am wondering if anyone can answer.....

    "Does anyone know if the recently released hi-res Steppenwolf titles use the same mastering as the 2013 SHM-CDs? The SHMs were new remasters and sounded very good."
    rockclassics, Jan 27, 2015

    Steppenwolf is touring in the mid Atlantic this fall by the way.
     
  2. Merrick

    Merrick The return of the Thin White Duke

    Location:
    Portland
    So you're saying that this additional information cannot be included if the newly created 24/192 file is dithered back down to 16/44? I can understand the reasons for remastering/remixing in higher res, but don't then sell those files as 24/96 or 24/192 when the source is really 16/44. That's what we're talking about, and IMO, it IS a sham/con to say "Hey look, you liked this album at 16/44, so now it's available at 24/192!" when the information included in that 24/192 file is simply a 16/44 file with some adjustments made to it.

    Even if the prices are the same for 16/44 and 24/192 files, you're still trying to woo in the consumer who's likely bought the albums several times before (including possibly digitally at 16/44) with the promise of "higher resolution", when in fact the files are not higher resolution, they're just bigger than the old files.
     
  3. JeffMo

    JeffMo Format Agnostic

    Location:
    New England
    Any Pono news about the Van Morrison catalog? That announcement about Sony acquiring the rights earlier this week was the best thing I've heard in a long time, since so many of his titles are long OOP.
     
  4. xj32

    xj32 Forum Resident

    Location:
    Racine, WI
    So what you are saying is that nothing that was originally recorded at 16:44.1 should never be remastered.

    I say this because once a recording leaves a digital audio workstation and goes into the analog domain, it will never again be captured at 16:44.1 never.

    No professional gear captures at 16 bit.

    Stop using graphs and charts to determine if something sounds good.

    I have heard first hand 16 bit files that have been remastered through high end analog gear that sounds better than the source. I don't care what bits are or are not there. If it sounds better it is and should be recaptured at the highest rate possible.

    Analog masters can and often are in rough shape with lost high end and are saved by good mastering engineers. Digital is no different. It's sound not bits that your ears here.

    Stop cheapening the art of mastering by clinging to the scientific limitations of the past.

    Should we only ever listen to 78 direct to disc recordings on a wind up phonograph ?
     
    Starwanderer and macdaddysinfo like this.
  5. xj32

    xj32 Forum Resident

    Location:
    Racine, WI

    Personally I don't want 16 bit dither added a second time just to maintain the originals limitation that's just pointless.

    The files should and I would guess in the future be sold as 16 bit recordings remastered to 24/96, ect. Then the buyer can choose if they like what was done or added through eq, processing and such just as we have done with regular remasters over the years.

    I am not talking about flat transfers. But true remasters by the way.
     
    macdaddysinfo and Plan9 like this.
  6. Merrick

    Merrick The return of the Thin White Duke

    Location:
    Portland
    I think that's the big problem, the lack of provenance on most of these releases. If an album was recorded at 16/44, they should make that clear on the sales pages. It's the lack of transparency that makes it feel like a con to me.
     
    Plan9 and Rockos like this.
  7. Rockos

    Rockos Forum Resident

    Seems to be a lot of hostility in your post. Not sure why it's directed towards me. I have no issue with modern equipment. If 24 bit is the standard, that is fine. And I don't use charts and graphs to tell me if something sounds good-never. But I do use them to see if there is any appreciable data above the 20/22Khz cutoff that my cd's are limited too. I use that in conjunction with reviews regarding sound improvements on whether to plop down my hard earned $17 or so on another version of an album I already own. Even if the word is the sound is similar to original release, yet I see there is much more musical data past what I own, I would likely purchase, but that's me.

    On the other hand, there are plenty of hi-res remasters with tons of data past 20/22hz that just sound worse than my original CD.

    Not sure why wanting more information-spectrograph is an easy visual for us to tell how much data exists-exact lineage-is cheapening anything. Consumers want information.

    If anything has put a bad name on mastering, it's the poor remasters we are exposed to year after year. Increasingly compressed and louder. If you can't make the original sound better, scrap the project. The goal should be to release a product noticeably improved from the original. If this can't be accomplished, don't release anything, pay the engineer for this time and move on. I used to get excited about remastering, now it's rare to find a real improvement over the original release.
     
    eran levy, BGLeduc, soundQman and 2 others like this.
  8. Stereosound

    Stereosound Forum Resident

    Location:
    USA
  9. JeffMo

    JeffMo Format Agnostic

    Location:
    New England
  10. jmacvols

    jmacvols Forum Resident

    Location:
    Tennessee
  11. Mickactual

    Mickactual Humble indie rock musician

    Another re-do? First Rush (the new ones are an improvement), then Van Halen (debatable improvement)...now Faces?
    For the price of these hi-res releases, they should be the be-all/end-all final word of the release of any recording. This seems to be going the same way CD's ended up going: remaster/resell - remaster/resell again - remaster(louder)/resell again... When does the greed stop?
    :rolleyes:
     
  12. ServingTheMusic

    ServingTheMusic Forum Resident

    Location:
    SoCal
    Yes, ALL new. Fremer reported about this on Analog Planet.

