I make my own 24/96 FLACs from cassettes and LPs (and real time CD's for that matter) using Sony Sound Forge on a semi decent, semi-older sound card (M-Audio with RCA and Digital inputs and outputs) in my Windows 8.1 PC that's hooked up to my big boy stereo that has an "analog direct " setting for no coloration. It's not that complicated, like the normal TDK's, don't record 'em too hot..
I don't understand. What's the point of taking a lossy source like a tape and upscaling to 24 bit?
What's the point of any hi res digital file above a 320kbs mp3? I've never heard the term "lossy" when talking about analog. Does it apply?
Yeah, I'm not sure that 'lossy' truly applies in the same sense that it does when you take a lossless file and move it to mp3. But that aside, tapes are certainly not as clean of a source as a modern vinyl or a cd. I'm not trying to dog you out for upscaling to 24 bit, I'm more just curious if you think there's a benefit. Certainly 'space' is no longer a concern like it was 10 years ago.
If there is a benefit or perceptible difference to the upsample, I don't hear it on the analog sources that I digitize, other than the 96k light comes on when I play them.. I'm not sure why I do it, I have the space for it, I guess. It adds a step when I put them on my ipod classic as highest quality VBR mp3s. I have stopped paying extra for hi res digital files. I can tell the difference between some bluetoothed over the phone spotify stream into a single POS speaker, but the 320kbs mp3 version of Hartford 2013 to the 20 dollar HD FLAC version, my 50 year old ears cant tell the difference, headphoned or cranked on speakers.
My late 80s Nakamichi (Dolby C with a decent CR02 or Metal tape) in a decent listening room, or nicely cabled directly into digital is pretty clean, bro.
Well you're both right. There's nothing special about these 24/192's.
Thanks for putting them to the test. It's better to get a first hand account about them than just looking at the numbers.
I'm not sure if you guys picked up what I said earlier, but there's nothing in the summary on the web page that said these were part of the remaster. I hope that's the case and the new vinyl will provide a much clearer distinction. We shall soon see.... I'll do the same testing of course, just for my own curiosity.
That's a good point. The item descriptions for the vinyl in the shop say they were remastered exclusively for vinyl by Bob Ludwig. Which begs the question why would they even put out higher resolution digital files if they weren't going to remaster them (except, it appears, to add compression)? Bizarre.
Haven't seen the files but logic dictates. If the vinyl is being remastered then they had to go back to the original mix tapes to do that. Back in '96 it wasn't really an option to capture them at 192k so the digital files have to be from the remastering session.
I tested both albums in the last few days. My equipment was jRiver - Burson Conductor DAC - Sennheiser HD800S. No Code sounds better to my ears. The base comes with more punch and the soundstage is bigger than with the Original album Flacs. I don't hear any differences on yield.
My Ponoplayer tells me that the release date is 08/05/2016. This was the release day for the vinyls. So I think this are the Ludwig remasters v
I tested both albums in the last few days. My equipment was jRiver - Burson Conductor DAC - Sennheiser HD800S. No Code sounds better to my ears. The base comes with more punch and the soundstage is bigger than with the Original album Flacs. I don't hear any differences on yield.
My Ponoplayer tells me that the release date is 08/05/2016. This was the release day for the vinyls. So I think this are the Ludwig remasters v
Good to hear. Maybe it's more evident with headphones. I heard from someone else that they saw some improvement in NC but not in Yield. ...
I tested both albums in the last few days. My equipment was jRiver - Burson Conductor DAC - Sennheiser HD800S. No Code sounds better to my ears. The base comes with more punch and the soundstage is bigger than with the Original album Flacs. I don't hear any differences on yield.
My Ponoplayer tells me that the release date is 08/05/2016. This was the release day for the vinyls. So I think this are the Ludwig remasters v
Good to hear. Maybe it's more evident with headphones. I heard from someone else that they saw some improvement in NC but not in Yield. ...
