HDTracks UK & HDTracks Germany Have Closed

[Owen Smith]

I never bought anything from HD Tracks because they were so expensive.

 

[dghan]

When people hear a difference between the CD and the hi-rez release, it's really the mastering differences that they are hearing. CDs still have a lot of dynamic compression added at the mastering stage, and, unfortunately, the more recent hi-rez releases do, too. I check the Dynamic Range Database, dr.loudness-war.info, first to see if the more expensive resolutions are worth it.

When all things are equal, CD equality (16 bit/44.1 kHz) sounds pretty darn good. Take the HD Audio Challenge, HD-Audio Challenge II: Preliminary Results | Real HD-Audio, and try it for yourself. Tracks recorded digitally at 24 bit/96 kHz are compared to the same tracks resampled to 16 bit/44.1 kHz and then put back in a 24 bit/96 kHz container so that people couldn't tell the difference by looking at the spectrum with Audacity or some other audio tool. The success rate for picking out the hi-rez track by listening is about 50%.

For old albums that have analog sources, the differences heard are most likely a different A/D conversion and/or the mastering after the conversion. For these reasons, many hi-rez releases sound better than the CD release, but I still buy the 16 bit/44.1 kHz version from HDtracks because it's cheaper and it's likely resampled from 24 bit/ 96 or 192 kHz. As the HD Audio Challenge has shown me, it sounds just as good.

 

[Sonik Wiz]

Those drinkie poo's help with a lot of things, and yes they do add to click-itis.
If I have a CD and HDTracks releases it in 24/96 or 24/192 I likely will purchase the download and it is worth it.
If I have a CD and it gets released in 24/44.1 I will not. That would be around 25-30 dollars for one piece of music, double dipped, not worth it.
Lets see, I have been a bottle collector, music collector, stamp and coin collector, I was a rock n roll concert poster collector also.
Funny that all of my collecting even with my music now has been the same. The funnest part about being a collector is the documentation of your collection. It was always fun back in the day when it was all pen and paper, now it is all computer based and super easy.

Thanks for the reply! Some keywords I see are past tense, "have been" and "was". At the risk of stating the obvious these changes are not just generational human wise but technology wise as well. People loved to work on their hot rods in the 50's because that was the affordable & accessible technology. They did that because they had yet to discover Atari Pong or build their own PC's.
I think ham radio & stamp collecting has more in common than 1st apparent. Someone involved in those activities has an interest in connecting with the greater world outside their door. If you collect a special commemorative stamp from Persia (remember Persia?) you probably were interested enough to learn about the person on the stamp & the country. Certainly ham radio wasd an adventure across the country & the world. To listen to Radio Free America or DX Spain is another way of exploring. Now we have the internet I can communicate with anyone in the world as easy as I connect with my anime friends across town on Discord.

Along with desiring a "really good sound system" at one time everyone also wanted a "really good camera set up". It was the common mans art form. This was supplanted by really good phone cameras & now that's a hobby faded away. Even for me, I spent 1/2 my working career in some form of visual communications. Now I have an Android camera.

Documenting my collection of music & movies is not something I have the dedication to do. But I certainly agree with computer stuff making it easier than ever. The best example I know of that is an anime friend with a vast collection of CD's, DVD's, Blu-Rei, etc. Once upon a time Microsoft had a ultra-high res image hosting service that show cased the Silverlight technology. My friend took his Canon camera in the panorama mode and swept from left to right row to row his collection which BTW was in alphabetical order. At one time I asked him if he had such & such series he just went to his images on the website & looked for the title. Yup, he had it.

 

[Jerry372]

On some sites they also require that you use a credit card issued in that country to avoid the VPNers.
Tightening up the requirements.

I use PayPal on Qobuz France and haven't had a problem yet.

 

[Sonik Wiz]

When people hear a difference between the CD and the hi-rez release, it's really the mastering differences that they are hearing. CDs still have a lot of dynamic compression added at the mastering stage, and, unfortunately, the more recent hi-rez releases do, too. I check the Dynamic Range Database, dr.loudness-war.info, first to see if the more expensive resolutions are worth it.

When all things are equal, CD equality (16 bit/44.1 kHz) sounds pretty darn good. Take the HD Audio Challenge, HD-Audio Challenge II: Preliminary Results | Real HD-Audio, and try it for yourself. Tracks recorded digitally at 24 bit/96 kHz are compared to the same tracks resampled to 16 bit/44.1 kHz and then put back in a 24 bit/96 kHz container so that people couldn't tell the difference by looking at the spectrum with Audacity or some other audio tool. The success rate for picking out the hi-rez track by listening is about 50%.

For old albums that have analog sources, the differences heard are most likely a different A/D conversion and/or the mastering after the conversion. For these reasons, many hi-rez releases sound better than the CD release, but I still buy the 16 bit/44.1 kHz version from HDtracks because it's cheaper and it's likely resampled from 24 bit/ 96 or 192 kHz. As the HD Audio Challenge has shown me, it sounds just as good.

If there is an audible improvement of high res vs CD then that's just what it is. It may come frfom better mastering, better ad convertors & a higher res format will convey these improvements. The DR on a recording is important but I see an over emphasis on the statistics. It's only one aspect of a recording quality & fails to tell anything about the other audible elements. I would never avoid a musical purchase based on someones DR stat nor would I buy something I only have a mild interest in because it has good DR.

I will check out the HD audio challenge. Sounds interesting.

 

[bmoura]

The DR on a recording is important but I see an over emphasis on the statistics. It's only one aspect of a recording quality & fails to tell anything about the other audible elements. I would never avoid a musical purchase based on someones DR stat nor would I buy something I only have a mild interest in because it has good DR.

Yes, and the "DR" numbers I see quoted for DSD and SACD releases are calculated after the music is converted from DSD to PCM.
So it's not an accurate representation of the original DSD audio.

Beyond that, I would agree with Sonik Wiz that statistics are only part of the story.
At the end of the day, you need to listen to the music to really hear what is audible to the listener.