AVS Forum banner

HD Tracks quality? Please share your experience about this download service

46K views 147 replies 61 participants last post by  Bill-99 
#1 ·
Bought a few tracks and couple of albums from HD Tracks . I am playing these through the Oppo BDP-95 from a USB flash drive. While they sound very good, some tracks (For example the song Hello, Lionel Richie, 192Khz/24bit) have some audio breaks/skips. Is it because of the USB drive? I will try the eSATA option too at a later time, but for now I am wondering if it is just a quality issue of the tracks. I still seem to prefer my SACDs. Makes me wonder how much attention they pay to rip quality.

Thanks,
 
#27 ·
If you have a well done and well mastered recording it will sound good in 16/44.1 or 24/192. If you take a poorly recorded and mastered track that is 24/192 there is still plenty of opportunity for it to sound like crap. I get 24 bit XXX Khz stuff whenever I can because I have the hard drive space for it. It's not so much that I feel it's better.
 
#28 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by nathanddrews  /t/1404247/hd-tracks-quality-please-share-your-experience-about-this-download-service#post_22306047


But we know this is false as many of the best-looking Blu-ray discs are converted from analog 35mm film stock (1959 Ben-Hur was shot on 70mm film and is arguably one of the best looking Blu-ray discs around). All music (like video) is recorded from an analog world. Analog recordings are perfectly capable of sourcing "HD" versions as long as the original elements contain enough information - if that's what they're trying to say, then I agree. "Digital recordings" are simply analog recordings from analog tools converted on-the-fly to digital (ADC). No magic or mystery there.

Ok try well recorded 5.1 SACDs and feel the difference compared to HD tracks here are a few good ones


Pink Floyd: Dark Side of the Moon: http://sa-cd.net/showtitle/771


Pink Floyd: Wish You Were Here: http://sa-cd.net/showtitle/7523


Dire Straits: Brothers in Arms: http://sa-cd.net/showtitle/3052


Or Classical


- Mozart: Serenades - Scottish Chamber Orchestra: http://sa-cd.net/showtitle/4493


- Beethoven: Piano Concertos Nos. 3, 4 & 5 - Pizarro, Mackerras: http://sa-cd.net/showtitle/5876


Even better well recorded music on Blu Ray:


- http://www.2l.no/epost/news2010may.html

- http://www.shopsfsymphony.org/shop/product.php?productid=1856&cat=100&page=1

- http://www.aixrecords.com/blu_ray.html


I can not listen to stereo any more, I love 5.2 music, especially with my ensemble of 800 Diamonds and 802Ds
 
#29 ·
Have not had any problems downloading or playing back any file from HDTracks. As for all the commentary about recordings that just sound 'meh', well, they probably sounded meh before but our previous playback chain may not have noticed. In my youth I thought many albums were superb but I was all agog at the music itself and not the sound quality. Many rock recordings back in the day were simply atrocious but we are sentimentally attached to the memories of the time and hope to recapture a bit of former glory. The pieces from HDTracks I have been grabbing are of music that was recorded and mastered superbly (think Steely Dan) or is simply not available anymore unless one wants to spend mucho dinero on elusive LP's and what's left of the thinning herd of SACD's. Gave up LP's. 'Nuff said on that.


As for the mastering, I have noted here, and on other forums, that a good recording, well mastered, can sound just great on a 16/44.1 CD. Many little things have to happen in the chain for that to happen.


I've often wondered about the early days of the LP. Analog tape with hiss, mastering and cutting of the lacquer, pressing the LP's, ceramic cartridges, heavy tonearms, dubious record changers, tubed preamp/amps and mostly crap speakers. How would anyone know if it sounded good? That fact that it sounded at all was the thing. Like the dancing bear, it is not that the bear dances so well but that he dances at all!


Returning to HDTracks:


Jazz at the Pawnshop - worth it, no brainer - beautifully recorded, some of the tracks are brilliant, funny, mediocre, but so what? a moment in time

Diana Krall - Quiet Nights, Look of Love, Christmas Songs - Jazz people really care about their recordings. period. also it appears that they are minimally miked, and done with no over dubbing. Live in the studio

Donald Fagen - Kamakiriad - Clean, pristine

Fleetwood Mac - Rumours - Have the DVD-Audio as well - there are differences but they are subtle and are more a matter of taste. like wine. pinot or zin?

