AVS Forum banner
1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
111 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Holy COW! This is utterly spectacular from an audio perspective. Downloaded the uncompressed version from HD Music.com and listening to it on the kitchen ceiling speakers. The difference to the CD is readily apparent. Quiet bits are quiet, instruments aren't fighting each other for dominance, and there are points where you can hear little refrains that I had never noticed before. A guitar bit on the title track, etc.


McCartney is a bit light from a musical perspective, but it was originally a very solid album. This just sounds incredible though. I'll give it a more critical listen on the main system later with a head to head with the original CD I bought years ago.


Also up, Tom Petty "Damn the Torpedos" in 24/96.....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,794 Posts
Agreed. I just got it and TP's Damn the Torpedoes in 24/96 this weekend. They do sound spectacular, and it's great that I'm lived with the material on both albums for more than 30 years, so it's stuff I know inside and out. Still, with the greater formats and remasters, there is still new detail to discover after all these years. Amazing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
111 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Will2007 /forum/post/19525224


Agreed. I just got it and TP's Damn the Torpedoes in 24/96 this weekend. They do sound spectacular, and it's great that I'm lived with the material on both albums for more than 30 years, so it's stuff I know inside and out. Still, with the greater formats and remasters, there is still new detail to discover after all these years. Amazing.

What amazes me is that the quiet parts are truly quiet. No clicks and pops of a needle on record, whirring of a CD player in the background or anything. Streaming to the Squeezebox TOUCH is truly silent.


I now have about a dozen hi-rez FLAC albums, and the McCartney and Wings is truly eye opening. The new Beatles CD's are very good remasters, but I have to wonder what would come out of a 24/96 remastering. May not beat the remasters of the early mono disks, but some of the later ones might be quite remarkable. There was mention that Apple tried to minimise using compression on the new disks, and the increase in quality in comparison tot he older remasters is evident. Some here have said they couldn't differentiate between the CD's and 24/44.1 FLAC, which I would believe.


Honestly, if high resolution FLAC downloads ever catch on, it could be a very expensive proposition for me to replace over 1,000 CDs. Of course, I wouldn't, but for a good many high quality recordings, the temptation would be great.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,292 Posts
I bought this within minutes of getting the e-mail from HDtracks a couple weeks ago.
I'm really enjoying it, and I love the fact that a dynamically uncompressed version is specifically offered apart from the "standard" 24/96 one...gotta support that. To me that's at least as important as the 24/96 part.


As it happens I also have the 24/96 FLAC of "Damn The Torpedoes" in heavy rotation...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
74 Posts
I agree the uncompressed sounds great. I also like the compressed (light compression like the Beatles stereo remasters), but not as much.


BTW, I hear a clear difference between the Beatles remasters in 24/44.1 and 16/44.1.


Just one example: The song "Words of Love" has hand clapping used as a major percussion instrument throughout the tune. The handclaps sound much more like real clapping on the 24 bit. Also the lead guitar in the song "sings" more in the 24 bit. (Unfortunately, on vinyl it sounds even better - the real sound of hands clapping, not just something "like" handclapping. And I'm not a vinyl afficianado.)


Apple is working on vinyl releases of the Beatles remasters, apparently mastered from the 24/192 transcription they originally did of the analogue master tapes.


Since the same technicians at Apple are working on the McCartney and Harrison hi-res remasters, and so far it seems to have been a commercial success, you can be pretty sure that once the sales of the new Beatles vinyl peaks, the Apple marketing team will put the Beatles out once more in another, hi-res, remaster.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
287 Posts
On an Apple sidenote, dont get the Badfinger remasters that just came out. Not much improvement to the 90's remasters. Or, if you have the time to do so, buy them anyway and re-EQ it yourself.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
107 Posts
Is the only way to get the 24/96 versions of Band on the Run is to download them as FLAC files from one of the HD sites ? Are the hi-rez versions not available on a physical disc format (such as Blu-ray Audio) ?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,270 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by ricky_rocket /forum/post/0


Is the only way to get the 24/96 versions of Band on the Run is to download them as FLAC files from one of the HD sites ? Are the hi-rez versions not available on a physical disc format (such as Blu-ray Audio) ?

You can create BR disk youself if you need it. Google MultiAVCHD. This is a free tool you can use to burn you own BR disks. And you do not need expensive BD blank disks, regular DVD-R works well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
74 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by NIN74 /forum/post/19661352


24/96 are not needed for "band on the run". 16/44.1 will do fine if its mastered correctly.

What does that mean? I've heard 3 versions of the new remaster, and several previous versions, including DCC remaster.


The new "unlimited" 24/96 is definitely the best sounding one, IMO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
107 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by ap1 /forum/post/19657249


You can create BR disk youself if you need it. Google MultiAVCHD. This is a free tool you can use to burn you own BR disks. And you do not need expensive BD blank disks, regular DVD-R works well.

Thanks for the tip. I tried the MultiAVCHD freeware and the AVCHD disk it created did not work on my player (Sony bdp-s570). So I tried HD-Audio Solo Ultra 3.2 software (their download gives you 30 days or 5 discs free) and that worked fine to create a AVCHD. My processor says 96K so I know it didn't downgrade the music when copying. Sounds great!


I don't have a good way to play flacs on my home stereo at this point - so this solution works great for me.


Quote:
Originally Posted by NIN74 /forum/post/19661352


24/96 are not needed for "band on the run". 16/44.1 will do fine if its mastered correctly.

Hdtracks.com has the 24/96 flac version of Band for $20 (averages out to $1.11 per song) so I bought that. Now that I have the flacs and conversion software - I can downgrade it to any lesser quality (for standard cd or iPod etc.).

I didn't compare the sound quality directly to 16/44.1 but I will say the 24/96 version has clarity and awesome bass!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,687 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Will2007
Agreed. I just got it and TP's Damn the Torpedoes in 24/96 this weekend. They do sound spectacular, and it's great that I'm lived with the material on both albums for more than 30 years, so it's stuff I know inside and out. Still, with the greater formats and remasters, there is still new detail to discover after all these years. Amazing.
Get the Blu-Ray of Damn The Torpedoes with the DTS-HD MA soundtrack - It will blow you away. The difference is astounding. Cannot listen to it any other way now. There is a thread now devoted to this Petty Blu-Ray - check it out.


Also, McCartney I and II have been released in 24b/96K - I posted about it earlier today. Haven't had a chance to give it a listen but I am sure it will be good.


And yes, I agree that Band On The Run is most definitely better in in 24b/96K as compared to both vinyl and CD releases. As well as the Beatles catalog in 24b/44K release last year. I prefer the Parlophone vinyl versions over the 24b/44K digital but it is very close. No question that it is better than any CD.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
46 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by WillyJ
Get the Blu-Ray of Damn The Torpedoes with the DTS-HD MA soundtrack - It will blow you away. The difference is astounding. Cannot listen to it any other way now. There is a thread now devoted to this Petty Blu-Ray - check it out.


Also, McCartney I and II have been released in 24b/96K - I posted about it earlier today. Haven't had a chance to give it a listen but I am sure it will be good.


And yes, I agree that Band On The Run is most definitely better in in 24b/96K as compared to both vinyl and CD releases. As well as the Beatles catalog in 24b/44K release last year. I prefer the Parlophone vinyl versions over the 24b/44K digital but it is very close. No question that it is better than any CD.
Where does one find the Beatles remasters in 24b/44K? I'm familiar with HDTracks, but they don't carry the Beatles.


EDIT: Ummm ... (doing Emily Litella impression) ... never mind. The USB stick is available at Amazon. LOL
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,687 Posts
Yes - the usb stick I think is the only way to get them that I know of. I guess at some point they may be available elsewhere. Perhaps iTunes/Apple will get around to offering them in one of their lossless formats at some point since they are now offering the Beatles catalog.


One thing to note about the USB stick if you decide to buy it: The usb stick is part of the Apple. One pulls on the stem of the Apple to remove the usb stick from the middle of the Apple. Kind of neat and memorable; However, the stem portion that connects to the usb stick will break off very easily as mine did. There is no way to fix it since it is so thin and susceptable to damage. It is not a good design for practical purposes.


I would suggest immediately copying all the files onto hard disk and then safety tuck away the Apple somewhere or put it in a glass display case to look at.



Luv them Beatles, I do................
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,524 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by firedog55 /forum/post/19662516


What does that mean? I've heard 3 versions of the new remaster, and several previous versions, including DCC remaster.


The new "unlimited" 24/96 is definitely the best sounding one, IMO.


It mean that unless there is a different master (and from what I understand the 24/96 is a different mastering) the 16/44.1 and 24/96 version will sound the same. There is no need for 24/96 in homes and surely not with music that have not so high dynamic range.
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
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