Great points Charlie!!!
I was hoping you and Bro Art would chime in and give some insights here.
YES, it is hard to know what quality one is getting when you do plunk down the hard cash to buy a Higher Resolution album, it might not really be any different at all.
As far as a resolving system, so far I am only listening on my DAP with my in ear monitors. That is the easiest way for me to listen to music files. I can get it around to bigger, better phones, and will surely try that. Otherwise to get these playing through my Ones takes more work and involves a bit more variables since I would basically have to play my DAP through my system. Will probably try that too.
And, also, I have to face the fact that my old ears are not what I was born with, not what they used to be.
I am blessed to be able to hear as well as I do.
But I am really blessed to be able to enjoy all this GREAT music!!!!!
Thanks Guys,
Looking for any Hi Res recommendations you may want to share.
God Bless,
Wayne

Hi Charlie and Wayne,

Charlie, your points are well-taken. I downloaded the Beethoven in hi res, just because it was available. I wanted the von Karajan recordings and did not want to buy the CDs, which I would immediately have transferred to lossless FLAC files anyway. I would expect the original analog source tapes to be the limiting factor. So far, I have not purchased a hi res download from a known hi res recording; therefore, I cannot comment upon what differences I might hear.

Also, I will be 76 years old on November 1. I know that the top-end of my hearing is diminished, but I am blessed to have almost no other discernable hearing difficulties. I'll admit to being audiophile, sort-of. I'm much more interested in music than in the subtle differences I might hear, so I don't spend much time looking for them. I am old enough to remember 78 RPM records, the first LPs (I own a very early 1950s Columbia LP which is not HI Fi), the advent of HI Fi and stereo. In the world of recorded classical music, there are a significant number of wonderful recordings which were made decades ago and which sound really good when properly transferred to digital formats. I have transferred a number of my early LPs to hi res digital files (96K/24 bit) with surprisingly good results, considering that I am working from LPs played on a good quality Technics linear turntable.

I buy almost all of my classical music now from Presto in England. They frequently offer CDs or downloads at various resolutions. I don't spend the extra money just to acquire the highest resolution files. I won't download MP3s or MP4s because I can readily hear the difference. But, I am equally likely to buy the CDs if the price is advantageous versus downloading, then do my lossless FLAC transfers.

Probably more details than you wanted to read, but there they are....

Best,

Art

Art,

Great comments. I'm ten years behind you, but I remember 78s, and players, and all the problems therewith. That's why I was a strong early advocate of CDs when they arrived. In spite of THEIR shortcomings that I soon discovered. (The world definitely ain't perfect.)

I want to modify my comments about Hi Res in general. I think the presence -- or lack thereof -- of ultrasonic content really doesn't make much of a difference. After studying and listening, I think the biggest reason people hear an improvement with Hi Res is because digital filtering artifacts are shifted to higher frequencies where they are more likely to be out of range of hearing or playback systems. These filters are applied during both recording and reconstruction, which is why merely upsampling older 44.1 kHz recordings may not make a big difference. The original recording filter artifacts are still there.

I think this is why vinyl had a naturalness advantage over CDs for such a long time. I remember hearing that difference way back in the mid 1980s when I went to a Stereophile audio show in San Francisco. The rooms that had the most realistic sound all had vinyl front ends! That was a real surprise and revelation to me at the time. I went home and listened to my very good CD playback system with fingernails-on-blackboard edginess. I could hear every scrape. Rather disappointing after spending all that money.

Digital artifacts include both pre-ringing (oldest filter designs, and very unnatural) and post-ringing. The best systems today can eliminate both, making the sound much more natural. My Vega DAC is wonderful in this regard, and MQA is working there also. Hi Res shifts those kinds of artifacts to such high frequencies that the audio passband becomes cleaner and time domain behavior more natural sounding. I think that's the reason for the enhanced "smoothness" I hear with some Hi Res.

I love music of most kinds, and I listen primarily to classical. For me, high detail during playback helps recreate the sensation of actually being in the concert hall. It also allows me to better resolve different musical lines, which helps me better understand the music. That is the reason I keep making improvements in my system. It's great fun to hear that stuff.

Just my thoughts, but that's how I see it today.

