# Integrating high resolution music into my system



## 480dad (Jan 22, 2015)

I’ve begun reading up on high rez music formats and decided to give it a try. So, I convinced my son to download the trial copy of JRiver Media Center and HDTracks downloader. We bought and downloaded a 96/24 FLAC copy of Ryan Adams Live at Carnegie last night. Tonight I’ll try to figure out how to import it into the MC and set things up with my system. One of the reasons I bought the Parasound P5 preamp was due to its flexibility-- a fairly decent DAC being one of the options I was after. 

Now, let me put things into some perspective here. I still have an Ipod nano with the square edges. It’s been a long time since I’ve messed with digital music, and when I did it was simply Itunes and Mp3 files. Furthermore, my old Dell laptop has been acting squirrelly which is the reason I had my son do it on his Mac. I have zero Mac experience on top of it. 

If I can figure out how to set things up with my system, learn how to navigate the Mac, and like what I hear, I’ll probably go ahead and buy one for myself and download the full copy of Jriver MC. I’m not computer savvy by any stretch so this isn’t a slam dunk by any stretch. 

When I google terms like hi resolution music files, media centers, etc…the results are overwhelming. It’s hard to know where to start or what truly is the best resource for GETTING STARTED. So, I’d like to know if anyone has a recommendation where I should look. I’m talking basics…not guides that assume you already know all the acronyms. Think along the lines of “High Resolution Music for Dummies”.

I mean I’m still at the stage of trying to understand pros/cons of lossless compressed vs. uncompressed, 192 vs. 96/88, FLAC/ALAC/AIFF, and so on. 

Any advice would be appreciated. If you would decide to reply, please speak s-l-o-w-l-y.


----------



## chrisletts (Oct 16, 2014)

I'll happily start you off.

First you have to watch out for the term 'hi res' which is often applied rather loosely.
To me, hi res means anything more than I could get on CD (16/44 but don't worry what the numbers mean yet) , and I have personally found that although 24/96 improves the quality, going right up to 24/192 makes no further improvement.

Second as regards format - FLAC is a universal file format, can carry any of those resolutions, and is a 'lossless' format which means in theory you are not losing any quality even though the file is compressed. Unlike mp3 which uses a 'lossy' compression. Again my personal preference is to use FLAC as I know virtually any digital player or PC can play them.

My final contribution is to say that the quality of the original master recording is usually said to have far more affect on the final sound than the resolution has (for FLAC files etc) and you can easily be misled into paying lots for a higher resolution file that isn't any better.


----------



## AudiocRaver (Jun 6, 2012)

Chrisletts gave you a good start.

Here is how I would proceed.

Be sure your speakers are set up for the best possible sound. Yeah, if they are not, you won't hear a difference anyway. This is a whole different topic, but do it first or don't bother with the rest. Other components, configuration, settings can make a difference, too, but this is the biggest one.:bigsmile: 
Go to highresaudio.com and find an album that you are pretty sure you would like (artist & type of music). Stick with studio recordings. There are good live recordings out there, but usually not as good as studio quality.
Get that recording on CD. They are cheaper. Listen and verify that it seems like a really good recording, very clear, well balanced, sharp imaging, good soundstage, every instrument has its own space in the sonic landscape.
Buy the high res tracks for that album. Try them out. See what you think. Make sure all settings through your system are really delivering you that quality of sound. Go back and forth from CD to high res tracks and listen for differences.
Give it time. Pay attention to details. Listening is a learned skill. With the greater skill comes quantum leaps in listening pleasure. And the ability to hear badness in recordings that you used to think were OK. That's just the way it is.
If you do that with a half dozen albums, you will find out a lot. If you hear no difference, it might be worthwhile posting your system setup and config so others can help determine if your system will deliver that quality of sound.

Good luck.


----------



## 480dad (Jan 22, 2015)

Thanks and Thanks.

