Jump to content
The Klipsch Audio Community
Sign in to follow this  
DizRotus

Hi-Res Music too $$$?

Recommended Posts

Many here and elsewhere complain about the cost of hi-res music files, epecially from Pono.

 

Since I received my Kickstarter Pono player last December, I have been more aware of the cost of hi-res music.  HDTracks and Pono Music Store are my most frequent sources, although Linn and others have also been used, as well as free online files.

 

The cost for a hi-res album runs from less than $15 to more than $50.  The more I explore the options, the better they seem as a value.  

 

As I type I'm listening to Brothers In Arms by Dire Straits.  It was $14.29 from Pono; not available from HDTracks.  Eafrlier today I downloaded Genius Loves Company, a posthumous album of Ray Charles duets withDiana Krall, Van Morrison, et al. It's an excellent recording, by the way.  It was $24.98 from HDTracks, but only $17.79 from Pono, both in 192/24 FLAC.  It pays to compare.  BTW, HDTracks has frequent sales.  Wait until there is a coupon for 10 - 20% off.

 

To answer my own question, NO, high resolution files are not too expensive.  How much is spent for a couple to go to a film?  For less than the cost of a single night out you can get a high quality high resolution file that lasts indefinitely.  As a bonus, you don't have to endure the noise from other theater patrons.

 

Copies are identical to the original.  There's no need to handle physical media. 

Edited by DizRotus
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The HI Res files are good.  For, they don't offer a lot of the music I prefer so I purchase from amazon.  I think files are 256 mp3.  I can't tell the difference with many of the albums.  The only bad thing about the Hi Res files is that they take of a lot of disk space.  The quality of the album is only as good as the original mastering.  Some of the High res files for HD Tracks were ok but, not great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Derrick,

Everything you say is true. For portability and mass storage, mp3s are sufficient. But for long-term storage of the best available recordings of the best performances by the best musicians. I'll invest my time and money in high-resolution digital.

Edited by DizRotus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I download any of the newer stuff such as EDM or a good new mainstream release, 320 works for me...as I believe most (not all) are mastered as such. Older releases I tread towards FLAC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't see the point to analog recordings that were remixed into two channel "HD" stereo.  I put HD in quotes because we all know that an analogue tape deck has a crappy S/N ratio compared to a real 96kHz digital recording.  The dynamics of these digital recordings can be incredible when you find one that was originally mastered in 96kHz/24bit such as the AIX records stuff.  For these old recordings, I see the only value being the additional tracks from the master can be remixed into an immersive multi-channel mix.

Edited by etc6849
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is my input.  When I was a young lad, I started with cassettes then moved to cds now back to vinyl.  Or wait vinyl and hd tracks.  Anywho I have all ways paid 16-26 dollars an album.  I still don't mind paying that regardless if its new vinyl or high resolution audio(flac).  I like FLAC, and most of the play back methods play it and it sounds good. Now there are the originals that have been re released in high resolution, some of them being Ozzy's older stuff.  Now reason I mentioned this, is due to what etc mentioned.  They are only as good as the original masters. One problem I have of this, on a good reproduction system, is that some of this now sounds like crap.  Anyways beer is good. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like ozzy and beer is good. especially good beer

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I download any of the newer stuff such as EDM or a good new mainstream release, 320 works for me...as I believe most (not all) are mastered as such. Older releases I tread towards FLAC.

 

Yeah EDM you can usually get away with a little lower quality as the sounds are not usually as intricate. I usually use EDM like a good couple Deadmau5 or Infected Mushrrom tracks to get my system warmed up and blast any thoughts out of my head before switching to the more intimate acoustic stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, yes, I know.  Younger folks like me really aren't into vinyl or reel to reel.  In fact, I use my PC to play all of my music.  I'm definitely not a traditional audiophile. :)

 

^ ?

Edited by etc6849
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...