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

172 would be an odd sample rate from a recording/mastering point of view in PCM. Possible it was captured in Direct Stream Digital, converted to PCM 172 (which would make sense)
Sample rate for converting DSD to PCM?

 

Yes, that's what I was saying!

 

Figured it was!
Sounds like something went amiss up above!

 

What he means is that when you see 88 and 176 PCM releases they are typically converted from the Sony single bit format (DSD). Converted not down-sampled. Just in case you are not knowledgeable about this, Wikipedia has a nice discussion.

 

The original DVD-A of "On the Beach" was 176.4/24 (not 172/24), which is simply quadruple the 44.1MHz sampling rate of redbook, never mind the 16 to 24 bit word length difference.

 

Some of Neil Young DVD-As have 24bit/176.4khz resolution. I don't think these are related to SACD. they're just quadruple the CD resoluion.
On the Beach, Hawk & Doves, Re-ac-tor and American Stars 'n Bar for this case.

 

Sorry for the 172/176 typo. 176 is correct. I believe it is both a conversion & a down sample at the same time from the raw dsd.

 

Daisley and Kerslake’s original bass and drums have been back for like a decade

 

True, but we don't know what mix or master they are using for this edition.

 

same old

 

That’s it, it’s a PCM resolution sample rate, not a DSD conversion.

 

Virtually all 176.4 releases are conversions from DSD. Otherwise why would anybody use such an odd sample rate? If you're recording high res PCM from the start, you use 192.

 

Yes, IT IS weird. But neither Neil/Pono/Redwood has stated that they’ve using DSD. Glad to be wrong if proven, no need to take it personal.

 

100% correct.

 

Well it sure looks like somebody was using DSD, based on that sample rate. I wonder if there was an aborted SACD master made and then never released after the format tanked? Many of the Warners 192 masters that came out for download in the 2010's were the result of work done in the 2000's to produce DVD-Audio masters that never got released on disc.

 

Probably that is the case with the 4 mentioned NY 176 titles.

 

At least one HUGE difference; the previous edition was 96/24; this one is 44/24.

The 96/24 was a DR7. Hopefully, this one isn't worse...............................

 

Both the main album & the bonus tracks checked separate from each other are both a DR7. I haven't played it yet, but I'll bet you're right; the main album is probably the same master with a lower sampling rate.

 

Guys, ADCs with HDCD mastering capabilities also use multiples of 44.1kHz for example.
Not always to do with a DSD to PCM conversion.
It can also be a choice originally done for Redbook downconversion.
Okay it's rare to see these sample rates nowadays but that's exactly the kind of thing the Neil Young team would do.

 

check the thread devoted to the release. Ozzy's camp put no effort into this thing at all. Can't even say they slapped a new paint job on an old car; they basically sprayed it with a garden hose for 10 minutes and put a sticker on it.

 

I have an odd 96/20 DAC from the late 90's (it sounds great on cd). It's a PS Audio SL-3.
The 20 bit is for HDCD. No idea why it goes to 96 sampling, I've never seen anything 20 bit other than HDCD. Afaik, it does not upsample.

 

Pretty much sums up my opinion of both 44/24 & brickwalling!

 

If you're recording or mastering in high res today, yes, the standard would be 192/24 or 96/24, but it wasn't that long ago that CDs absolutely ruled the roost, so everything was done in multiples of 44.1. Many, many high resolution recordings were done at 88.2/24 so that the eventual conversion to 44.1/16 for CD wouldn't leave any artifacts from weird math equations. Nowadays, Pro Tools, Sox and others have amazing algorithms so you can downsample from whatever to whatever without any damage to the audio, but that wasn't always the case, especially back in 2002-2003 when Neil prepared a large chunk of his catalog for release - of which On The Beach, American Stars 'N Bars, Hawks & Doves and Re-Ac-Tor were the only ones to be issued. It's pretty obvious to me that Neil feels the masters done at the time for those 4 albums are great as they are, so those are what he's continued to release. Songs For Judy was also released in 176.4/24 as that was prepared and mastered in the early 2000s. The outtake-from-Harvest version of Dance, Dance, Dance he's recently put up on his website is also 176.4/24 as this is a master from an earlier version of the Archives box that he chose to drop between then and the entire as-released project being re-transferred and remastered from scratch in 192/24. Again, it's just simple math based on the redbook 44.1/16 standard.

 

Does anyone know how the new mastering of Giant Steps compares to the previous HDTracks 24/192 download?

 

There are also cases in which material was sampled as PCM at 176.4 kHz in anticipation of conversion from PCM to DSD, rather than the other way around.

In the case of the Neil Young titles with a 176.4 kHz sample rate, both now when they're available as downloads and back in 2002 when they were released on DVD-A, including American Stars 'N Bars, Hawks & Doves, Re-ac-tor, and On The Beach, we just don't know why. Maybe DSD was used for the analog-to-digital conversion and maybe it wasn't.

But it's a question that anyone who has signed up at neilyoungarchives.com can pose. We might find out!