After alot of speaker set-up trials, I'm sticking with the configuration that uses the dipole's rear wave vs. disperses it. The main compromises I'm making for critical listening are PLP distance a few feet beyond where it sounds best and the so-so absorption I'm getting from a quilt thrown over the back of my lazy boy chair to clear up some reflections. Otherwise, I think I'm dialed in set-up wise. 

Before I go any farther, I suppose I need to get confirmation that my set up will indeed be able to present the difference in sound quality beyond CD's 16/44 resolution. My 2-channel gear includes:

Source: 24/96 FLAC via JRiver Media Center on MacBook Pro (I plan to use USB)
Preamp: Parasound Halo P5 2.1-channel (Burr-Brown PCM1798 DAC. Coax & optical up to 24/192; USB up to 24/96)
Amp: Parasound Halo A21 2-channel
Mains: MartinLogan ESLs

Good info on the master recording quality. Guess I just assumed recordings were produced to a set quality standard. Besides studio vs. live recordings, is there any way to tell if a master would be of higher (or lesser) quality? anything on the label or packaging...?

Are there any settings resident within the JRiver MC that I especially need to be aware of to achieve the best sound from a 24/96 FLAC format?


----------



## Lumen (May 17, 2014)

480dad said:


> Good info on the master recording quality. Guess I just assumed recordings were produced to a set quality standard. Besides studio vs. live recordings, is there any way to tell if a master would be of higher (or lesser) quality? anything on the label or packaging...?


I'm om my iPad and can't get the embedded links to work properly, so a longhand one follows
http://www.hometheatershack.com/for...igh-fidelity-inspired-speaker-demo-songs.html
That link is to another thread on this site which has more than a dozen suggestions for demo/test material.

You can also choose by recording label (not always guaranteed good SQ), or by mastering engineer (Bob Katz, Bernie Grundman,, etc.). You may find that by using these two methods, you may not care that much for the music. Try sound bytes (song sample lasting 15-30seconds or so) first to see if you'll enjoy what you're auditioning. It will make the process easier and more effective. Even if the seller doesn't have samples, you can usually find them on Amazon if you google the Artist and title appended with the word "Amazon".

Sent from my iPad using HTShack


----------



## 480dad (Jan 22, 2015)

I think I'm experiencing audio nirvana. Compared a couple tracks of Fleetwood Mac Rumours CD to the 24/96 FLAC album I downloaded tonight. I'm really noticing kick drum hits and keyboards more than I have before. Christine McVie's vocals are also standing out. I've also listened to Ryan Adams live at Carnegie a couple times tonight...really hearing detail...including a guy sneezing from what I presume may be the audience. 

I plan to download a couple more albums tonight, Tears for Fears Seeds of Love and some Bob James and will do more comparisons to cd sound tomorrow night. I think I might try some blind listening tests to really see if I'm hearing what I think I'm hearing vs. something psychological. 

I can only imagine what that this would be like if I had a clue what I was doing! :T


----------



## Lumen (May 17, 2014)

Nah, don't sell yourself short; you're doing fine. Be methodical and rigorous, but most of all, have fun with it! I believe comparisons are more meaningful and effective if limited between 30-60 seconds. Our sonic memories are not very long--sort of like pain. You remember it was not pleasant, but it's hard to really pin down how it felt. If you try to listen too far into a song, details become blurred with time (unless of course, you're intimately familiar with the performance). 

Those kick drums and keyboards you're noticing more of: are they night and day, or is there a certain difference in sound character between CD and Hi-Res? If they're night and day-- meaning that one (presumably CD) masks sounds which are easily revealed by the other medium (presumably Hi-Res)--then I would say it's a no-brainer to take the plunge. But if not night and day and instead a difference in sound character, then you have to ask yourself whether or not difference is better, or just different. 

