That Little Animal Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 Oh when he starts the "don't", I hear it now. It's actually nothing compared to the Save Me one though It's in the loooooooong. Edit: Unless I'm wroooooong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FabriPav Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 It's in the loooooooong. Edit: Unless I'm wroooooong I don't hear anything there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Travisx2112 Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 1:10, between "drowning in" and "denial", there's a little 'fzzzt' before denial I havent heard the HD versions yet, but even on the standard ones, there's a vocal editing issue right there that always bugs me. Also, in Liquid State, the fade in is cut off and sounds weird. Bad editing. Always bugs me when I listen to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FabriPav Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 I havent heard the HD versions yet, but even on the standard ones, there's a vocal editing issue right there that always bugs me. Also, in Liquid State, the fade in is cut off and sounds weird. Bad editing. Always bugs me when I listen to it. The Liquid State one might be done like that on purpose, though. It sounds great imo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Travisx2112 Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 The Liquid State one might be done like that on purpose, though. Ah true enough! It still bugs me though; I wish it were a smoother transition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hyper_chondriac_muser Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 Listening now intently to spot the errors ... and I heard a little click in Supremacy where everyone mentioned it. It feels really obvious now that the whole world has picked up on it, haha. The quality is amazing though! Thanks to whoever recommended boottunes Now my n00by self still needs to work out how to get the files, which are .m4a after being converted from FLAC, to work on my iPhone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gareeh Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 Whut? Boottunes should simply change FLAC to ALAC unless you are talking about something else? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hyper_chondriac_muser Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Whut? Boottunes should simply change FLAC to ALAC unless you are talking about something else? They are ALAC, but they won't play/upload on my iPhone I did exactly what the tutorial said, which was easy enough, but they won't sync. Not tech savvy in these things Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gareeh Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Everything here is correct, do you have enough space on your iPhone and what iOS is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hyper_chondriac_muser Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Everything here is correct, do you have enough space on your iPhone and what iOS is it? Yep, iOS6, got a 32GB so plenty of room. I read in a Mac forum that it's cos the sample rate is 96.000 kHz, while iPhones can only handle 44.100 max. If I downsample, will I lose the lossless quality, though? I found a way to right click and select 'create AAC version' or 'create MP3 version' in iTunes, which would work on my iPhone, but again I dunno if I'm losing the lossless quality of ALAC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Citizen_2 Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 These 24/96 tracks might show up the odd studio glitch but the standout best thing about them is that they were authored before all the compression/brickwalling that has been done on the CD master. In fact the worst thing about them is that they make the CD sound a bit yuk when you have the choice. My box set turned up earlier and I couldn't believe how harsh the CD sounds in comparison with the FLAC files. The CD tracks seem to have even more post-production compression than the 128K streaming mp3's the Guardian was hosting, which is nothing if not ironic. Doubt it'll ever happen but I'd love to know what the raison d'etre is for mastering like that. I know practically all mainstream albums suffer to some extent nowadays but this seems unusually bad. What's the point of a format with this much dynamic range when you're only using a handful of decibels of it? Do a compressed to b*gg&ry radio-tweaked mix if you want to, but send them to the radio stations, don't put 'em on the commercial release. Grrrr. Kirkbot - or anyone on the technical side, would really love to know why this is how it is. Mind you, just so this doesn't sound like a rant, would also like to thank everyone involved for putting out these HD files. They're awesome, really. They alone make the box set worth the price of admission for me - which is as good an expression as you could get of how much better they make the whole album sound. Just a shame the CD sounds so (avoidably) compromised in comparison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JessicaSarahS Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 These 24/96 tracks might show up the odd studio glitch but the standout best thing about them is that they were authored before all the compression/brickwalling that has been done on the CD master. In fact the worst thing about them is that they make the CD sound a bit yuk when you have the choice... Just a shame the CD sounds so (avoidably) compromised in comparison. I agree completely. The CD compression is pretty awful. I'm sticking to listening to the FLACs, but I do listen to the CD in my car where it's less noticible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weezul Posted October 4, 2012 Author Share Posted October 4, 2012 I agree fully on the mastering. Heck. I doubt with the same mastering job, the difference between the 44.1/16 and 96/24 would be that obvious. My face lit up when I heard the difference though. It makes all the drops much larger. As for converting the files, I would say do it. This HD mix encoded to 320kbps MP3 44.1/16bit would still IMO be a more pleasant listen than the CD purely on the master. That's up for debate I guess but you know. Did not expect this thread to blow up like this. So no one wants this process applied to a nice 10th anniversary Absolution?!?