Better mastered music could be on the way!

Congratulations Mirren Boy.  

You have managed to destroy any credibility that you might have had.  Although none was apparent to me.  

You sem to think record stores and online download stores are checking every album for it’s bandwith. Honestly I have never read so much nonsense on a hifi forum before.

What, not even this one?

Here are todays Linn downloads. The track is called 'The Missing Plutonium'.

As you can see from these pictures the two files are different again today. The FLAC version has several seconds of silence at the beginning and end but the MP3 version has had these silent sections removed. Apart from that the two tracks are the same. They are both at the same volume level and they both have a matching amount of dynamic range.

IMO this is actually a sensible way of editing the original 24bit FLAC studio version before converting it into an MP3. Just cropping the silent sections off the beginning and end but leaving the rest of the sound exactly as it is.

What does seem odd though, is that over the past three days all of the MP3 tracks have been edited but in different ways. The first had the dynamic range compressed, the second had the volume altered and the third had the silent sections cropped.

Wednesdays 24 bit FLAC

http://i1239.photobucket.com/albums/ff512/steve__1979/Day4FLAC.jpg

Wednesdays 320kbps MP3

http://i1239.photobucket.com/albums/ff512/steve__1979/Day4MP3.jpg

Here are another pair of pictures that you may find interesting. They show the FLAC and MP3 versions of the track 'Oranges and Apples' from two days ago (the one on page 7 of this thread). This is the track that had the dynamic range compressed on the MP3 version.

The original pictures that I posted on page 7 were zoomed into a 1 second long section of the song. These new pictures show the entire length of the song. The red lines on the MP3 version show where the peaks have reached the maximum possible volume and have been clipped.

FLAC version

http://i1239.photobucket.com/albums/ff512/steve__1979/Linnday2FLACfull.jpg

MP3 version

http://i1239.photobucket.com/albums/ff512/steve__1979/Linnday2MP3full.jpg

I think WHF forum found its own quality controller. Well done Steve.

 If only your findings could be made more public and companies involved actually took any notice.

Whatever I've seen on here has generally been from a good place.  Generally.  All fora have their issues, but compared to some I can think of, most of the folk on here probably don't need to take a good hard look at themselves.

duplicate deleted

I am aware of many opinions and subjective impressions that say 24-bit is better, but objective studies with blind tests and carefully setup and volume-matched comparisons, with music rather than test tones, are scant indeed.

I doubt it is for lack of trying.

I have many hi-res recordings but when I downsample to 16/44 and compare them blind they sound the same.

When I run SACD output through a 16/44 ADC and DAC conversion it sounds the same (though with two conversions here you could expect it to sound fractionally worse). Perhaps there is someone out there or some system that would enable a difference to be heard, but if it exists, it is very very small.

Tim

I agree there is an issue the graph above shows that. However I firmly believe good 24bit recordings are out there going by my own collection. Have also written on this thread about the duff ones I have from HDtracks such as Talking Heads and Nirvana.  

Agreed, there are lots of good 24 bit recordings out there. The only thing I doubt is whether they sound any better than they would at 16/44!

Tim

Has What HiFi got nothing to say about Steve's findings on the Linn files?  

Would seem like a very valid investigation that What HiFi could pursue on behalf of possibly exploited members of the music buying public.  Might not be so good for advertising revenue though?

good job Steve, again. but I have to disagree with you. they are not identical masters. by looking at the pictures it seems like some of the background instrument of the mp3 version is shelved down compared to 24 bit version. this can be seen easiest at the beginning of the song. this trick will make seem hi-res sound more "clear".

They're different shades of blue as well, I'm sure that's important! #notaclue

there's one more thing I need to draw your attention to with regards masters of the hi-res songs from Linn's web site. despite the fact they are 24 bit - meaning they have the possibility to utilise much wider dynamic range than with mere 16 bit version - they are still compressed! it's most clearly seen on the 3rd download. it may not necessarily be digital compression as the Audacity doesn't mark anything in red but I believe some analog compressors were used during mastering process of the songs, most likely on the percussion, as the peaks don't reach as high over the mean as they should and also the peaks couldn't be as level in real life as they are on the recording. here's a graph of Dire Straights' "Walk of Life" from the 80's. Dire Straights early masters are still pointed out as the best examples of how to do mastering properly, despite such a long time has since passed.

so, this is exactly what I said before; 24 bit does not give you better quality recordings. good quality mastering does. and it's really a shame that having access to such a wide dynamic range 24 bit format ca offer you still get compressed music!!!

of course music mastered with preserving high dynamic range will initially sound quieter compared to low dynamic range recording - that's why you need to pump up the volume considerably to get decent volume levels. but when you do the music sounds so much more realistic and natural.... definitely worth an effort to get yourself a better amp able to handle high dynamic peaks.