Eagles - Hotel California - See above


These are just examples. I really don't obsess over this stuff since it is the music that matters to me. If I don't feel like moving to it, or crying or grinning or singing along, the rest is unimportant!
 
#114 ·
I agree. I almost never find a single track that I want.
We've been through this before.
They were selling single songs for 99 cents.
Now they're back to trying to sell albums.
(See definition of insanity)
PS- the only single that I found was
Madeleine Peyroux Weary Blue.
Which really worked out well for her.
I ended up buying more of her music.
 
#31 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by detroit1  /t/1404247/hd-tracks-quality-please-share-your-experience-about-this-download-service#post_22548164


I also wanted to buy a track from HDTracks and they told me they only offer full album purchase, which is a joke I wanted to try certain tracks from albums that I was familiar with has anyone bought a single song from there lately?

Forget it they are a total rip off instead this is much better http://www.linnrecords.com/recording-weber--wind-concertos.aspx
 
#32 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmcomp124  /t/1404247/hd-tracks-quality-please-share-your-experience-about-this-download-service#post_21879550

Quote:
Originally Posted by ap1  /forum/post/21879255


If you experience skips it is either bad file or broken storage/player device. Try to listen them on computer, if it still skips, then contact HD Tracks with complaint.


I thought it was repeatable, but tried now again and could not reproduce the problem.

That's frustrating!
Quote:
I wonder if the BDP-95 at times struggles to sustain the 192/24 stream. USB bandwidth issue?

Most likely source of bottlenecks would be the flash drive itself.


What class flash media do you have? Multichannel 192/24 can bump up against some media speed limits.


Flash drives have a fair amount of intelligence built into them because the basic flash memory media has a built-in ticking time bomb for number of updates. There is error detection/correction built into the drive, and it will relocate data that has soft errors during playback, but this might cause a brief delay.
Quote:
Does the player buffer while played from USB.

It has to at some level as the data is in packets on the flash drive.
Quote:
It appears not to be a HD tracks issue.

If there are breaks or skips in audio files, sometimes they are visible if you load them onto your computer and look at them with audio editing software like audacity.


You can find software players for just about anything you can download with a computer, so playing the file on your computer gives you a low-cost source of second opinions.
 
#34 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by detroit1  /t/1404247/hd-tracks-quality-please...bout-this-download-service/0_60#post_22549908


the linn site does not have any popular artists; seems like it is all classical; no pop, rock, etc

any other sites that have more popular music where you can download 1 song at a time?

Give it up on downloading 1 song at a time.


What exactly are you trying to accomplish?


IMO wse is right about avoiding https://www.hdtracks.com/


Just to repeat my main question:

What exactly are you trying to accomplish?


Both linnrecords and 2L are the 2 best sites I know of for high quality download of 5.1 and stereo music.


And you can get a lot of free hi-rez music from the 2L site.
 
#36 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by OtherSongs  /t/1404247/hd-tracks-quality-please...bout-this-download-service/0_60#post_22551135


And you can get a lot of free hi-rez music from the 2L site.
Quote:
Originally Posted by detroit1  /t/1404247/hd-tracks-quality-please...bout-this-download-service/0_60#post_22551408


what is the link for 2L.
http://www.2l.no/


In the extreme upper right corner is a pull down menu


Left click on it.


Then left click on "Test Bench HD audio files" and the page will expand so that you can download a lot of stuff that will help to get you sorted with the whole hi-rez and 5.1 audio thing.
 
#37 ·
Which one do you think sounds the best (I know which one sounds the loudest!)?


foobar2000 1.1.16 / Dynamic Range Meter 1.1.1

log date: 2012-11-19 14:09:26



Analyzed: Eagles / Hotel California




DR Peak RMS Duration Track



DR15 -2.48 dB -20.88 dB 6:32 01-Hotel California

DR13 -3.64 dB -20.10 dB 5:05 02-New Kid in Town

DR15 -1.10 dB -19.42 dB 4:47 03-Life in the Fast Lane

DR13 -5.56 dB -23.03 dB 4:55 04-Wasted Time

DR11 -8.73 dB -26.29 dB 1:24 05-Wasted Time (Reprise)