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gareeh Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Yep, iOS6, got a 32GB so plenty of room. I read in a Mac forum that it's cos the sample rate is 96.000 kHz, while iPhones can only handle 44.100 max. If I downsample, will I lose the lossless quality, though? I found a way to right click and select 'create AAC version' or 'create MP3 version' in iTunes, which would work on my iPhone, but again I dunno if I'm losing the lossless quality of ALAC. Wasn't aware of that, basically CD quality FLAC is the best you will be able to get onto your iPhone, so if you can't get that at all you should create MP3 versions that are 320kbps, you'll be losing that extra HD quality but there isn't much else you can do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hyper_chondriac_muser Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Wasn't aware of that, basically CD quality FLAC is the best you will be able to get onto your iPhone, so if you can't get that at all you should create MP3 versions that are 320kbps, you'll be losing that extra HD quality but there isn't much else you can do. Ah, shame . At least I can hear the HD quality on my Mac anyways, even if they won't sound that way on iPhone. I can create the MP3 versions, but that's essentially the same as importing the normal CD, right? Damn iPhone can't even handle Apple lossless, lol! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forluthien Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Ah, shame . At least I can hear the HD quality on my Mac anyways, even if they won't sound that way on iPhone. I can create the MP3 versions, but that's essentially the same as importing the normal CD, right? Damn iPhone can't even handle Apple lossless, lol! I am not sure whether this app keeps the FLAC quality or not, but I put all my HD audio files to iPhone using this app and it sounds amazing to me http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/capriccio-free-ultimate-music/id434829018?mt=8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hyper_chondriac_muser Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 I am not sure whether this app keeps the FLAC quality or not, but I put all my HD audio files to iPhone using this app and it sounds amazing to me http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/capriccio-free-ultimate-music/id434829018?mt=8 Cool, thanks for sharing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forluthien Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Cool, thanks for sharing Sorry, actually I just looked up more and found someone said app also lower the quality It seems this app maintains the quality, but it's $9.99 http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/flac-player/id390532592?mt=8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Citizen_2 Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 I agree fully on the mastering. Heck. I doubt with the same mastering job, the difference between the 44.1/16 and 96/24 would be that obvious. No doubt. I've just burned off a CD from the HD files and they still sound miles better than the commercial disc. Which is wrong in all sorts of ways when you think about it. Did not expect this thread to blow up like this. Ironic, isn't it, that something effectively chucked in as a free gift for those of us who sprung for the box, shows up what's in the box for being less good than it could have been. On the one hand I'm reluctant to complain as I'd love to see more of these kind of releases and don't want to say something that'd risk the band doing something similar in future. On the other, if discussion like this results in the next album sounding better on CD, then yay. So no one wants this process applied to a nice 10th anniversary Absolution?!?! Would love it - although given how big Muse were(n't) back in 2001-2, given what the state of the art was back then, and where Absolution was recorded, would be a bit doubtful whether it would even be technically possible to release those songs in the same way as has been done with the T2L flacs. The masters will still exist, but whether it was even recorded at 96/24 is something only those who know, will know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weezul Posted October 4, 2012 Author Share Posted October 4, 2012 Good points one and all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curlyxz Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Now my n00by self still needs to work out how to get the files, which are .m4a after being converted from FLAC, to work on my iPhone. Yeah, same happened to me. Converted the FLAC files to ALAC and it turned out that my iPhone doesn't support that type of ALAC.(?) So I just imported my CD using ALAC settings. I would LOVE Absolution to receive this sort of treatment, it would be amazing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Citizen_2 Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Oh - hey, this is the Muse messageboard, so wild conspiracy theories are fine, yes? If so, anyone else wondering why these flacs have _1411 tagged on the end of each filename? That number has an obvious technical significance, although the real reason is probably nothing to do with that. Anyone from .mu who wants to tell us why it's there, go ahead. Anyone else, as above, conspiracy theories please, and the wilder the better! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JessicaSarahS Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Oh - hey, this is the Muse messageboard, so wild conspiracy theories are fine, yes? If so, anyone else wondering why these flacs have _1411 tagged on the end of each filename? That number has an obvious technical significance, although the real reason is probably nothing to do with that. Anyone from .mu who wants to tell us why it's there, go ahead. Anyone else, as above, conspiracy theories please, and the wilder the better! I thought it was because of the bitrate of the raw PCM? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Citizen_Eraser Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Is there any legit way to pay for just these HD audio files without buying the box set? Or even a non-legit way to get them? I have to hear this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JessicaSarahS Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Is there any legit way to pay for just these HD audio files without buying the box sets? Or even a non-legit way to get them? I have to hear this. 2nd option http://muse.warnerbrosrecords.com/the-2nd-law-digital-download.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.