Hi all, is there any prince album available in hi-res right now across the board? hd tracks only has AOA (24bit/44.1khz), the others have disappeared. So if I need me some 24-bit/96KHz (or higher) prince, is there any option at all? If there have been any past threads, please point me to it. I missed the boat earlier when HD tracks had around the world in a day.

Funkyalien said:

Hi all, is there any prince album available in hi-res right now across the board? hd tracks only has AOA (24bit/44.1khz), the others have disappeared. So if I need me some 24-bit/96KHz (or higher) prince, is there any option at all? If there have been any past threads, please point me to it. I missed the boat earlier when HD tracks had around the world in a day.

They're available on Qobuz and the Pono store.

[Edited 10/12/15 5:44am]

massing said:

Funkyalien said:

Hi all, is there any prince album available in hi-res right now across the board? hd tracks only has AOA (24bit/44.1khz), the others have disappeared. So if I need me some 24-bit/96KHz (or higher) prince, is there any option at all? If there have been any past threads, please point me to it. I missed the boat earlier when HD tracks had around the world in a day.

They're available on Qobuz and the Pono store.

[Edited 10/12/15 5:44am]

Pono prince is only 16-bit/44.1, which is CD quality. I want actual hi-res. Let me check if Qobuz is any different.

qobuz is also merely lossless, CD quality. No 24-bit. So only one truly high-res prince album available, AOA. which has been mastered awfully. Or am I wrong?

[Edited 10/12/15 6:02am]

Qobuz has several 24/96 Prince albums for download. And Pono has them in 24/192.

massing said:

Qobuz has several 24/96 Prince albums for download. And Pono has them in 24/192.

thanks for the good news. that's strange...in india i can only see the 16 bit ones in pono....

Funkyalien said:

Mindflux said:

Funkyalien said:

qobuz is also merely lossless, CD quality. No 24-bit. So only one truly high-res prince album available, AOA. which has been mastered awfully. Or am I wrong?

[Edited 10/12/15 6:02am]

Unless the 24/96 versions were constructed from the original master tapes (which they're not), then it is utterly pointless. If the source material doesn't have the resolution and detail in the first place, then there's nothing to add.

.

Based on what? It's clear those HD releases from a while ago came from digital masters WBR made in the late 1980s/early 1990s and there's no reason to assume those weren't in a higher-than-CD-quality format.

mikeyaddict said:

If you had the vinyl and played on a really good turntable that was hooked up to a laptop with audacity of some such couldn't you record in whatever bitrate/format you wanted?

yes, but it's never the same thing. I could make a few needle drops at 320, world of difference. I don't have industry-standard decoding stuff at home. I'm kinda liking hi-res. the led zep ones from hdtracks are amazing. also check out songs in the key of life (stevie). with hi-res, I think I might a digital alternative to vinyl after all.

BartVanHemelen said:

Mindflux said:

Funkyalien said: Unless the 24/96 versions were constructed from the original master tapes (which they're not), then it is utterly pointless. If the source material doesn't have the resolution and detail in the first place, then there's nothing to add.

.

Based on what? It's clear those HD releases from a while ago came from digital masters WBR made in the late 1980s/early 1990s and there's no reason to assume those weren't in a higher-than-CD-quality format.

True, they are higher-than-CD quality format, from what I've heard. Interestingly, the only one that fails to excite me is AOA. A casual sample listen on hd tracks reveals the same problems with compression on breakdown, for example.

Funkyalien said:

mikeyaddict said:

If you had the vinyl and played on a really good turntable that was hooked up to a laptop with audacity of some such couldn't you record in whatever bitrate/format you wanted?

yes, but it's never the same thing. I could make a few needle drops at 320, world of difference. I don't have industry-standard decoding stuff at home. I'm kinda liking hi-res. the led zep ones from hdtracks are amazing. also check out songs in the key of life (stevie). with hi-res, I think I might a digital alternative to vinyl after all.

.

Note that Jimmy Page is deeply involved in those Led Zep remasters; they've been releasing "updates" every couple of years. Hence me saying that we should have had several rounds of Prince "remasters" already.

Funkyalien said:

BartVanHemelen said:

.

Based on what? It's clear those HD releases from a while ago came from digital masters WBR made in the late 1980s/early 1990s and there's no reason to assume those weren't in a higher-than-CD-quality format.

True, they are higher-than-CD quality format, from what I've heard. Interestingly, the only one that fails to excite me is AOA. A casual sample listen on hd tracks reveals the same problems with compression on breakdown, for example.

.

.

[Edited 10/14/15 5:21am]

BartVanHemelen said:

Funkyalien said:

Remember that you can only hear improvement if the hi-res files are from a better source.

If you take the hi-res file and convert them to CD quality 44.kHz/16bits they sound identical.

I recently found out the 80's Linn drum samples are 8-bit, but their analog circuits sound great.

see: https://xiph.org/~xiphmon...young.html

epronk said:

Mindflux said:

epronk said:

Remember that you can only hear improvement if the hi-res files are from a better source.

If you take the hi-res file and convert them to CD quality 44.kHz/16bits they sound identical.

I recently found out the 80's Linn drum samples are 8-bit, but their analog circuits sound great.

see: https://xiph.org/~xiphmon...young.html

Correct - it's what I said. However, there are plenty of fakes, where the "hi-res" wasn't mastered from the original. It's just a cd quality file, tampered with (lime adding subtle treble for a bit more brightness) and saved in hi-res fooling some in to thinking it was an HD version. Unless it is clear that the work has been sourced from the original master, I'm not interested

"Wreakastow!".... come on? say it again this time louder

Q. If you wanted to buy a Sam Cooke album (in better than cd quality) where would you go?

A. The Wrecka Stow!

Mindflux said:

Funkyalien said:

qobuz is also merely lossless, CD quality. No 24-bit. So only one truly high-res prince album available, AOA. which has been mastered awfully. Or am I wrong?

