Mostly PCM, using either a Marantz PMD671 or Sony PCM-D100.
It was the Beatles 44/24 files which convinced me to move from CD to streaming. It is my experience that 16 v 24 is more important than 44v96v192.
That said, I have many superb 44/16 CD rips. A great deal depends on the quality of the original recording.
Equally, many remasters are now only available in 24 bit, so a 24 v 16 comparison is not possible. My experience is that most of these are an improvement on their earlier 16 bit CD versions.
Yes, I agree.
I do find that modern 24bit recordings have some wonderful dynamics, going from pp through to full mf.
The dynamic swings can be superb.
M
How many who hear these differences have taken Mark’s blind test?
Reading between the lines on his update emails it would appear that not many people are able to accurately pick the high resolution recordings. It would be a great help for the robustness of the data if more people who can hear these differences partake in the test.
.sjb
2 Likes
Certainly noticeable on Blu-ray Discs versus DVD for concerts.
1 Like
Be careful of your ears, listening at 144dB (24bit) is certain to damage your ears.
On the other hand the dynamic range of a valve line stage typically 90dB. Well below even 16bit. It is easy to get lost in the numbers. Bit depth does not add accuracy/resolution. Only lower noise.
1 Like
My ears are nothing special and I use hearing aids, but even so I can tell the difference between the CD rip (made on a Unitiserve) and the 24/96 download of this relatively recent well-reviewed recording. I read a HiFi News review of the download which commented on the different sound quality, more ethereal and edgy sound to the violin, making the whole thing more “live” if I remember accurately, which I probably don’t. As it was a new release and I bought the two formats at the same time, I think it’s safe to assume that they were both as the recording producer intended.
But I rarely buy a high res download now unless it’s a lot cheaper than the CD, which occasionally happens.
Best
David
I listen at about 65db or thereabouts.
1 Like
I agree re the 24/96 v 24/292, I don’t hear any difference. I’ve been told that 96 might be the best option and that it’s the 24 bit that brings the improvement.
Just in case anyone who is interested hasn’t heard of this: a set of varied music files with unlabelled red-book and hi-resolution versions of each, the idea being that you download them, listen to them, decide which is the high-res version of each and then submit your answers. When enough participants have submitted their answers, all will be revealed. These are all well-recorded tracks and the challenge is a bit of fun.
Not sure how you blind test this without easily knowing what is hires considering all the apps and displays say what it is these days. I struggle to tell the difference and only notice if the master is good, but then it could be good at cd quality to. Can’t say one hires album has made me go wow it’s all really worth it.
Seems bit involved… why not use a service like Qobuz, and you can simply compare hidef and 44./16 masters of the same mix… and even create a random playlist so you don’t which is which other than by listening to them… and then you will no doubt find it’s quite apparent. I find the 16 to 24 bit usually the most noticeable with space around elements in a busy mix.
3 Likes
Nope - file labelling / metadata adjusted so you can’t cheat ‘accidentally’ unless you go out of your way and use particular analytics software. Anyhow, your choice whether or not to try, of course. But you might be surprised at what you hear if you do…
1 Like
There is another thread open on this, started a month ago:
Can your system accurately tell the difference between 24/96 and 16/44?
@Richard.Dane i wonder if they would be better combined?
Agreed. I’ve combined the threads.
I have done Marks blind test
Some tracks sounded different some it was hard to tell any difference
My overall result - just received from Mark - was 41% correct!!!
I must admit though, that I classed the version I liked listening to better as the Hi Res version
Well asked to be sent them, so this should be fun and something to do while we are under lockdown
One problem I have is that the return form requires saying which you think is the hi res. In some cases I can hear a difference, so wrong to select ‘no difference’, but cannot decide if one actually sounds better than the other, which would be my only way of deciding which is the hi res. I did contact the guy, who said The industry is insisting that hi-res audio enhances our listening or “sounds better” than what we’ve had previously. I would suggest that you select the version you believe “sounds better” to you. Or you can choose to ignore that track. I will listen again when I have time, but if still the same then rather than mislead, I think I will have to ”ignore” those ones as if not assessed.
Has anyone else experience hearing a difference but not one clearly being ‘better’?
Do some people have sentient HiFi?
Yes, this is an opportunity for true blind testing, made easy for everyone! Other than availability of time, why would anyone not take it up and find out?
Of course, it will only relate to the specific recordings used, but there is a range. I hope that afterwards the analysis will identify other statistics than just percentage of correct identification of the hi res, such as identifying the percentages against each individual track, which may help show if it is recording-specific or regardless or recording. Maybe people participating could request that, and sufficient requests might promptbit if not already intended.