I've never heard anything about a MC mix (only up-mixes), but wouldn't be great in say... AtmosJust saw this on Discogs:
https://www.discogs.com/release/14240716-Beck-Morning-Phase
"Quadraphonic," eh? Surely entered by mistake, right?
I've never heard anything about a MC mix (only up-mixes), but wouldn't be great in say... AtmosJust saw this on Discogs:
https://www.discogs.com/release/14240716-Beck-Morning-Phase
"Quadraphonic," eh? Surely entered by mistake, right?
Frankly I don't understand why File or FLAC are format options on discogs.Just saw this on Discogs:
https://www.discogs.com/release/14240716-Beck-Morning-Phase
"Quadraphonic," eh? Surely entered by mistake, right?
If used correctly, it can indicate they are available as a Hi-Res download, like from Qobuz etc.Frankly I don't understand why File or FLAC are format options on discogs.
No earthly way this album was released in quadrophonic form and none of us heard about it. Literally won an album of the year Grammy and quadrophonic was for all intents and purposes a dead format for new commercial mixes at the time. It's only because of Rhino's quadio program that newly created quad mixes are even on the table.Just saw this on Discogs:
https://www.discogs.com/release/14240716-Beck-Morning-Phase
"Quadraphonic," eh? Surely entered by mistake, right?
There was a legit 24/96 stereo download available, I have it. Pretty sure it was WAV, not handy at the moment.Frankly I don't understand why File or FLAC are format options on discogs.
It's apparently the same mastering (compression and EQing, I mean) as the CD version as well, if anyone was curious.However, in appending the download page of Beck’s Morning Phase (24bit/96kHz, US$17.95) with a note that reads “Tracks 4, 5, 7, 10, 11 contain elements of 48k tracking, mastered in 96/24” you know there’s seriously something amiss.
I bought it from HDtracks in FLAC. Most stores will allow you to choose a download file type.There was a legit 24/96 stereo download available, I have it. Pretty sure it was WAV, not handy at the moment.
It's likely that the mastering was done in the analog domain, then recaptured to digital at 96kHz, so there was no "upsampling" involved. Most hi-res downloads of new albums released at the same time as a standard resolution download or CD will use the same mastering, sometimes with a little bit less peak limiting, but usually the same amount.You say "legit", but actually, some tracks were upsampled to 96kHz.
It's apparently the same mastering (compression and EQing, I mean) as the CD version as well, if anyone was curious.
There's already a listing for the stereo download, so the one I linked should actually be flagged for deletion.I just amended the listing to show that it's a stereo release.
You can look at the hyperlink, but my impression from the article was that there was no audio above 24 kHz, which is how you can tell it's upsampled.It's likely that the mastering was done in the analog domain, then recaptured to digital at 96kHz, so there was no "upsampling" involved. Most hi-res downloads of new albums released at the same time as a standard resolution download or CD will use the same mastering, sometimes with a little bit less peak limiting, but usually the same amount.
If there's no content above 24kHz going out of a DAC and into an analog mastering chain, there will be very-little-to-none coming back into the ADC at the end of that chain. It doesn't mean any digital upsampling was ever applied.You can look at the hyperlink, but my impression from the article was that there was no audio above 24 kHz, which is how you can tell it's upsampled.
When I said legit I was referring to it being offered officially not of its technical lineage. I did not know the details mentioned.You say "legit", but actually, some tracks were upsampled to 96kHz.
It's apparently the same mastering (compression and EQing, I mean) as the CD version as well, if anyone was curious.
Enter your email address to join: