Anyone like HDtracks?

[Anarchist420]

I think they're okay, but they're kind of expensive... which is understandable since most people are satisfied with whatever crap they're given thus lowering the demand for decent quality. Sometimes lossy is fine but if it's a track I really like that's lossy, then it's not really acceptable.

However, I don't get what's up with double bit rate albums costing 50% than the ones that aren't double bit rate.

Anyway, some Herman's Hermits mp3s I have didn't sound all that much worse than the 24b 88.2khz tracks I downloaded from HDTracks recently although there was some difference I could perceive.

I do think it's a damn shame and rather pathetic that most music you'd hear from, say, Sega CD games has a higher bitrate than the audio from, say, the re-release of AVP (especially considering that the audio doesn't even have to take up a much space per track since we have FLAC and other lossless codecs).

 

[WilliamM2]

Prices are ridiculous. $17.98 to $24.98 to download albums that cost $4.99 to $7.99 on CD from Amazon. I'd rather just rip my own.

It's already been shown that there is no discernible difference between CD's and higher rez formats like SACD and DVD-A:

http://www.drewdaniels.com/audible.pdf

It's all in the mastering.

 

[lxskllr]

I like ogg because it takes less room.

 

[bradley]

Get a benchmark DAC with perfect linearity and there's no discernible difference between 16/44 and 24/96-192 with identical mastering.

 

[mmntech]

It's all in the mastering.

This. Check out the Loudness War on Youtube. A lot of record companies prefer loudness in their music. Problem is when you bump up the gain, it also introduces noise since the computer has to guess what should be there. Bumping up the gain also clips the punchier parts of a song. It becomes harder to separate individual instruments from a piece. The music becomes muddier as a result. When a song is mastered like this, it doesn't matter what bit rate it's encoded at.

This is why LPs tend to sound better than CD or digital music. Old LPs anyway. It's harder to master music like this using analogue equipment, not to mention the limits of a physical medium. The grooves of an LP are only so wide. Modern LPs however tend to have the same problems as CDs and MP3s since they are cut using the loud tracks. Turn the volume up, cut out the punch, remaster that track with lower volume for cutting LPs and the punch is still gone. It's easier to take data away than add it.

 

[thecoolnessrune]

As others have said, 24/96-192 tracks are indiscernable from their 16/44 counterparts as long as identical mastering is done (and it often isn't).

That being said, they sound better if your only alternative is a junky MP3 (should rarely be).