Why would anyone use HD Tracks for Downloads?

Noble100 you are way off base. Analog has infinite resolution, it is as good as the playback system can make it. Anything recorded in analog and never converted is the good standard. Hi Rez can only hope to approximate the original analog experience, it cannot surpass it.

Analogluvr,

I think you may be living in an alternate world or universe. With your username, I should probably expect a biased viewpoint and some questionable claims.

Wow, analog has INFINITE RESOLUTION? That would make it the perfect format for recording and playback of audio. Perfect sound forever, right? Well, it would if it was TRUE!

Have you enlightened all the engineers and experts currently working on developing new recording and storage technology that would improve on the analog technology that was first utilized in the 1800's? I don't think they're aware that no improvements to existing analog technology are possible. Boy, they're sure going to be excited when they hear about your good news!

I'm thinking they'll be very grateful you finally set them straight. They'll be so happy that analog's maximum dynamic range of 90 db, well below the limit of live instruments and music, is now suddenly acceptable since no improvements are possible. They'll be overjoyed that tape hiss, high noise floors,low signal to noise ratios and frequency response errors caused by tape speed variations are no longer something to be concerned with.

I would love to be there when you break the news and let them know they've been wasting their time during all those years of schooling and all those years of researching, experimenting and testing based on the false premise that 150 year old analog technology could be improved upon. Silly bastards, I can't wait to see the expressions on their faces when you lay your infinite wisdom on them.

On the other hand, they may be upset when you let them know the truth according to you. They may respond in unison with s single digit hand gestures followed by a loud group yell of "Infinite Resolution My ASS!

It's also a distinct possibility that each engineer may insist on beating you. The severity of each beating will likely be proportionate to the number of years of schooling and research that each has invested on their futile quest for a recording and playback technology that outperforms analog.

Tim

Yer absolutely right, it is the gold standard. And that is why we have the audiophile expression, "it's sounds like the master tape." Of course even the master tape can sound generic or perhaps even horrible on a bog standard system. It so hard to generalize in this hobby, no?

Noble 100,

The thing that gets me is that most of the posts have concurred that digital done right can sound very good. However, once some says analog can sound very good and has qualities that in someways surpass digital you get all upset and begin rehashing a 30 year old debate, with what seems to be a passionate agenda to bash analog.

Your last post was extremely hostile and adds nothing to the conversation. I would suspect that if you could, upon review, you would hit the delete button.

Now back to your original question, people will pay for the highest resolution in the digital domain to analog tape because it sounds better than the bandwidth limited 44/16. Why it sounds better has been discuss over and over and over again with lots of reasons given. Do a google search and you can read for weeks.

However, one reason, which I think you might conclude is valid, is that brick wall filters create issues and once you move them further up in the audio spectrum they are less of an issue, thus allowing for further enjoyment.

Peace to all who listen!

Geoffkait,

I agree, it is hard to accurately generalize in this hobby. I think it's best to be as specific as possible when communicating our thoughts and opinions.

I'll try to practice what we preach below:

I have absolutely no bias against analog, whether it is vinyl or tape. I believe everyone should use and listen to whatever they like best. My opinions should not, and I believe do not, have any influence on what equipment or music formats people choose to utilize and enjoy.

However, I also believe Audiogon forums offer an excellent venue for sharing our thoughts, experiences and opinions on audio subjects with fellow enthusiasts. I think it's best if we are all honest, lack agendas, support subjective statements with at least some objective facts or explanations that are verifiable and attempt to keep an open mind by avoiding any developed biases.

I agree with Geoffkait that multi-track reel to reel analog masters have been the gold standard for many years.

Until recently, I'd never known of anyone claiming analog reel to reel masters were capable of infinite resolution. I don't believe this is possible with analog tape due to several absolute limitations of this format that have not, and likely cannot, be overcome. These limitations are dynamic range, noise floor level, frequency response accuracy, signal to noise ratio and detail level. Unfortunately, these are all limitations in areas that are important in conveying realism in reproduced music.

Music recorded directly to PCM 24bit/96 khz (not 16bit/44.1khz) digital files main advantages over analog are in these critical areas that convey a sense of realism in reproduced music: dynamic range of up to 135 db, noise floor level of -120 db (Total Harmonic Distortion + Noise), frequency response accuracy of 20 hz-96khz +/- 1.5 db, signal to noise ratio of better than 135 db and these combined capabilities result in very high detail resolution levels that far exceed analog capabilities.

When the above impressive performance specifications of 24 bit/96khz PCM digital are compared to the less impressive performance specs of analog reel to reel tape, it becomes obvious why PCM is considered hi-res and tape is considered standard-resolution (I consider standard-res to be any format with specs equal to or below Redbook CD levels).

However, I realize that there are music lovers that prefer listening to their music in analog format even though it is less dynamic, has less frequency response accuracy, has a higher noise floor, less detail, a lower signal to noise ratio and, in general, a more colored sound than digital. Analog sounds more rounded, natural and 'honest' to them.

I have no intention of convincing them otherwise and would only wish them well in their musical enjoyment. My main issues are with claims that analog qualifies as hi-res and that it has infinite resolution.

Raymonda,

You stated: "The thing that gets me is that most of the posts have concurred that digital done right can sound very good. However, once some says analog can sound very good and has qualities that in someways surpass digital you get all upset and begin rehashing a 30 year old debate, with what seems to be a passionate agenda to bash analog.

Your last post was extremely hostile and adds nothing to the conversation. I would suspect that if you could, upon review, you would hit the delete button."

After reviewing this thread, I think you have a valid point; I now understand that claims that analog is hi-res and has infinite resolution does seem to get my panties in a bunch.
I honestly believe that analog can sound very good and I should not be so concerned that some consider it hi-res and allows infinite resolution. I also really do believe that all of us should listen to music on whatever format we like.

In my defense, I am somewhat passionate about music, its high quality recording and its realistic reproduction. I'm very interested in new emerging music reproduction technologies and think I do get frustrated when I encounter comments I think are wrong and just confuse the subject of hi-res music reproduction. I apologize to all for my small rants and will try to refrain in the future.

However, I think you're wrong that my reply to Geoffkait was hostile. I'll admit it added little to the conversation but know I didn't write it with hostile intentions. My intention was to be sarcastically funny while still conveying my point. I thought I was successful but now I'm not so sure.

A toast to enjoying our music however we choose to do it,
Tim