Medozk. It isn't really an assumption. 192k wasn't an option in 1996. In order to create 192k files they had to go back to the original tapes and recapture them at that resolution. Those tapes would have to be mastered or in this case remastered. Bob Ludwig did the original mastering so he probably dialed in No Code to sound about as close to the original as he could with a few tweaks to, in his opinion, improve it. Or maybe he thought it was great and just got as close to the original as he could. The only real question is did they use the same signal path to create the CD, vinyl and high res files or did they treat them all separately or did they do one thing for the CD and another for the vinyl and high resolution files. Often for vinyl they will leave out a final stage of limiting that they might use for a CD or digital files. This is because vinyl doesn't have the same dynamic range and limiting can make it more difficult to cut or can make some things distort on sibilant parts. Vinyl has a real hard time dealing with sibilance and vocals compressed in the mix can distort a little bit more when they get vinyl. Vinyl can't handle as much low end either. Check out Peter Gabriel's box set re-issue of 'So'. In liner notes he talks about how they had to re sequence the original album pressing because a bass heavy song would have been at the end of the side. Since those grooves are smaller and narrow it couldn't handle the low end. They moved the song earlier on the side so they could get as much bass as the cutter could make. Also longer albums can't have as much dynamic range and frequency width as shorter albums because they grooves have to be cramped to fit on a record. 22 minutes is about as long as you want to go for a side but 17 would be preferable. Back to Peter Gabriel. He has re issued all of his albums at 45 rpm and is keeping everything to around 15 minutes or less per side. At 45 rpm and without jamming as much as he can on a side he is trying to get the best sound possible on vinyl. And lastly. Mastered For iTunes means that when they mastered it they checked the audio through and application that Apple gave them so they can hear what it is going to sound like in the final version sold in the Apple store. There are adjustments they make to get the most out of the file resolution. You have to (or should) create a separate master for iTunes. Just like they often create a separate master for vinyl and CD. This wasn't the case back in the early days of CD's and digital files but it is now.
Medozk. It isn't really an assumption. 192k wasn't an option in 1996. In order to create 192k files they had to go back to the original tapes and recapture them at that resolution. Those tapes would have to be mastered or in this case remastered. Bob Ludwig did the original mastering so he probably dialed in No Code to sound about as close to the original as he could with a few tweaks to, in his opinion, improve it. Or maybe he thought it was great and just got as close to the original as he could. The only real question is did they use the same signal path to create the CD, vinyl and high res files or did they treat them all separately or did they do one thing for the CD and another for the vinyl and high resolution files. Often for vinyl they will leave out a final stage of limiting that they might use for a CD or digital files. This is because vinyl doesn't have the same dynamic range and limiting can make it more difficult to cut or can make some things distort on sibilant parts. Vinyl has a real hard time dealing with sibilance and vocals compressed in the mix can distort a little bit more when they get vinyl. Vinyl can't handle as much low end either. Check out Peter Gabriel's box set re-issue of 'So'. In liner notes he talks about how they had to re sequence the original album pressing because a bass heavy song would have been at the end of the side. Since those grooves are smaller and narrow it couldn't handle the low end. They moved the song earlier on the side so they could get as much bass as the cutter could make. Also longer albums can't have as much dynamic range and frequency width as shorter albums because they grooves have to be cramped to fit on a record. 22 minutes is about as long as you want to go for a side but 17 would be preferable. Back to Peter Gabriel. He has re issued all of his albums at 45 rpm and is keeping everything to around 15 minutes or less per side. At 45 rpm and without jamming as much as he can on a side he is trying to get the best sound possible on vinyl. And lastly. Mastered For iTunes means that when they mastered it they checked the audio through and application that Apple gave them so they can hear what it is going to sound like in the final version sold in the Apple store. There are adjustments they make to get the most out of the file resolution. You have to (or should) create a separate master for iTunes. Just like they often create a separate master for vinyl and CD. This wasn't the case back in the early days of CD's and digital files but it is now.