Only you can make that call. No one can tell you what you can and can't hear. But as a precaution,you might like to remind yourself that first impressions can be misleading, especially if they seem too good to be true. IA presentation that stands out at first, may grow annoying over the long term. Not lecturing, just saying


----------



## AudiocRaver (Jun 6, 2012)

480dad said:


> Thanks and Thanks.
> 
> After alot of speaker set-up trials, I'm sticking with the configuration that uses the dipole's rear wave vs. disperses it. The main compromises I'm making for critical listening are PLP distance a few feet beyond where it sounds best and the so-so absorption I'm getting from a quilt thrown over the back of my lazy boy chair to clear up some reflections. Otherwise, I think I'm dialed in set-up wise.
> 
> ...


I should have recognized you from some of the discussions about MartinLogan / open baffle / dipole setup. Everything on your equipment list is suitable for excellent sonics.

For quality recordings, go first by artist then by producer. Nothing in labeling or description really helps here, only reputation. With certain artists you are almost guaranteed a really clean mix. The same can often be said about certain producers. Listen for separation where each vocal and instrument seems to own its own area of the mix and is separated, at least slightly, from adjacent sound. Also listen for layering, where some sounds seem to come from the back of the mix and others from forward. All of this will add to the separation and contrast and detail that can be heard. Reject any that sound cluttered or nonspecific.

I do not know any specific jRiver MC settings to watch for. Your setup is actually fairly simple, so not a lot to worry about there. You want, ideally, for the signal to stay in its high res format with minimal processing - some EQ is OK if you need it - be aware of any resampling taking place - until the DAC stage - hopefully only one, no DA > AD > DA if you can avoid it - then amps, speakers and you at the LP. None of the aforementioned is an audio evil, they just are detractors from the pristine high res experience you are trying to achieve. For instance, if adding room correction, the best "high res experience" choice would be one that operates inside the computer and can operate at 24 bits and 44.1, 48, 88.2, 96, 176.4, and 192 kHz (unless you limit yourself to 96, like chrisletts mentioned) so no bit rate resampling takes place. 

Don't forget DSD files (the SACD file format). They are a different animal. jRiver can handle them, but for the purest experience, the DAC must handle them natively, and there can be no EQ or other processing anywhere.

If you care about comparing CD to high res, stick to recent recordings where the same mix (probably) and master (maybe/hopefully) was the source for the CD and the high res tracks.


----------



## AudiocRaver (Jun 6, 2012)

480dad said:


> I think I'm experiencing audio nirvana. Compared a couple tracks of Fleetwood Mac Rumours CD to the 24/96 FLAC album I downloaded tonight. I'm really noticing kick drum hits and keyboards more than I have before. Christine McVie's vocals are also standing out. I've also listened to Ryan Adams live at Carnegie a couple times tonight...really hearing detail...including a guy sneezing from what I presume may be the audience.
> 
> I plan to download a couple more albums tonight, Tears for Fears Seeds of Love and some Bob James and will do more comparisons to cd sound tomorrow night. I think I might try some blind listening tests to really see if I'm hearing what I think I'm hearing vs. something psychological.
> 
> I can only imagine what that this would be like if I had a clue what I was doing! :T


Many older recordings have been remastered, some even remixed, in the process of creating high res versions. The differences you hear are not _necessarily_ just from being higher res tracks. OTOH, if you are not into the serious comparing part, then don't worry about that stuff and just enjoy it!


----------



## 480dad (Jan 22, 2015)

BlueRockinLou said:


> Our sonic memories are not very long--sort of like pain. You remember it was not pleasant, but it's hard to really pin down how it felt.


au contraire...my pain has been there for over 30 years and she, I mean...it's... just as painful today as it was back then.



AudiocRaver said:


> Many older recordings have been remastered, some even remixed, in the process of creating high res versions. The differences you hear are not _necessarily_ just from being higher res tracks. OTOH, if you are not into the serious comparing part, then don't worry about that stuff and just enjoy it!


Alot of twists and turns in this journey aren't there. Think you're heading down one road and find out you may be on a different one altogether. I don't mind the comparing part as it helps me learn a little and hopefully hear some real differences. It's sometimes hard to talk about or put into words things you haven't necessarily experienced firsthand.

Key is, it's all still alot of fun...


----------

