Interesting article, but it won't keep me from continuing to purchase Hi-Res downloads. Like anything else, there are cases where you don't get what you pay for. Sometimes that's gonna happen. Way too often now-days it seems. But the article (in my mind) confirms that Hi-Res is superior when you actually get Hi-Res material that is handled properly. The article isn't saying that Hi-Res isn't worth it, just that sometimes, the sellers don't provide what is expected, and that the buyer needs to beware. For what it's worth, I have had nothing but good experiences with the stuff I have purchased from HD-Tracks. I didn't purchase the Framptom album they mentioned. I already have it on "normal" CD that I have ripped to flac. I don't feel strongly enough about the Hi-Res stuff that I would purchase Hi-Res copies of something I already have in CD. But for new purchases, I prefer to get the music in Hi-Res. One point in the article I don't agree with however is the assertion that it is pointless to release a Hi-Res version of anything that was mastered in analog. Profesional analog tape equipment is capable of much better bandwidth than the 22 kHz brick wall that CD is limited to. Of course if bandwidth limiting was applied (like is required before placing it on a CD), then I agree with the point. But if it is truly made from the analog masters, and bandwith limiting is not applied, then 96kHz (48kHz bandwidth) still makes good sense to me.
Terry -- TerryS ------------------------------------------------------------------------ TerryS's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=40835 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=88756 _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/discuss