DR13 -4.82 dB -21.04 dB 4:10 06-Victim of Love

DR15 -5.47 dB -25.32 dB 3:59 07-Pretty Maids All in a Row

DR13 -4.03 dB -20.54 dB 5:12 08-Try and Love Again

DR13 -3.28 dB -21.88 dB 7:27 09-The Last Resort




Number of tracks: 9

Official DR value: DR14


Samplerate: 44100 Hz

Channels: 2

Bits per sample: 16

Bitrate: 779 kbps

Codec: WMA

================================================================================

vs.


foobar2000 1.1.16 / Dynamic Range Meter 1.1.1

log date: 2012-11-19 14:10:11



Analyzed: Eagles / Hotel California




DR Peak RMS Duration Track



DR10 0.00 dB -11.95 dB 6:31 01-Hotel California

DR9 0.00 dB -11.30 dB 5:04 02-New Kid In Town

DR9 0.00 dB -10.85 dB 4:46 03-Life In The Fast Lane

DR10 0.00 dB -13.67 dB 4:55 04-Wasted Time

DR11 -0.80 dB -17.14 dB 1:24 05-Wasted Time: Reprise

DR8 0.00 dB -10.46 dB 4:10 06-Victim Of Love

DR12 0.00 dB -14.91 dB 3:59 07-Pretty Maids All In A Row

DR9 0.00 dB -11.06 dB 5:10 08-Try And Love Again

DR9 0.00 dB -13.35 dB 7:32 09-The Last Resort




Number of tracks: 9

Official DR value: DR10


Samplerate: 96000 Hz

Channels: 2

Bits per sample: 24

Bitrate: 2666 kbps

Codec: FLAC

================================================================================

I emailed HD tracks and asked them about it. This is their answer:


"We receive masters/files from the record labels. Each label has their own mastering process unfortunately. We don't master or recording anything here. But that is something we can discuss with the label for the future. We do appreciate you bringing it to our attention."
 
#38 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by boh10  /t/1404247/hd-tracks-quality-please...-about-this-download-service/30#post_22602211

Which one do you think sounds the best (I know which one sounds the loudest!)?

foobar2000 1.1.16 / Dynamic Range Meter 1.1.1

log date: 2012-11-19 14:09:26



Analyzed: Eagles / Hotel California



DR Peak RMS Duration Track



DR15 -2.48 dB -20.88 dB 6:32 01-Hotel California

DR13 -3.64 dB -20.10 dB 5:05 02-New Kid in Town

DR15 -1.10 dB -19.42 dB 4:47 03-Life in the Fast Lane

DR13 -5.56 dB -23.03 dB 4:55 04-Wasted Time

DR11 -8.73 dB -26.29 dB 1:24 05-Wasted Time (Reprise)

DR13 -4.82 dB -21.04 dB 4:10 06-Victim of Love

DR15 -5.47 dB -25.32 dB 3:59 07-Pretty Maids All in a Row

DR13 -4.03 dB -20.54 dB 5:12 08-Try and Love Again

DR13 -3.28 dB -21.88 dB 7:27 09-The Last Resort



Number of tracks: 9

Official DR value: DR14

Samplerate: 44100 Hz

Channels: 2

Bits per sample: 16

Bitrate: 779 kbps

Codec: WMA

================================================================================
vs.

foobar2000 1.1.16 / Dynamic Range Meter 1.1.1

log date: 2012-11-19 14:10:11



Analyzed: Eagles / Hotel California



DR Peak RMS Duration Track



DR10 0.00 dB -11.95 dB 6:31 01-Hotel California

DR9 0.00 dB -11.30 dB 5:04 02-New Kid In Town

DR9 0.00 dB -10.85 dB 4:46 03-Life In The Fast Lane

DR10 0.00 dB -13.67 dB 4:55 04-Wasted Time

DR11 -0.80 dB -17.14 dB 1:24 05-Wasted Time: Reprise

DR8 0.00 dB -10.46 dB 4:10 06-Victim Of Love

DR12 0.00 dB -14.91 dB 3:59 07-Pretty Maids All In A Row

DR9 0.00 dB -11.06 dB 5:10 08-Try And Love Again

DR9 0.00 dB -13.35 dB 7:32 09-The Last Resort



Number of tracks: 9

Official DR value: DR10

Samplerate: 96000 Hz

Channels: 2

Bits per sample: 24

Bitrate: 2666 kbps

Codec: FLAC

================================================================================
I emailed HD tracks and asked them about it. This is their answer:

"We receive masters/files from the record labels. Each label has their own mastering process unfortunately. We don't master or recording anything here. But that is something we can discuss with the label for the future. We do appreciate you bringing it to our attention."

Forgive my ignorance, but what is this telling us? I got these tracks from HDtracks and just want to understand.


Thanks
 
#39 ·
It indicates that the hi-resolution tracks have been compressed (dynamic compression, not bitrate compression) to reduce the difference between the quiet sounds and the loud sounds. The result is an overall louder, less dynamic sound. This is usually a bad thing, and can easily render the "high-resolution" release inferior to a lower-resolution (or less compressed) release of the same content.


Head over to Google and run a search on "loudness war". Most of the information that you find will be in reference to standard audio CDs, which have been crippled by increasingly-"loud" mastering since the early or mid '90s. But the same problems can occur with any format, including hi-resolution downloads. It's especially disappointing with high-resolution downloads, which are marketed to audiophiles who are looking for high-quality (as opposed to unnaturally loud & squashed) release of their favorite music.
 
#41 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Theresa  /t/1404247/hd-tracks-quality-please...-about-this-download-service/30#post_22622784


So HDTracks claims they have no control of the mastering? That would make downloads from them pointless or worse. Because all their downloads are stereo, not MC, I had decided to not buy from them anymore and this just confirms my decision.

I would sincerely hope that HDTracks did not remaster the products they sell. Their role in the mastering picture is to distribute whatever other people produce, Mastering engineers are typically hired by the recording's producer and do their work before the recording is released to distributors the first time.
 
#42 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by skriefal  /t/1404247/hd-tracks-quality-please...-about-this-download-service/30#post_22622476


It indicates that the hi-resolution tracks have been compressed (dynamic compression, not bitrate compression) to reduce the difference between the quiet sounds and the loud sounds. The result is an overall louder, less dynamic sound. This is usually a bad thing, and can easily render the "high-resolution" release inferior to a lower-resolution (or less compressed) release of the same content.

That's a value judgement on your part. It seems to be based on a narrow view of what music is and how it is enjoyed.


If I'm doing some dedicated listening to a big musical work, then preserving the dynamic range of the original performance makes much sense.


If an office worker is playing it as background music at a low level in his cubicle, then wide dynamic range is his enemy, and will make enemies among the people who sit near him.


In an ideal world all recordings would be distributed with original dynamic range, and a standardized and effective little gizmo would allow listeners to modify the original wide dynamic range recording to have whatever dynamic range suits their situation.


To work out well the gizmo would have to be standardized. That means a lot of people see the need and agree on something fairly complex. Lotsa luck!


The gizmo would add considerable work to the job of being a mastering engineer because the original recording would have to be tested over a range of settings of the gizmo to make sure that the recording "worked" for a range of potential consumers.


This isn't going to happen this year, next year, or probably 5 years down the road because it takes a lot of people agreeing on a complex standard of a kind that has never been done before, and it involves a lot of people taking on extra work.
 
#43 ·
Sorry, my mistake.

For now I'm sticking with CDs, SACDs, and DVD-As. Since HDTracks use more heavily compressed music than the earlier released CDs

(as seen in: "It indicates that the hi-resolution tracks have been compressed (dynamic compression, not bitrate compression) to reduce the difference between the quiet sounds and the loud sounds. The result is an overall louder, less dynamic sound. This is usually a bad thing, and can easily render the "high-resolution" release inferior to a lower-resolution (or less compressed) release of the same content.")

I would wish that they did some remastering from the original rather than using the more heavily compressed music supplied by the studios. For the price premium they charge it doesn't seem too much to expect that their files would have greater dynamic range than the CD.
 
#44 ·
Content for HD Tracks must be "remastered" in a number of instances. An example is when they are given an SACD as the source. This has to be converted to PCM and how you do that requires judgement (e.g. what to do with its ultrasonic noise). In other cases they get tapes, etc.