    You are preaching to the congregation.

    I have HAD it with HI REZ re-dos.

    The fact is my intuition has been correct all along. Many of these "hi rez remasters" are from MULTI Generation safety copies and they just won't fess up.

    Whomever paid for this **** before should not have to pay again.
     
    Starwanderer and Mickactual like this.
  13. Mickactual

    Mickactual Humble indie rock musician

    Agreed 110%. And not I'm trying to take a side in the listen with Your eyes vs. listen with Your ears argument.
    ...But just because $17 (and up for higher sample rates) is an exorbitant premium for an album that needn't cost more than $5. Particularly catalog material most consumers are double or triple dipping for at this point.
    By now we're all so blasé about being raped by the unparalleled greed of the record companies...but, really, for that kind of money a spectrograph and a DR listing should made available on the sites to all shoppers (pre-purchase) - and, I'll add, a PDF of FULL artwork should be included with all purchases.
    Consumers want information, and we want our money's worth.
    :cussing:
     
  14. motionoftheocean

    motionoftheocean Senior Member

    Location:
    Circus Maximus
    not to be too conspiratorial - I am someone who listens to a lot of what is billed as high resolution material - but isn't it possible that one of the reasons information that we'd consider no brainers is omitted, namely DR reports, lineage/genealogy, spectrograms and so forth, is that frankly, in most of the cases, is that it wouldn't provide compelling enough data? perhaps is it not better to shroud things in mystery while hiding behind caveat emptor? just a thought.
     
    Rockos and Mickactual like this.
  15. Mickactual

    Mickactual Humble indie rock musician

    Well, pillage anybody's wallet enough times and everything starts to feel conspiratorial.
    But I agree - many (though certainly not all) of these hi res downloads are sold under a surreptitious shroud.
     
  16. Rockos

    Rockos Forum Resident

    Bingo. Less information works to their advantage, in their opinion.
     
  17. Dino

    Dino Forum Resident

    Location:
    Kansas City - USA
    I think that the powers that be would weigh the pros and cons of providing information on the files that are being sold and determine whether it would increase or decrease sales.

    If they sold quality product on a regular basis, more information would be a selling point.

    If more information revealed a lack of quality they would choose not to provide it.

    (These downloads are not being purchased by the casual music fan.)
     
    Rockos likes this.
  18. motionoftheocean

    motionoftheocean Senior Member

    Location:
    Circus Maximus
    totally. there's been plenty I've heard that have been really great releases offering clear advantages over the redbook. but unfortunately, the majority of the time the results are less than stellar.
     
  19. agentalbert

    agentalbert Senior Member

    Location:
    San Antonio, TX
    If this is just a hi-rez brick, like the digital master used for the CD, no thanks. But if this is a nice sounding non-compressed version, I will be all over that. Fantastic album!

    I thought Faces was already available? How long ago was it that the Faces album collection or whatever it was came out?
     
  20. jonboy71

    jonboy71 Forum Resident

    Location:
    Oxnard, CA
    WHERE IS RUSH - EXIT STAGE LEFT??? Yes, I know I'm yelling!
     
    Rockos likes this.
  21. Rockos

    Rockos Forum Resident

  22. Stone Turntable

    Stone Turntable Independent Head

    Location:
    New Mexico USA
    I check in on this thread periodically in hopes that a) I'll read about somebody listening to a hi-rez album I'm interested in, and b) I'll find out it sounds great.

    :shake:
     
  23. sacsongs

    sacsongs Senior Member

    Location:
    St. Louis , MO
    Me too.
     
    Mickactual likes this.
  24. JeffMo

    JeffMo Format Agnostic

    Location:
    New England
  25. Mickactual

    Mickactual Humble indie rock musician

    But instead, You're lucky enough to get to read:
    Arguments about the merits (or lack thereof) of various sample rates.
    Musings about the provenance of releases.
    And PhD dissertations about every up, down, in, out, and upchuck of Pono.
    Lucky You! :goodie:
     
    Stone Turntable likes this.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine