[REMOVE ADS]




Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 101 to 112 of 112
  1. #101
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    10,798
    Rep Power
    350
    I'm quite happy with the R Dean Taylor tracks because I like corn, and I like the HDH production. The LA tracks are fine with me. I'm not so keen on the Marvin Gaye show-tune styled tracks as they don't have the Motown sound.

  2. #102
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1,204
    Rep Power
    179
    I'm interested in buying this collection in lossless quality. Apparently, Qobuz seem to supply it in lossless quality. I'm wondering, has Universal supplied Qobuz with high fidelity copies of the songs in this [[and other Motown Unreleased) collection? I don't want to buy this collectin if Qobuz have "upgraded" them in some way from lossy MP3 to a lossless format.

  3. #103
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    718
    Rep Power
    183
    Mr P, it is my understanding that Universal supply the tracks to vendors in WAV format. Every vendor gets the same files. Each vendor then encodes them according to their own proprietory method. I should have thought that the only way a vendor could issue "lossless" versions would be to release the WAV files as received from UMG. Maybe that's what Qobuz are doing ...

  4. #104
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,007
    Rep Power
    155
    Quote Originally Posted by keith_hughes View Post
    Mr P, it is my understanding that Universal supply the tracks to vendors in WAV format. Every vendor gets the same files. Each vendor then encodes them according to their own proprietory method. I should have thought that the only way a vendor could issue "lossless" versions would be to release the WAV files as received from UMG. Maybe that's what Qobuz are doing ...
    That's what I thought, thanks for confirming that Keith. One can see that different vendors encode differently to mp3 - for example, while Amazon often uses a 256 kbit/s variable rate, some others [[7Digital, Google Play) seem to use 320 kbit/s constant rate.

    Qobuz does offer WAV files, but they also encode and offer files in other formats such as flac and this is a lossless compression - one can decompress the flac [[or other lossless type) file and get the full audio information of the original WAV file. Software does this while playing the file, so nothing is lost in playback. Also, one can use converters [[such as foobar2000) to convert flac files to WAV files, and these will have the same audio information as the original WAV file. [[Which is why the compression is called "lossless" - no audio information is lost.)

    In the case of "mastered for iTunes", though, I believe that Universal provides high resolution files to Apple - but then iTunes compresses them in a lossy way, such that the end product people buy has a bit rate similar to that of mp3 files, well below the bit rate of the "lossless" files from Qobuz [[or Pono).
    Last edited by calvin; 04-14-2015 at 05:54 PM.

  5. #105
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    3,983
    Rep Power
    351

  6. #106
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1,204
    Rep Power
    179
    Thank you for this information, Keith and Calvin. I think I'm gonna go ahead and download from Qobuz from now on. Are you aware of other vendors selling the digital Motown releases in WAV or FLAC quality?

  7. #107
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,007
    Rep Power
    155
    Quote Originally Posted by mr_postman View Post
    Thank you for this information, Keith and Calvin. I think I'm gonna go ahead and download from Qobuz from now on. Are you aware of other vendors selling the digital Motown releases in WAV or FLAC quality?
    There could be others, but Qobuz is the only one I know in Europe. There's Pono in the US, they're supposed to come to the UK at some point but who knows when.

    As a side note, that Dorsey Burnette set above is also on Qobuz:
    http://www.qobuz.com/gb-en/album/the.../0060254717063

  8. #108
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1,204
    Rep Power
    179
    Thanks! Speaking of that Dorsey collection, do you know what is the difference between the two download options - Hi-Res and 16-Bit CD quality?

  9. #109
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,007
    Rep Power
    155
    Mr P, the cd-quality download is 16-bit/44.1 kHz [[the same bit depth and frequency as a standard cd), this high resolution download is 24-bit/96.0 kHz.

    Digital representation of audio is a big subject, how much do you already know? Do you know, for example, what those numbers mean?
    Last edited by calvin; 04-22-2015 at 09:17 AM.

  10. #110
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1,204
    Rep Power
    179
    Calvin, I'm glad you're so on the point. Frankly, I don't know exactly what those numbers mean and I don't understand the qualitative difference between these two options. I know about lossy and lossless audio files and the difference between them, but "bits" and "hertz" is greek to me. Do you happen to know an internet site where these things are properly explained for a novice like me?

  11. #111
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,007
    Rep Power
    155
    Mr P, I can't really recommend a site for a novice without doing some searching. My background is in maths/physics and when I wanted to learn something about this, I began with a paper that was theoretical and technical - probably not what you want.

    What those numbers mean, very quickly and roughly - audio information is represented digitally as a sequence of numbers for the signal [[sound - compression and rarefaction of air) at regular intervals. 44.1kHz means that there are 44,100 signal values [[samples) for every second of audio [[for each channel of stereo) - this is the sampling rate or frequency. 16-bit means that each sample is represented by a 16-bit number [[the "bit depth"). Greater bit depth means greater accuracy in representing the original analogue sample value [[see "quantization error").

    In terms of the quality difference between high resolution and cd-quality, I will just say that this is a controversial issue. You could read some different views on it, and perhaps try it out if you're so inclined.

    Note that you might need some special equipment to play high resolution files. Also, if you're one who likes to burn audio cds from the files [[I'm not, but many in this forum say they do it), 16-bit/44.1kHz is already suited for that.

    I have a good sound card for playing high resolution files on my pc and running the output to my amplifier, but I usually buy 16-bit/44.1 kHz, as I did with this Dorsey Burnette download.
    Last edited by calvin; 04-22-2015 at 05:03 PM.

  12. #112
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1,204
    Rep Power
    179
    Thanks for that quick walk-through, Calvin! Much appreciated. I'm not an audiophile, so I should be satisfied with the 16-bit/44.1 kHz option.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

[REMOVE ADS]

Ralph Terrana
MODERATOR

Welcome to Soulful Detroit! Kindly Consider Turning Off Your Ad BlockingX
Soulful Detroit is a free service that relies on revenue from ad display [regrettably] and donations. We notice that you are using an ad-blocking program that prevents us from earning revenue during your visit.
Ads are REMOVED for Members who donate to Soulful Detroit. [You must be logged in for ads to disappear]
DONATE HERE »
And have Ads removed.