D/T Hi res files

[KevShmev]

I won't copy and paste the email here, since I am not a fan of putting someone's private email to me on to a public forum, but the reply I got from HD was basically that they can only sell what is given to them by the label because they do not do any mastering themselves.  In other words, Inside Out completely dropped the ball by sending "HD files" to HD Tracks that are just as compressed and brickwalled as the normal version released to the public.  Very poor form on the part of IO.

[RaiseTheKnife]

This thread saved me $18.  Thanks!

[Bolsters]

Inside Out completely dropped the ball by sending "HD files" to HD Tracks that are just as compressed and brickwalled as the normal version released to the public.  Very poor form on the part of IO.

Especially since we know they had a much better high resolution master they could have sent to HDTracks instead (the one on the blu ray).

[Groundhog]

You are right. We should email Inside out too. 

I don't think HDTracks can be absolved of all responsibility, though.

I think HD Tracks needs to tell them that the best possible master is a dynamic one.  Just saying best possible master will result in the same old brickwalled versions. You are right that they have some responsibility too.  They need to tell the labels that the type of customers coming to HD Tracks are NOT looking for heavily compressed versions.  HD crap is not any better than plain old crap.

I agree. They should specifically ask for a dynamic master as this is what their customers are after.

I sent an e-mail to InsideOut yesterday about the HDTracks version and explaining the importance of dynamic master, but haven't gotten a reply yet.

[Thoughtspart3]

Inside Out completely dropped the ball by sending "HD files" to HD Tracks that are just as compressed and brickwalled as the normal version released to the public.  Very poor form on the part of IO.

Especially since we know they had a much better high resolution master they could have sent to HDTracks instead (the one on the blu ray).

I am replying and trying to explain this.  It should not be much more work if any to send this version.

[Thoughtspart3]

I won't copy and paste the email here, since I am not a fan of putting someone's private email to me on to a public forum, but the reply I got from HD was basically that they can only sell what is given to them by the label because they do not do any mastering themselves.  In other words, Inside Out completely dropped the ball by sending "HD files" to HD Tracks that are just as compressed and brickwalled as the normal version released to the public.  Very poor form on the part of IO.

Yea, the main blame is with Inside Out.  I am trying to get HD Tracks to advocate for us though.  If they tell the labels this is what people want hopefully they will listen.

[cool34231a]

Bought the album on hdtracks day one and got mad about crazy dynamic range compression. Then I started playing with blu-ray 5.1 LPCM mix trying to convert it to stereo, without even checking the stereo 2.0 mix first, thinking that's where hdtracks sourced it from.

Here's the way I did 5.1 to stereo :-)
Rip the audio to 5.1 FLAC files.
In Audacity, set front L+R as stereo, set back L+R as stereo, C and LFE as mono. Export audio as 32-bit float 96KHz WAV. Open the new stereo WAV (which will look brickwalled, then amplify to 0db, a trick I learned on youtube.
Export as 24-bit 96KHz FLAC
Still sounded better than hdtracks.

Then I found out that LPCM stereo tracks from blu-ray actually sounded good, which I kept them as FLAC for main listening experience.

Sent hdtracks an email.

[me7]

Have you checked whether the Blu-ray 2.0 version is different than the front channels of the 5.1 version? Maybe it's "incomplete", missing the content from the center channel.

[cool34231a]

Yes, the front speakers sometimes missing the keyboard parts, and probably some other stuff. I actually merged the front and rear channels as stereo, and center+sub as mono, into the stereo mixdown.

In the end, I though that the blu-ray stereo mix had little more ambience than my surround downmix.

HDtracks needs to start providing technical info and the history of the masters, or I'll start calling them Fake hdtracks.

[me7]

Have you checked whether the Blu-ray 2.0 contains the keyboard parts that the Blu-ray 5.1 front channels are missing?

[cool34231a]

Blu-ray 2.0 does contain the keyboard parts that the Blu-ray 5.1 front channels are missing.
I'm pretty sure they're identical. It's just on 5.1 it's spread out between front and rear channels.

example S2N 2:10-2:22 stereo version has the whole rhythmic keyboard solo, but on blu-ray 5.1 it jumps between rear and front channels. The rear channels also have keyboard orchestration and whole band atmosphere/reverb/delay effect.

 
Untethered Angel 4:16 organ solo is there, in stereo version. On 5.1, the organ solo is missing from the front channels, and playing in the rear channels.

[unklejman]

I don't see how mixing down a 5.1 mix to stereo would ever sound right.

[faizoff]

I finally got my artbook with the bluray. The stereo LPCM track is really fantastic, I ripped it to FLAC and listen to this version now. I didn't really have an issue with the CD version but after listening to the BR stereo version I now know what people were talking about how loud the CD version is.

I will have to check out the 5.1 version at some point.

[Lax]

I had a chance to listen to the 5.1 version converted to stereo and indeed we loose too many keyboard parts

How loud is the bluray 2.0 version compared to the cd ?

[DoctorAction]

All labels and bands really to get on the ball with this. Incredibly low effort to create and distribute a master without the compression/amplification step and let digital consumers choose.

[faizoff]

The Bluray stereo doesn't sound loud at all. It's the CD version that is really loud. If you compare them you'd easily be able to hear how loud the CD version is. It crackles at certain points too but I haven't heard the bluray stereo do that.

[nobloodyname]

How loud is the bluray 2.0 version compared to the cd ?

See my post on the first page of this thread for a visual representation.

[Lax]

How loud is the bluray 2.0 version compared to the cd ?

See my post on the first page of this thread for a visual representation.

Indeed, I forgot it was the stereo and not the 5.1
I guess I have to find this version

[Dellers]

Those stereo files from the Blu-Ray really make a difference (quite hard to make them, but worth it). Less loud parts sound a lot quieter than on the CD version, which means the impact of more powerful parts is also bigger. I do not regret getting the artbook.

[faizoff]

Me too, I love cranking up the stereo rip from the bluray. It sounds so amazing and I can listen to this on repeat endlessly. The crunchy guitar riff in At Wit's End in the second part of the song is orgasmic.

[convrge]

One thing I noticed with the DVD LPCM 2.0 mastering is that the mix seems to be slightly different, at least in one place. At 5:30 in At Wit's End, the synth part is much louder in the standard/CD mastering than it is in the DVD mastering. Unless this is a byproduct of the less compressed mastering?

[ytserush]

The Bluray stereo doesn't sound loud at all. It's the CD version that is really loud. If you compare them you'd easily be able to hear how loud the CD version is. It crackles at certain points too but I haven't heard the bluray stereo do that.

Haven't tried the Bluray, but my stereo system is orders of magnitude better than my Bluray set up which is crap. 

At first I thought my stereo speakers were going because I actually hear them crackle at various points when I play the CD.