(Sorry, couldn’t resist… 
)
7 Likes
Maybe some people in some instances…
I have the SHM CD and SHM SACD of the Stone’s “Sticky Fingers”. Both are identical masterings. Yet the SACD is clearly better sounding on my system.
I’m lost…
I’m sure there is. But this is one of the first steps in the decoding.
5 Likes
You need, with any recording, the correct level of gain.
1 Like
I wrote about playback. When you stop a regular recording and then start A MQA, listen for the volume increase.
That doesn’t make the MQA wrong although I haven’t really noticed it. I will often turn MQA up to wallow in the clarity and sumptuous experience, I will look out for this another time though. For what it’s worth, I don’t use volume levelling as I haven’t felt the need.
Perhaps musical styles may be a factor in perception here.
Guys,
I’m asking you as experts:
- I did some test in Audacity:
I took 24/192 track with dynamic range about 10dB and downsampled to 16/44 to have the same “master” but different “quality”.
Played on 3K$ set in living room with basic acoustic treatments.
Result:
- by inverting one track and then summing both track I saw few differences max 2dB for extremely small fractions of miliseconds
I could not repeatebly hear any difference in blind test to say:
- if plays track A or B
- if there is any track I like more
- which track is original and which downsampled
- I could not hear any difference even with focus on times where I noticed biggest changes in sine waves comparison
- several volume levels
- I did test of my hearing range and it is approx 26Hz to 15kHz (I’m 38 years).
Q1) Is there any benefit of HiRes for me? Easily said - with 15kHz range should be 30kHz sampling frequency enough so CD 44.1 kHz is just fine, isn’t it? Or is there anything else I’m missing and higher bits and frequency has still sense?
Q2) Is there anybody around 40 years who can hear 16, 18 or even 20kHz?
Seems I can be happy because no need to pay extra for HiRes 
2 Likes
No.
Especially since it’s the new mastering. The original Geffen CD release is a good master and if you don’t mind a slightly anemic version, the MFSL is hard to beat.
1 Like
Hi res is not about the frequency you can hear, it’s about the digital artefacts introduced by Brick Wall filters and digital pre ringing.
2 Likes
@Chrislayeruk So higher frequency / bit depth means smaller artefacts? Is this audible?
@Eve_Fox If CD release has good mastering then there is no audible difference compare to “hi-res”?
Maybe I’m wrong but you both tell opposite to each other, don’t you?
Yes, it is audible and un natural. That’s why CD is deemed harsh by vinyl and analog enthusiasts as a pure analog chain has non of these artefacts. They have other losses and issues of course but the digital sound has gone.
Pre ringing, ie an echo before the sound occurs does not happen in nature yet is a major cause of blur in digital transmission.
This is what High Res and MQA is all about.
A/B testing is not valid in my opinion, you should listen for an extended period and then try to go back. That’s when you will really notice, but if you don’t notice and are happy with what you are listening to, then it doesn’t matter.
But it’s not a frequency issue, it’s timing. Music is all about timing.
There is a lot to study about how human hearing had evolved and how we perceive sound.
So as I did - simply downsampled - I generated artifacts, pre-ringing and broke timing?
If I would use some proper methods and filters, I cannot get rig of those?
But sine waves comparison doesn’t show any significant differences. If there was biggest difference 2dB in microseconds, is this really audible?
And (I don’t know) if the 2dB difference was over 20kHz, then definitely no difference in what can human hear, isn’t it?
What do you mean by “really” audible? You pointed out you don’t hear it. Isn’t that “real” enough for you? If other people tell you they think it’s audible, does that change what you perceive or don’t perceive? Does that make the music you like less enjoyable in any way?
12 Likes
You may want to read here as an introduction with some of the ideas covered.
An excerpt here
The confusion around ‘high-resolution digital audio’ started when people noticed that PCM at faster than CD-rates, could often sound better. This led to an arms-race where increasing sampling-rate to 96, 192 or even 384 kHz could provide sonic benefits –
A file cannot be High Resolution, nor can the container inform us about the sound. To experience resolution, we must play it back in the analogue domain.
That’s my point: “they think”. I’m just trying to link something exact with my and others perception to get deeper understanding if I can get/do something more considering my ears, environment, formats, devices,… Is there any further step (and how big) like going from mp3+bluetooth speakers to CD+audio system. And if there is, is it worth to invest? Am I doing something wrong that I cannot hear difference but other people in my age can hear (or think or wish to hear) the difference? Is it even possible for human to hear change of single dB in scale of few microseconds or people just say?
So I’m satisfied where I am. But can it be better?
I used to check cd’s if I thought that they sounded really good and more often than not found them to be HDCD, coincidence? Maybe but I don’t think so.
I recorded all my vinyl to 24/96 so you would think this would be noticeable but the recording level was lower than CD so unless you turn it up it doesn’t sound as good. I tried volume levelling but in my head that made everything sound worse.
Moral of the story in my house? Keep the remote handy and adjust for best sound!
2 Likes
No what I’m saying is, in many cases with older albums ‘hi res’ is the least of your worries. Theres often a ton of different masters floating around. For this example that the OP picked, the Hi Res version on Qobuz is a much newer master and frankly I don’t think it’s very good.
3 Likes
Thank you all. And I agree (even before posting here) that music should be enjoyed emotionally and not technically by analyzing if I can hear this and that (indeed quality affects emotional enjoyment).
But I’m still wondering if anybody here can hear the difference between 24/192 and 16/44 of same master and explain what exactly (in some measurable or more exact way).