Oh, I had bought the whole download - I just meant that I’ve only had time to give a quick listen to a few tracks. I just can’t believe how much better I could hear her vocal “imperfections” that define a great jazz vocalist.
1 Like
I’m laughing. No, I really like understatements - they keep me at least in the realm of humility. In all seriousness, I learn so much more from you people around here when I go ahead and admit my limitations, which I know compared to the average audio listeners are far and away higher. But one day I’d love to be able to HEAR some of the things I read about DSD, etc. to see if my ears could tell the difference.
2 Likes
Not from me… I’m still at the low angle portion of my learning curve.
But, as it seems that you are too, I am very much enjoying the journey.
And you have insight to offer.
My take on DSD and higher resolutions, is that even if I cannot hear the differences from lower resolutions, whether or not it be due to the gear that I currently use, or my hearing, itself, I want to know that I have the best or at least close to the best possible media that I can play.
1 Like
Oh, I see.
I just listened to the album.
It made me feel that I was ‘there’ in the recording studio.
Wonderful stuff!
1 Like
I urge you to try DSD…
You may be surprised by what you hear.
I certainly enjoy listening to DSD on my system (see my profile for details) which, admittedly, I’ve invested heavily in…
1 Like
This discussion of “whether I can hear the difference” interests me. I’ve found through listening together with friends that we can all hear much more than we give ourselves credit for being able to do. The key is: do you care about the sound or not? I’ve had several experiences with non-audiophile friends who claim they can’t hear the difference (in whatever the topic might be). But when we listen together, it becomes clear that they do hear the differences, they just don’t care about them. They are into the music, not the sound quality.
Also, there is a bit of a “learning curve” to listening for sound quality and being able to differentiate what you’re hearing.
My guess is that we all discriminate sound quality far more than we give ourselves credit for. I’m 72, and I’m sure my hearing is not nearly as good as it was at 22, 32, or 42. But I still discriminate easily between all sorts of sonic differences and format difference, even though I know my ability to hear high frequencies must be seriously deficient these days. I confirmed to myself just yesterday that, yes, that 32bit DXD file sounded better than the same file at 24bit DXD on my system. And the Pure DSD256 file sounded even clearer and more transparent.
So, all this is to say, don’t discount your ability to hear the differences, and once heard, to begin to appreciate the greater resolution and transparency of the sound as you go to higher resolution formats (all other factors being held constant).
If, as @JLawry so well expresses, you can appreciate the sonic improvements of an HDTT released file even at 24/96 over some other commercially released version of that same file, you have a lot to look forward to enjoying if you can climb the resolution ladder.
Good listening, to All!
4 Likes
Yes! Exactly. This is, more often than not, the crux of the “argument”.
And obviously the people in this forum are people that do care.
And it doesn’t matter to what or how we listen to the music, we do care about how it sounds.
I am sure that my hearing is not what it used to be. And I know my setup could be better than it is.
And maybe I do not hear them as often as I could or should hear them, but when they do come, those moments of, I don’t know, brilliance and clarity, while listening, are sheer, heaven sent bliss.
There are moments when it feels like my heart skips a beat and my breath has been taken away. It’s such a rush!
I may be hampering myself with my listening learning curve because I do not make the time to listen to the different resolutions of an album that I have purchased, but I am grateful for the moments that do come my way.
So, yes, like so many of you, I do care.
I am approaching 58 at the end of next month and I have been caring about music and how it sounds, in one way or another, off and on, probably since I was, at least, 10 or 11 years old.
And I am also grateful for all of you enablers in this forum. You know who you are 
Thanks!
1 Like
Just to continue along this theme for a bit further, here three articles I wrote about listening to both 32bit files and Pure DSD256 files. The first is from three years ago, the second from early this year. These share a sense of why high resolution files are so worth it to me and my wife to pursue:
Some free sample downloads of Pure DSD256 files can be found here:
2 Likes
This recording is great either way, but as to which format is better, I decided to compare it again, DSD128 vs 24bit 352.8kHz and it came down to what I said before. The sound of the DSD file has the separation and air superior to the 24bit file. The 24bit version is not as focused and lose a bit of richness and dimensionally. I use the general term “flatter” to describe this difference. It could be that my DSD DAC, the MK2,or my streamer is better deciphering DSD too, that is a possibility.
…the majority of the time, the quality of the recording engineering effort and the musicality of the art captured during the recording process matters more than the resolution at playback or whether the something is X times DSD, PCM or whatever.
4 Likes
Thanks. Definitely.
Learning this more and more as I go.
The old axiom of, “garbage in equals garbage out”.
While that may be true, formats can make a considerable difference also. My brother once bought a 24bit 96k file of Jackie McLean by mistake. He went and got the 192k version also. The difference was not small. You can really hear the lost in resolution with te 96k version. “flatter” would be how I describe that also. Yes, of course how and where it is recorded or mastered makes more difference, but don’t underestimate the difference in formats also.
4 Likes
I agree.
FWIW.
1 Like
No, I get it. But this is where my cheapness rears its ugly head. I do this with other equipment as well - exceed my ability to hear - but if I can’t hear a difference between 96 and 192, then why spend the money?
On another topic, I saw you were really impressed with the Bartok Concerto for Orchestra. I was first introduced to that piece when I was in a Governor’s Honors program in 1977. As much fun as it is to hear, it’s even more fun to play. What an exciting piece, full of life, and humor. My current favorite recording of it - both audio and interpretation – is the Baltimore Symphony directed by Marin Alsop; on the same album, there’s also a great recording of Bartok’s Music for Strings, Percussion and Celeste. Sorry to deviate from the thread, but it’s available on 2XHD’s NAXOS label. Not sure whether they do DSD, but my downloaded one is fantastic.
2 Likes
Very nice post Ruhton. One thing you say about the learning curve that has been my experience is how my ears and brain get better and better at hearing things - some of them I can even DESCRIBE in terms others can understand. I was once a co-moderator of the Wine Forum on CompuServe - this goes back to the late 1990s. I was trying to learn how people could taste those “hints of moldy blackberries,” and as I am now with audio, I was progressively getting closer, and learning my own ways of tasting things. There was a guy there who used to say that the difference between a wine drinker and an aficionado is simply that the latter THINKS about the wine and what makes it good to him. Fortunately I needed to give up the wine hobby 7,313 days ago, but the same principle applies here - THINK about the sound and decide what it does to impress you. Then while you’re at it, do the same thing with the music itself - ask why it is that Frank Sinatra waits longer in the last verse to sing that note? Listen to how the drummer and sax player encourage each other. Then the real magic I’m working on: how does the sound quality reveal the subtleties of what someone is doing? Notice how he seems to almost be tapping the cymbals with his fingernail (and maybe he is). And don’t be intimidated by others’ ability to hear and taste things - they might be lucky or they might be making it up to justify spending the money! Which does make me wonder why the audiophile world doesn’t seem to do “blind” tastings as they do for wine.
3 Likes
Oh, no worries. Cheap is my middle name.
Well, at least trying to maximize the value gained for my limited budget.
The caveat to my cheapness is FOMO. Fear Of Missing Out - Even though my current DAC covers up to DSD 128 and PCM 192, for DSD I’ll get the higher rates, if available and they offer all of the lower rates by purchasing the highest. One day…
Bartok. Yes! When HDTT released the Concerto for Orchestra, and for just about any other release that they offer and that I am interested in, I will usually check out other vendors for the same, and/or stream the album. In my searching, I did come across the Concerto paired with Music for Strings, Percussion and Celeste. It is also a really wonderful work from Bartok. and has been added to my wishlist.
Very cool that you were able to play the piece as well!
I will look for the Baltimore Symphony directed by Marin Alsop version and the Naxos version of MfSPaC. I am not a DSD purist, so even if available in PCM only, I would still add PCM albums to my collection.
Also, I have not listened to enough classical music to be able to catch the differences between the different conductors and orchestras versions of the same work. So, I do appreciate your recommendation.
No need to apologize to me for deviations. Conversations can naturally tend to wander.
Hey, thanks for the reply. Sounds like you’ve got your musical head screwed on pretty good!
One thing I’ve learned about classical music is that a lot of people listen to it WRONG. Here’s what I mean: we are intimidated by classical music being “high-brow”, something to STUDY, being complex, based on music theory (my worst classes in college). All of that is true, but none of it is NECESSARY. When I was in college, “studying” music, I also produced jazz radio programs with a guy about 10 years older than me. In the classical field, I wasn’t crazy about the modern 20th Century atonal stuff - like Schoenberg, Webern, even Bartok - but when I began exploring atonal avant-garde, or “free” jazz, I found that I really connected to it. My co-producer told me that the best thing to do with ANY kind of music is shut out any preconceptions you have and just listen to the music itself and LET it move you - don’t try to FORCE yourself to like it. It was after using that approach that I began to really LIKE modern classical music, and started liking other genres even more - country, bluegrass, blues, rock, alt. rock, Americana, music from other cultures, even some rap and hip-hop. It’s what I said elsewhere in this thread about being a wine “aficionado” - all it requires is taking the extra step to THINK about what you like and WHY you like it that counts.
And you probably don’t want to tell anybody - shhhhhhh - but a hell of a lot of modern “classical” composers would rather people try to listen to their stuff from a LET-it-move-you perspective than all that fancy academic crap.
2 Likes
I couldn’t agree more.
I was lucky enough to be born into a family that has the ‘music gene’, so I was educated with music as a core subject.
I’m so glad.
I can relate to, and I enjoy, almost all music genres.
However, I have never felt any connection with, or like of
As you say
I agree, but rap and hip-hop don’t move me…
Each unto their own.
2 Likes
Like the old saying goes?
I don’t know much about art…
These days, with streaming, there is usually no excuse not to at least try listening to something new.
And, yes, if it hits me, chances are I will listen to the same again.
The biggest problem is a lack of time. And wanting to try to hear more of what I know that I already do like. I am making up for lost time.
The could be bigger problems to have, I guess.
A nice problem at that.
1 Like