Medozk. It isn't really an assumption. 192k wasn't an option in 1996. In order to create 192k files they had to go back to the original tapes and recapture them at that resolution. Those tapes would have to be mastered or in this case remastered. Bob Ludwig did the original mastering so he probably dialed in No Code to sound about as close to the original as he could with a few tweaks to, in his opinion, improve it. Or maybe he thought it was great and just got as close to the original as he could. The only real question is did they use the same signal path to create the CD, vinyl and high res files or did they treat them all separately or did they do one thing for the CD and another for the vinyl and high resolution files. Often for vinyl they will leave out a final stage of limiting that they might use for a CD or digital files. This is because vinyl doesn't have the same dynamic range and limiting can make it more difficult to cut or can make some things distort on sibilant parts. Vinyl has a real hard time dealing with sibilance and vocals compressed in the mix can distort a little bit more when they get vinyl. Vinyl can't handle as much low end either. Check out Peter Gabriel's box set re-issue of 'So'. In liner notes he talks about how they had to re sequence the original album pressing because a bass heavy song would have been at the end of the side. Since those grooves are smaller and narrow it couldn't handle the low end. They moved the song earlier on the side so they could get as much bass as the cutter could make. Also longer albums can't have as much dynamic range and frequency width as shorter albums because they grooves have to be cramped to fit on a record. 22 minutes is about as long as you want to go for a side but 17 would be preferable. Back to Peter Gabriel. He has re issued all of his albums at 45 rpm and is keeping everything to around 15 minutes or less per side. At 45 rpm and without jamming as much as he can on a side he is trying to get the best sound possible on vinyl. And lastly. Mastered For iTunes means that when they mastered it they checked the audio through and application that Apple gave them so they can hear what it is going to sound like in the final version sold in the Apple store. There are adjustments they make to get the most out of the file resolution. You have to (or should) create a separate master for iTunes. Just like they often create a separate master for vinyl and CD. This wasn't the case back in the early days of CD's and digital files but it is now.
Good stuff. Thanks for the education!
I know I was born and I know that I'll die. The in between is mine.
These are up now at HDtracks. Same prices as acoustic sounds. There are 96khz/24 bit versions of both albums available, too.
"This product is not currently available due to region restrictions."
HDtracks blows. The last purchase I bought from there was Lightning Bolt. Back then it was available to all the first week, then they restricted it to USA customers only.
I'm glad I found the 192 kHz tracks some where's else instead.
I still gotta listen to my 3rdman rips LPs are the top of the food chain. copying now with 15GB of other stuff That funky sound is going to make for an interesting transfer.
Dr. Delight. You might be right. I would have to go back to the So Box set. I don't remember what song. I would have to go back to the liner notes. They might have resequenced before it was ever released.
Dr. Delight. You are correct. Wikipedia had the 2002 remaster sequence. They moved "In Your Eyes" to the end of Side B and put "Big Time" at the beginning.
Comments
I've never heard the term "lossy" when talking about analog. Does it apply?
No Code Warehouse...(insert problems, my guess)
My Ponoplayer tells me that the release date is 08/05/2016. This was the release day for the vinyls. So I think this are the Ludwig remasters v
Wait, is this Dennis K?
This is because vinyl doesn't have the same dynamic range and limiting can make it more difficult to cut or can make some things distort on sibilant parts. Vinyl has a real hard time dealing with sibilance and vocals compressed in the mix can distort a little bit more when they get vinyl. Vinyl can't handle as much low end either. Check out Peter Gabriel's box set re-issue of 'So'. In liner notes he talks about how they had to re sequence the original album pressing because a bass heavy song would have been at the end of the side. Since those grooves are smaller and narrow it couldn't handle the low end. They moved the song earlier on the side so they could get as much bass as the cutter could make. Also longer albums can't have as much dynamic range and frequency width as shorter albums because they grooves have to be cramped to fit on a record. 22 minutes is about as long as you want to go for a side but 17 would be preferable.
Back to Peter Gabriel. He has re issued all of his albums at 45 rpm and is keeping everything to around 15 minutes or less per side. At 45 rpm and without jamming as much as he can on a side he is trying to get the best sound possible on vinyl.
And lastly. Mastered For iTunes means that when they mastered it they checked the audio through and application that Apple gave them so they can hear what it is going to sound like in the final version sold in the Apple store. There are adjustments they make to get the most out of the file resolution. You have to (or should) create a separate master for iTunes. Just like they often create a separate master for vinyl and CD. This wasn't the case back in the early days of CD's and digital files but it is now.
All that I once held as true
I stand alone without beliefs
The only truth I know is you.
HDtracks blows. The last purchase I bought from there was Lightning Bolt. Back then it was available to all the first week, then they restricted it to USA customers only.
I'm glad I found the 192 kHz tracks some where's else instead.
I'm pretty psyched for both of these reissued LPs