In discussions with other audiophiles regarding CD vs. high resolution digital formats, one thing that comes up repeatedly is the fact that most folks have no means of making a valid comparison. Often, a high resolution version of a record is mastered at a different session, sometimes by a different engineer. At many format shootouts I've attended, I hear level differences, EQ differences, etc. that make a true comparison of the formats impossible. Astute listeners realize we are comparing different masterings.

In an effort to provide some help, I've put up some samples from the same album, same mastering session, etc. A number of folks I know, who use upsampling devices to play back their CDs, have found these useful in illuminating the pluses as well as minuses of their upconversion, as they can now compare the results with a true high res version.

The track is an extended sample from "Dragon Boats", the first track from Work of Art's Lift CD, which is the first release on my own label, Soundkeeper Recordings.

When comparing the two files as they are, be sure your system is not performing any sort of resampling of either one. (Some will by default, either upsample the 16/44 or downsample and dither the 24/96.)

Have fun!
The samples can be found here.

Best regards,
Barry
http://www.soundkeeperrecordings.com
http://www.barrydiamentaudio.com

If anyone here has a system capable of playing back both on the same system, I'll be interested in what you hear. I do have a bias, but I've been unable to prove it as my standalone d/a tops out at 20/96, & my universal player isn't good enough to form definitive opinions (at $100 I don't expect it to be that good!) .

Hi Geff,

What is your "bias" and how did you arrive at it, considering the D-A and universal player you mentioned? (By the way, some players will apply default conversion and/or dithering. There may -or many not- be menu settings on the individual player to control this.)

Best regards,
Barry
http://www.soundkeeperrecordings.com
http://www.barrydiamentaudio.com

Hi Barry - My bias is that I believe higher bit rates are potentially better. SACD sounds 99% as good on my $100 Pioneer universal player as cd does on my $3200 cd front end. DVD-a doesn't usually sound as good on the Pioneer as SACD, but on the recent Neil Young Live At Massey the DVD sounded better on the Pioneer then the cd did on my (somewhat dated) Esoteric/Illuminati/PS Audio cd front end. That's the first time I've experienced that.

My Pioneer does claim to output true 96/24 (at least through analog outputs & where available off dvd video at the spdif output). I have checked the menu settings you mention.

I've also read for years in Stereophile & other mags from folks I tend to trust who have access to multi buck systems that higher bit rates sound better.

At the same time, I don't feel I can personally make a definitive comparison as cd doesn't sound all that great on the $100 Pioneer (nor should it, it AMAZES me how good SACD sounds on this cheap machine!). Based on my experience & what I've read, I would think a definitive comparison would require a system that is known to bring out the best of both bit rates, & has KNOWN sonic tendencies at both bit rates.. Another issue could be how to get the files to disc. In my experience, a high quality blank cd burned at 4x on my Plextor sounds ALMOST as good (but not quite) as the original, where as in my experience for reasons unknown to me burned dvd audio (both dvd-v & dvd-a) tends to be shrill; at least on my Pioneer with Tayio discs. I'm aware that someone with a QUALITY 96/24 burner would have these issues minimized.

I suspect that the issues in the last paragraph may be non-issues for you, but many of us are limited in our playback gear. Even before inflation, I'm making less then 10 years ago, & my expenses have at least tripled.

Hi Geff,

Thanks for your reply.



My experience has been that many universal players do SACD better than they do 24/96. One explanation I've heard is that SACD is easier to do in a less expensive chip. This may have something to do with the sound you hear on DVD-A via the Pioneer.




A reasonable concern, though I originally thought folks with outboard D-A converters (capable of decoding the files in their native formats without any further processing) would use their computers as the source. Burning the files to discs is fine just so long as the blanks are good quality (the Taiyo Yudens you mention are fine), the burn is slow and the software and burner are of good quality.




My experience with good blanks, slow burned after a stop on the hard drive, is that burned discs can sound better than the pressing their made from. By this I mean, closer to the original master the pressing itself was made from. Even if one does not have access to the orginal master (most folks, of course, won't), the sense of clarity, pitch definition in the bass and overall "focus" on the space itself, are noticeably better to my ears than on the pressing.

If your DVD-A burns sound "shrill" in the Pioneer but pressed DVD-As (or other 24/96 discs) don't, I would suspect something in the burn software. If you are using sample rate conversion, this is another area where only a handful of the current algorithms are truly transparent.
If pressed DVD-As sound "shrill" too, your burns are probably fine.

Best regards,
Barry
http://www.soundkeeperrecordings.com
http://www.barrydiamentaudio.com

Barry, for the burning part, I'm using Nero 6 with all processing turned off (or so I believe!). Except on live cd's, I also turn off the remove silence at end of tracks setting. I always allow the cache track on hard drive first setting.

If I'm ripping, I use EAC. I often use the 3rd party nero plugins to decode flac, ape & shn on the fly rather then decoding first. If i suspect a possible problem with the original file, I use the outboard decoder before burning to convert to .wav. Since I heard the difference a year or 2 back, I only use tayio or Mam-a for my personal cdr's. My Plextor will not burn slower then 4x.

Any thoughts?

Geff

Question, are most pc sound cards good enough to output an accurate digital stream to the d/a? My assumption was that budget cards like I have (Creative Soundblaster) aren't.

Hi Geff,



I'm not very familiar with Nero.
EAC should do a good job ripping.
My experience has been that a good 4x burner like yours can make a great disc. No problems with that. Just make sure the blanks you use are specified for "8x" or less. Some, which are specified for high speeds, won't burn as well when using 4 x or less.
I'd just avoid burning at 8x or higher at this time.

For 24/96 DVD-Rs, I know Toast (on the Mac) and Easy CD Creator (on the PC) have settings to allow 24/96 burns. They do a good job when properly set.

Hope this helps.

Best regards,
Barry
http://www.soundkeeperrecordings.com
http://www.barrydiamentaudio.com

Hi Geff,



The better cards will have the converters in an external box, so the part that installs in the PC is really just a collection of connectors. These "talk" with the external box, which is free from the internal environment of the PC, which can indeed "hashify" the audio with interference.

Internal cards work, insomuch as they allow you to get audio in and out of the computer but to my ears, they are not the path to the best sound quality.

Hope this helps.

Best regards,
Barry
http://www.soundkeeperrecordings.com
http://www.barrydiamentaudio.com