[Edited 10/12/15 6:02am]

Unless the 24/96 versions were constructed from the original master tapes (which they're not), then it is utterly pointless. If the source material doesn't have the resolution and detail in the first place, then there's nothing to add. It's a bit like transferring a VHS to a blu-ray - you don't suddenly get an HD picture! So, why do you want hi-res versions that aren't?

I have the HDTracks 24/96, and that is without a doubt a really lovely sounding version. It's much less compressed and just sounds... less stressy. I don't know how else to put it. I have 1999, too, and it definitely sounds different than my CD copy. I also have Parade and Purple rain, 24/192, but I'm not sure that those sound better. ATWIAD sounds amazing, though.

JudasLChrist said:

Mindflux said:

Funkyalien said: Unless the 24/96 versions were constructed from the original master tapes (which they're not), then it is utterly pointless. If the source material doesn't have the resolution and detail in the first place, then there's nothing to add. It's a bit like transferring a VHS to a blu-ray - you don't suddenly get an HD picture! So, why do you want hi-res versions that aren't?

I have the HDTracks 24/96, and that is without a doubt a really lovely sounding version. It's much less compressed and just sounds... less stressy. I don't know how else to put it. I have 1999, too, and it definitely sounds different than my CD copy. I also have Parade and Purple rain, 24/192, but I'm not sure that those sound better. ATWIAD sounds amazing, though.

You're either talking remastered versions - not likely in the case of Prince, or it's placebo. https://xiph.org/~xiphmon...young.html

fortuneandserendipity said:

JudasLChrist said:

I have the HDTracks 24/96, and that is without a doubt a really lovely sounding version. It's much less compressed and just sounds... less stressy. I don't know how else to put it. I have 1999, too, and it definitely sounds different than my CD copy. I also have Parade and Purple rain, 24/192, but I'm not sure that those sound better. ATWIAD sounds amazing, though.

You're either talking remastered versions - not likely in the case of Prince, or it's placebo. https://xiph.org/~xiphmon...young.html

Well, just focusing on ATWIAD, I have two CD pressings... and the 24/96 HDTracks sounds very differrent than either of those. It is definitely not placebo.

The HDTracks are sourced from the recent Grudman vinyl masters. Those ones are different.

I do not want to get into any debates about whether hi-res sounds better than the vinyl. My point is, in the digital domain, it's safer to stick to the 24 bit digital versions whenever they are available, because I think the hi-res versions are a welcome break from the loudness wars and sound way, way better than the CD.In a word, the masters are good.

If you like vinyl, which I do, 16-bit CDs always, always sound too bright, or too tinny, or lack headroom.

The hi-res sometimes exceeds the vinyl quality, in my case at least convincingly so for Thriller, Amaerican Beauty, Beggar's Banquet and Led Zep I and II. I do not own a matching Prince hi-res yet to comment.

That's a shame because a 24/192 version of, at the very least, 'Prince' or 'Parade' is way, way overdue.

I like hi-res, it sounds so good, and it's so expensive I don't buy many albums but only the ones I will listen to a significant number of times.....

Is the HD tracks AOA worth getting? The mastering isn't Prince's finest moment, IMO, so am sceptical of what a 24/44.1 version can do to improve that....maybe someone more knowledgeable can comment.....

[Edited 10/27/15 10:12am]

Mindflux said:

Funkyalien said:

Stick.to buying actual, lovingly manufactured and processed reworks - on blu-ray pure audio

And that introduces another cost element into the mix, the blu-ray player. Blu-ray and all hi-res suffer from the same problem.....so few works are available in that format. You cannot download 'The Wall' even, imagine. I wonder when hi-res downloads will go mainstream....will they ever?

Funkyalien said:

I do not want to get into any debates about whether hi-res sounds better than the vinyl. My point is, in the digital domain, it's safer to stick to the 24 bit digital versions whenever they are available, because I think the hi-res versions are a welcome break from the loudness wars and sound way, way better than the CD.In a word, the masters are good.

If you like vinyl, which I do, 16-bit CDs always, always sound too bright, or too tinny, or lack headroom.

The hi-res sometimes exceeds the vinyl quality, in my case at least convincingly so for Thriller, Amaerican Beauty, Beggar's Banquet and Led Zep I and II. I do not own a matching Prince hi-res yet to comment.

That's a shame because a 24/192 version of, at the very least, 'Prince' or 'Parade' is way, way overdue.

I like hi-res, it sounds so good, and it's so expensive I don't buy many albums but only the ones I will listen to a significant number of times.....

Is the HD tracks AOA worth getting? The mastering isn't Prince's finest moment, IMO, so am sceptical of what a 24/44.1 version can do to improve that....maybe someone more knowledgeable can comment.....

[Edited 10/27/15 10:12am]

I get the Warner versions 24bits@192Khz directly from somebody who works there. I made some comparison and the results are mixed.

Controversy and Parade are really great, but for example For You and 1999 seems really too thin in comparison with my CD version !

highcalonic said:

I get the Warner versions 24bits@192Khz directly from somebody who works there. I made some comparison and the results are mixed.

Controversy and Parade are really great, but for example For You and 1999 seems really too thin in comparison with my CD version !

now that's really interesting! 1999 thin in comparison to the CD?

Funkyalien said:

highcalonic said:

I get the Warner versions 24bits@192Khz directly from somebody who works there. I made some comparison and the results are mixed.

Controversy and Parade are really great, but for example For You and 1999 seems really too thin in comparison with my CD version !

now that's really interesting! 1999 thin in comparison to the CD?

Yes ! as if it was not the same Master that was used for the two versions...