Choosing Best Sample Rate

[o0OBillO0o]

Sorry- everyone loves F-R-E-E stuff and

Sample rate converter tool software - Voxengo r8brain - Voxengo

Video Review:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZQn_0gP74k

[scirica]

Thanks to the OP for opening up this topic. Until now I've been buying the 192/24 when it is an option on HDTracks. As mentioned above, I will start considering 96/24 purchases to save $ and disc space, UNLESS the album is one of my all-time favorites (which means I probably already have it in multiple formats!.

[chessman]

Originally Posted by 2fastdriving

The original recording quality is much, much more important than the bit rate. I have some standard CD's that sound better than other hi-rez downloads. I think if I heard the same exact album in CD quality and 24/96 I might be able to hear the difference on a good day, but I doubt I could tell the difference between 24/96 and 24/192.

But I keep coming back to the original recording. If that's not great, no bit rate can fix it.

And here is another pair of concerns. First, I want it well mastered. Second, if it is being sold as 96/24, how do I know if it was mastered at that rate or merely up-sampled?

[o0OBillO0o]

Originally Posted by chessman

And here is another pair of concerns. First, I want it well mastered. Second, if it is being sold as 96/24, how do I know if it was mastered at that rate or merely up-sampled?

prov·e·nance
ˈprävənəns/Submit
noun
the place of origin or earliest known history of something.
"an orange rug of Iranian provenance"
synonyms: origin, source, place of origin; More
the beginning of something's existence; something's origin.
"they try to understand the whole universe, its provenance and fate"
a record of ownership of a work of art or an antique, used as a guide to authenticity or quality.
plural noun: provenances
"the manuscript has a distinguished provenance"

Provenance is the whole big deal behind Pono. A little light is supposed to come on and validate that the track is a true master quality. TidalHifi has the "HIFI" logo that lights up if it's CD quality. Lots of discussion there. I am right with you buddy!

I am still researching if upsampling is an "okay thing" despite the basic idea of just padding zeros..

[crwilli]

Originally Posted by chessman

And here is another pair of concerns. First, I want it well mastered. Second, if it is being sold as 96/24, how do I know if it was mastered at that rate or merely up-sampled?

Great question. It is not always obvious what the source is. I don't do this but suspect you cdoul super sleuth things out on AA or the net at large to figure out the source.

When you look at the HD Tracks site at a given album, hit the tab labeled "About this Album" and it will generally give you some limited insight on the source or whether it is remastered.

[radio times]

Old cloth ears Rad says 256 kbps for early to mid 50's Jazz box sets,; they scarce need more, and 320 for nearly everything else. Good old Sony and their standard download transformations.

[o0OBillO0o]

Originally Posted by radio times

Old cloth ears Rad says 256 kbps for early to mid 50's Jazz box sets,; they scarce need more, and 320 for nearly everything else. Good old Sony and their standard download transformations.

I think you are mixing up "bit rate" and "bit depth and sample rate."

https://www.google.com/search?q=bitr...nd+sample+rate

[radio times]

I've heard both the AK 120 with full DSD, and the 240 with CD quality. My Sony A17 gives about 40% of the sq at it's height. Box set Jazz is notorious for crappy transfers from cheap turntables.

[o0OBillO0o]

Originally Posted by jdandy

Randy.......I have purchased several HDTracks 24/192 downloads. I had the same curiosity about the sound quality difference between 24/192 and 24/96 so I downloaded the 24/96 files of Louise Rogers - Black Coffee, which I already had at 24/192. I spent a number of hours listening to both downloaded versions and came to the conclusion that the 24/96 sounded exactly the same to my ears as did the 24/192. Now I only purchase 24/96. I see no reason to fill up my hard drive with twice the file size and pay the added cost when the 24/96 downloads satisfy me completely.

Originally Posted by djwhog

Same hear, I tried several too and decided the 192 was maybe on a few a tad better, but in most cases I could not tell one from the other. I even mixed them in media player to go 96 to 192, sure you hear the dac click and switch, but I did a complex double blind mixed up test and drove from my iPad app in my seat as not to look at the display etc. after going back and forth again and again I settled. On the less than 192 option as fine.

Maybe if I had a better system, k01 Ivan's TAD speakers and all platinum cables I would hear and be able to benefit, but I am very happy with the 96/24 k files. All that said I still like sacd disc better when I can get them

Sent from my iPad using A.Aficionado

Originally Posted by crwilli

Randy, These responses pretty much sum up my perspective. While I MAY be able to hear the difference between various sample rates and bit depths, I wouldn't bet money on it. As a result, i will still buy a CD if it is not available as 24/96 or higher. If it is available at 96 and other higher sampling rates, i will usually get the 96 version unless I feel something special with that recording - like an old favorite. However, there are entire forums dedicated to this and some science That might skew your decisions. Craig

Hi there- You three all agree that 24/96 is all you need? I would say you do. Because if I had to pin you down , I would read your comments as such. This is an interesting take on high resolution audio.

[crwilli]

Originally Posted by o0OBillO0o

Hi there- You three all agree that 24/96 is all you need? I would say you do. Because if I had to pin you down , I would read your comments as such. This is an interesting take on high resolution audio.

For me, yes based on what I can and cannot hear balanced with the extra cost of the +96 files... It is not an absolute scientific analysis or opiniion.