Charlie

Well guys, 7 years behind you Bro Art, sort of in the middle here. And I too remember all those things. I remember the first time stereo sound was demoed on FM radio and TV via simulcast.
Guys, interesting stuff here, Charlie, some good thinking there as far as I can see.
I will add smoothness to the top of my list of things to listen for as a difference Hi Res may bring over CD quality.
God Bless,
Wayne

charliehatch wrote: Art,

Great comments. I'm ten years behind you, but I remember 78s, and players, and all the problems therewith. That's why I was a strong early advocate of CDs when they arrived. In spite of THEIR shortcomings that I soon discovered. (The world definitely ain't perfect.)

Yes, I remember the wonderful advent of CDs, even though they were few in number and expensive. Digital recording technology preceded the CD (there were digitally recorded LPs). When digital recording came along, the recording and rendering engineers were faced with new problems which CDs with their 30+ db additional dynamic range only exacerbated. I have some very early 1980s EMI CD digital recordings of Mahler symphonies by The London Philharmonic under the baton of Klaus Tennstedt. The sound is indeed edgy, but the dynamic range of the loudest versus the softest passages is far more exciting than would have been possible on an LP. Despite the edginess, the CD answered my primary objection to LPs with the complete absence of surface noise.

I want to modify my comments about Hi Res in general. I think the presence -- or lack thereof -- of ultrasonic content really doesn't make much of a difference. After studying and listening, I think the biggest reason people hear an improvement with Hi Res is because digital filtering artifacts are shifted to higher frequencies where they are more likely to be out of range of hearing or playback systems. These filters are applied during both recording and reconstruction, which is why merely upsampling older 44.1 kHz recordings may not make a big difference. The original recording filter artifacts are still there.

I think this is why vinyl had a naturalness advantage over CDs for such a long time. I remember hearing that difference way back in the mid 1980s when I went to a Stereophile audio show in San Francisco. The rooms that had the most realistic sound all had vinyl front ends! That was a real surprise and revelation to me at the time. I went home and listened to my very good CD playback system with fingernails-on-blackboard edginess. I could hear every scrape. Rather disappointing after spending all that money.

Digital artifacts include both pre-ringing (oldest filter designs, and very unnatural) and post-ringing. The best systems today can eliminate both, making the sound much more natural. My Vega DAC is wonderful in this regard, and MQA is working there also. Hi Res shifts those kinds of artifacts to such high frequencies that the audio passband becomes cleaner and time domain behavior more natural sounding. I think that's the reason for the enhanced "smoothness" I hear with some Hi Res.

Over the years, the engineers have done what they can to soften the digital sound. However, I am not a particular fan of "Analog Sound" per se. I have listened to a number of live performances of classical music in various venues. Where I was sitting and the general acoustical properties of the venue significantly affected what I heard. I have also participated as a choral singer in the presentation of a number of major choral/symphonic works (Beethoven 9th, Verdi Requiem, etc.). Being placed generally in the center of the chorus and directly behind the orchestra provides yet another listening experience. I can only imagine what it sounds like from the conductor's podium. To me, the conductor is in the prime spot and experiences true "stereo surround sound". Currently, with my audio gear, I am attempting to re-create that listening experience at my PLP.

I love music of most kinds, and I listen primarily to classical. For me, high detail during playback helps recreate the sensation of actually being in the concert hall. It also allows me to better resolve different musical lines, which helps me better understand the music. That is the reason I keep making improvements in my system. It's great fun to hear that stuff.

Yes it is fun. When I incorporated my Cambridge 851A stereo amplifier and my external Cambridge DAC Magic Plus DAC, I was astounded at how the music "blossomed out" and the amount of additional detail I could hear. Although I believe that I understand your comments about digital artifacts, I am not sure that I have been audibly aware of their existence. When I listen to music, I am focused on the composition and the presentation. I want to be in the middle of the performance with the music all around me. For years, I listened in various surround sound modes, but I never felt that I was in the middle of the music. I am much closer to that goal now with two-channel sound coupled with three pairs of GE speakers surrounding my PLP in a 180 degree arc (side-front-side). I'm driving all six GE speakers with the Cambridge, using the AB speakers capability. I am about to add a Niles SSVC-2t Audio Controller to provide separate level controls for the mid-side and side GE speaker pairs. I want the primary sound focus to be the Triton Ones up front, with the mid-sides and sides adding the "surround effects" without manipulating the sound content. A report will be forthcoming on this latest experiment.

This is a fun thread. More from me later....

Art

Just my thoughts, but that's how I see it today.

Charlie

Great thread, guys!

I can't try much of what's suggested, sitting here in NH, but I love the interchange, the nuances on what works and doesn't and why.

I'll be testing Hi Rez more when I get back to TX, and these exchanges are an education for me!

So, thanks, I'm all (ears?).