A solid sea of red and green for the right and left channels, peak limited and compressed to the max. The O db lights are fully lit up. Not to seem ungrateful, but not much of a reason to do 24/192 in light of this I would think.
...to the Foos, do ya now Jim? What's your favorite album? Would you say this EP is a maturation of their 20-year discography, or more of an artistic exploration project? Something else perhaps?
With all the technology and since 24 bit does give us "theoretical" -144db noise floor ( reality is that -80db is probably reality) could we leave some life and breath in the music rather than just be the loudest? Many of us grew tired of the AM/FM loudness wars of the past and I don't so Serius/XM radio for their compressed business model. It is Foos' music to perform and present as they wish, but it just seems to me that the benefits of 24/192 are lost in max compression and peak limiting. I have no doubt they are excellent musicians and I would guess that this a nice gesture on their part to offer some of their new music for free. But, this is an audiophile site and so the rules are ever so slightly different for us.
...(and initially hoped, for that matter) this was a site purely for digital audiophiles, however, consider the following:
- The number of Bluetooth-supported products in the 2015 edition of Annual Bits
- Copious mentions of Apple products (which we all know are limited natively to a max throughput of 24/96 for notebooks and desktops -- and of course, even less for smaller Apple-branded devices)
- Postings of products like the Chromecast
(By the way, have you ever perused the forums here? Seems like most of the questions are either from folks who somehow didn't get a manual with their audio equipment, or topics that are more apropos for the Genius Bar.)
Anyway, there's a lot of other content here that suggests this site is what the tag line beneath the Audiostream logo says:
"COMPUTER AUDIO FOR EVERYONE."
Digital vs. analog, hi- vs. low-rez -- the list goes on and on... But in the end, it's all intended to promote the enjoyment of sound that's suited to the individual's tastes. I prefer to listen to the music first, and if it's worth more than one or two plays, THEN let my audiophile persona take over and fuss about provenance and the delivery stream.
And if your preference is to the consume the content in the form of measurements, who am I to judge.
Now, back to the Foo Fighters' EP... This is the band's first cut at hi-rez since sister site S&V first posted this:http://www.soundandvision.com/content/foo-fighters-join-sony-promote-hi-...
As a digital audiophile, I 100% agree that the benefits of 24/192 are lost in max compression and peak limiting, but as a Foo (and music) fan, am just happy the band is making strides in the right direction, and hope they can effect change in the industry for the better.
Happy listening! (Or measurement-taking, if that's your thing!)
P.S. To all the Foo fans: whatever your preferred format is, definitely worth downloading!
I own and use a MacBook Pro running Roon as my music server and an iMac on my desktop so that explains why there are references to that fact in most of my reviews.
...on my comment about Apple desktops and notebooks. From https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202730:
These computers support up to 192 kHz sample rate for audio playback:
•MacBook Pro (Retina, 13-inch, Late 2013) and later
•MacBook Pro (Retina, 15-inch, Late 2013) and later
•Mac Pro (Late 2013)
•iMac (21.5-inch, Mid 2014)
•Mac mini (Late 2014)
(I knew my wife should've waited when she bought her iMac in early 2013. Ugh.)
Thanks for the info.
...let Apple know their page needs some updating. (https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202730)
Care to share your thoughts about the Foo Fighters' EP?