No offense taken. Even HDtracks sells upsampled CDs because that's
what the recording companies give them, and I complain to them when
they do that. That's why I check all that is supposed to be hi-res. I
don't have the HDD space for stuff that's not really hi-res.
Thanks for clarifying your sources and thanks for your posts.
PB
On Sun, 29 Oct 2017 18:40:32 -0500, philnation@(do not post)att.net
wrote:
>
>This is Uncle Phil replying to several indivisuals who have asked
>about my 24/192 post over the past few days. Gosh gentlemen,
>I really didn't know that I was interupting the recording industry.
>One individual actually seemed to be ready to comit to a convent if I
>didn't fess up about my post and admit that I had 'done him wrong' by
>trying to share a few songs. Are my post 24 bits = YES Are my khz
>192 = YES Are my post taken from CDs = YES Have I tried to trick
>and/or confuse anyone = NO My upsampling of the CDs sound very good
>on my computer system - they sound very good on my large system in the
>living room - they sound great in my car. Sooooo - what have I done
>wrong? I thought I would share some songs at hirez which would be an
>improvement over 16/44.1. You know, it's really about the music and
>not about being able to hear sounds that are more that 30khz on up
>into the upper index of harmonics. Here again, I'm sorry if you were
>offended by my posting these few songs and upsetting you day. From
>now on, I will identify any of my post with one of two words: upgrade
>and/or upsampled.
>
>Again gentlemen, I'm sorry you were offended - I'm going to go for a
>walk in the woods to releave the pressure on my pounding head and
>breath the frest air of common sense. Remember - from my point of
>view, this newsgroup is not real life - these are just digital
>computer files. They come and they go.
>
>By the way, just so you know, there's one individual who has been
>knocking around with analysis of my post and reports that he knows
>everything because he has run 'test' and 'checked out' my posts. For
>this individual (who shall remain nameless), why don't you post
>something if you're so perfect. I notice you havn't posted anything
>to this newsgroup AT ALL. Where are your 'perfect post' and where are
>your 'great sounds'???
>
>Till next time..............Uncle Phil
>On Sun, 29 Oct 2017 13:48:13 -0600, trilobyte5@theyahoo.com wrote:
>
>>Are ALL of his posts this way??
>>I don't have the experience or expertise you fellas have and don't
>>know how to check them.
>>
>>Thanks....
>>
>>~BA
>>
>>On Sat, 28 Oct 2017 09:37:18 -0500, Puffer Belly
>><anonymous@anonymous.org> wrote:
>>
>>>There are no known hi-res sources for many of Uncle Phil's posts. I've
>>>downloaded a few dozen of his posts (various files, not whole albums)
>>>and checked the frequency spectrums with Audacity. All show a
>>>brickwall filter was used at 20 kHz, which means these posts are
>>>upconverted CDs (16 bits/44.1 kHz). There's nothing wrong with that
>>>as long as you know what you are getting, which are very large files
>>>of CD resolution music.
>>>
>>>If these posts had been ripped from analog sources (vinyl or tape), in
>>>case you were wondering, then there would be frequency content out to
>>>30 kHz or higher and the roll off would be gradual, not a brickwall
>>>shape.
>>>
>>>Regards,
>>>PB
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 |
|