Bruce Brown who posts on whatsbest forum does a lot of this work for them and has given a ton of insight about it. He has his own forum there and you can ask questions about such things directly from him. But please note that he doesn't control the source either. He simply tries to make the best out of it. Click on the first link in this search to find his forum: https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Awhatsbestforum.com+bruce+brown+&rlz=1C1SNNT_enUS374US375&oq=site%3Awhatsbestforum.com+bruce+brown+&aqs=chrome.0.57j58.8256&sugexp=chrome,mod=8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8


And no, there is no good reason for loudness equalization in the content we buy. We can always compress the dynamics when we play them. But we can't restore them once destroyed in the mastering.
 
#45 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk  /t/1404247/hd-tracks-quality-please...-about-this-download-service/30#post_22622904


In an ideal world all recordings would be distributed with original dynamic range, and a standardized and effective little gizmo would allow listeners to modify the original wide dynamic range recording to have whatever dynamic range suits their situation.

I see no reason that this device would need to be standardized. The playback device simply needs to be able to apply dynamic range compression. Most AVRs can already do this, as can some portable players.


Music released with proper dynamics can be listened to as-is for those of us who wish it, or can be compressed at playback time (or while ripping and encoding to MP3) for those who prefer reduced dynamics. That choice is not available with pre-squashed content.
 
#46 ·
Here is a graphical view of the above tracks:





You can clearly see the clipping on the compressed tracks. To be fair, HDtracks have some really good recordings as well so if they allowed people to either comment on the downloads or if they provided some additional data about the particular mix then we would know what we paid for. Right now they just say that they don't know, which is not good enough.
 
#47 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by boh10  /t/1404247/hd-tracks-quality-please...-about-this-download-service/30#post_22634967


Here is a graphical view of the above tracks:





You can clearly see the clipping on the compressed tracks.

Nope. I see no such thing.


Clear evidence of clipping is flat-topped waves. The view shown lacks the detail required to make that call.
 
#48 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by skriefal  /t/1404247/hd-tracks-quality-please...-about-this-download-service/30#post_22624653

Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk  /t/1404247/hd-tracks-quality-please...-about-this-download-service/30#post_22622904


In an ideal world all recordings would be distributed with original dynamic range, and a standardized and effective little gizmo would allow listeners to modify the original wide dynamic range recording to have whatever dynamic range suits their situation.

I see no reason that this device would need to be standardized. The playback device simply needs to be able to apply dynamic range compression. Most AVRs can already do this, as can some portable players.

I sense a very simplistic view of the art and science of dynamic range compression. All dynamic range compressors aren't the same, don't sound the same, and aren't used the same. Especially the last point: Operator skill is very important.
Quote:
Music released with proper dynamics can be listened to as-is for those of us who wish it, or can be compressed at playback time (or while ripping and encoding to MP3) for those who prefer reduced dynamics. That choice is not available with pre-squashed content.

I agree with that as far as it goes. If there weren't so many recording engineers who have made the big bucks and lifelong reputations based their skill at meeting producer's needs by compressing dynamic range, the sort of simplistic approach you seem to be suggesting might even work.


You are proposing that it would be possible to put the skills of dozens of skilled technicans into a box that sells for $1.98, and have it perform audibly like one of them correctly all of the time.
 
#49 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk  /t/1404247/hd-tracks-quality-please...-about-this-download-service/30#post_22635245


Nope. I see no such thing.

Clear evidence of clipping is flat-topped waves. The view shown lacks the detail required to make that call.

The tool calculates and shows (in red) the clipping which turns into cut highs and added distortion.
 
#50 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by boh10  /t/1404247/hd-tracks-quality-please...-about-this-download-service/30#post_22637276

Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk  /t/1404247/hd-tracks-quality-please...-about-this-download-service/30#post_22635245


Nope. I see no such thing.

Clear evidence of clipping is flat-topped waves. The view shown lacks the detail required to make that call.

The tool calculates and shows (in red) the clipping which turns into cut highs and added distortion.

Since I know nothing about how the tool works or even what its name is, I remain unconvinced.
 
#51 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by boh10  /t/1404247/hd-tracks-quality-please...-about-this-download-service/30#post_22634967


Here is a graphical view of the above tracks:


Yeah, not quite enough information . . .


The tool is Audacity.


Audacity indicates a saturated sample by drawing a vertical red line at the sample's position, so that first track does look pretty bad.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top