Linn Studio Master
Posted by: DaveBk on 03 December 2010
Had an interesting email from Linn today informing me that some of their studio master hi def files were not of the resolution that you would expect. Looks like a problem in the mastering process - I'm guessing some kind of HF rolloff, but it's not clear. I wonder how many other supposed hi def files are not actually containing the full resolution you might expect?
Linn to their credit are sorting this out. Relevent section from the email below:
Linn to their credit are sorting this out. Relevent section from the email below:
Posted on: 03 December 2010 by DaveBk
At Linn Records it is always our aim to bring you the nothing but
the highest quality music. That is especially true of our Studio
Master downloads which allow an extraordinary level of quality;
far higher than any other digital format.
It has come to our attention, though, that some of the Studio
Master albums from the ARTS label have been, well, missing
something.
These albums were recorded at a sample rate of 96kHz, so on top
of having all the great dynamic range of a 24-bit Studio Master
recording, they should also have had all the lovely high
frequencies that using a high sample rate afford. However, during
the process of the label preparing these release for delivery to
us, these high frequencies were lost.
We have been working closely with the engineers from the record
label, going back to the original recording and preparing the
albums for download just as they should be: perfect. This is not
a quick process, but over the coming months we will be making
these albums available for you to download again, so the great
news is that the recordings you have purchased will sound even
better.
the highest quality music. That is especially true of our Studio
Master downloads which allow an extraordinary level of quality;
far higher than any other digital format.
It has come to our attention, though, that some of the Studio
Master albums from the ARTS label have been, well, missing
something.
These albums were recorded at a sample rate of 96kHz, so on top
of having all the great dynamic range of a 24-bit Studio Master
recording, they should also have had all the lovely high
frequencies that using a high sample rate afford. However, during
the process of the label preparing these release for delivery to
us, these high frequencies were lost.
We have been working closely with the engineers from the record
label, going back to the original recording and preparing the
albums for download just as they should be: perfect. This is not
a quick process, but over the coming months we will be making
these albums available for you to download again, so the great
news is that the recordings you have purchased will sound even
better.
Posted on: 07 December 2010 by Phil Harris
I did have a set of what were said to be exceptionally good 24/192 files sent to me by A.N.Other with the suggestion that we should consider using them as "demo" tracks...
...unfortunately the only thing 24bit192kHz about them was the folder name on the memory stick - they were actually 320kbit MP3 files.
Always a good idea to check what you're getting - and even if you have been given "hi res" fles there's nothing to say they weren't generated from a much lower resolution source and simply upsampled.
Phil
...unfortunately the only thing 24bit192kHz about them was the folder name on the memory stick - they were actually 320kbit MP3 files.
Always a good idea to check what you're getting - and even if you have been given "hi res" fles there's nothing to say they weren't generated from a much lower resolution source and simply upsampled.
Phil
Posted on: 07 December 2010 by Tog
There are bad people out there.
Tog
Tog
Posted on: 07 December 2010 by Phil Harris
There are also just people out there that don't know what they're listening to either...
...at the end of the day, if it sounds enjoyable then enjoy it!
Phil
...at the end of the day, if it sounds enjoyable then enjoy it!
Phil
Posted on: 07 December 2010 by kuma
Phil,
Any reasons why the Naim high-res files are at 24/48 instead of 24/96?
Any reasons why the Naim high-res files are at 24/48 instead of 24/96?
Posted on: 07 December 2010 by Briz Vegas
I would guess it is because the track was originally recorded at 24/48.
Its nice to see Linn is seeking to do the right thing. They will probably be looking to improve there quality control after this.
RE some of the other comments. We have a little thing called the Trades Practices Act that takes a dim view of misrepresenting a product. Simply saying "just enjoy it" is beside the point, particularly if you have paid more for what is supposed to be a superior product.
Maybe we need to push for a standard. ie 24 / 96 native unless there is some way to check if a file is upsampled vs native resolution (an actual high res recording or high res from an analogue source)
Its nice to see Linn is seeking to do the right thing. They will probably be looking to improve there quality control after this.
RE some of the other comments. We have a little thing called the Trades Practices Act that takes a dim view of misrepresenting a product. Simply saying "just enjoy it" is beside the point, particularly if you have paid more for what is supposed to be a superior product.
Maybe we need to push for a standard. ie 24 / 96 native unless there is some way to check if a file is upsampled vs native resolution (an actual high res recording or high res from an analogue source)
Posted on: 08 December 2010 by Phil Harris
quote:Originally posted by Briz Vegas:
I would guess it is because the track was originally recorded at 24/48.
Absolutely correct...
quote:Originally posted by Briz Vegas:
RE some of the other comments. We have a little thing called the Trades Practices Act that takes a dim view of misrepresenting a product. Simply saying "just enjoy it" is beside the point, particularly if you have paid more for what is supposed to be a superior product.
Please don't get me wrong here - I completely agree that if you have supposedly been provided with a 24bit 192kHz file then you should get a 24bit 192kHz file - I have no dispute there.
What I was trying to get across is don't get hung up on numbers per se - the numbers themselves just specify the container and not the quality of the content which can be mangled by bad production. There are some spectacularly good recordings at CD quality and some real tat out there at high bitrates and at the end of the day, aren't we here to enjoy the music whatever format it's in?
Phil