Gaga's albums now available in audiophile 24bit

[RAMROD 109,666]

Just now, Greanskye said:

Yea but does she still sing "free bit?" That'd be a deal breaker for me. 

 

No, you can try hear the sample and clearly it is uncensored version

[Blueskye 1,087]

1 minute ago, RAMROD said:

 

No, you can try hear the sample and clearly it is uncensored version

Very cool, might have to look into this (when I actually have some money).

[RAMROD 109,666]

3 minutes ago, Greanskye said:

Very cool, might have to look into this (when I actually have some money).

When you did, get the non deluxe one, bit cheaper, unless you also want to have The Fame in one package. Both editions are uncensored, I have checked.

[GhettoFabulous 18,501]

Can't really hear the difference cuz my earphones are not that good 

But I heard somewhere when songs are mastered in HD they stand a better chance at winning Grammys 

[Windowlicker 3,572]

10 hours ago, SpaceAce said:

I don't think Joanne is the best album to test this out with. Try the Born This Way Snippets. And if you still can't hear a difference then don't worry. This type of listening is just a sort of luxury if you have the time and and get the right equipment to fully pay attention and enjoy. Otherwise I don't see the point. Most people are too busy to sit back and devote hours to listening to music. We typically pair music with activities that take up a lot our attention and it's an afterthought. I consider myself obsessed with music but I'm no audiophile and I can still enjoy listening through a $5 pair of earphones. 

Yeah. Joanne more or less sounds the same, which is actually great. They did a fantastic job with the mixing/mastering. Very open sounding, and at times it feels like she's sitting in your ear. I think it has a lot to do with the analog elements in the production. Rihanna's ANTI is another album where the difference isn't too noticeable, aside from the added "space" for the songs to breathe in. Gaga's earlier albums is where this sort of quality will shine through and the listener will hopefully be able to hear elements they've never noticed before, especially if the producers and engineers were doing their job. This sort of thing can be hit and miss, since it really depends on how it was all created in the first place. You won't hear any differences (such as clarity) in a hi-res file if a song wasn't finished off right.

[Katie14 4,828]

29 minutes ago, PropaGaga said:

Yeah. Joanne more or less sounds the same, which is actually great. They did a fantastic job with the mixing/mastering. Very open sounding, and at times it feels like she's sitting in your ear. I think it has a lot to do with the analog elements in the production. Rihanna's ANTI is another album where the difference isn't too noticeable, aside from the added "space" for the songs to breathe in. Gaga's earlier albums is where this sort of quality will shine through and the listener will hopefully be able to hear elements they've never noticed before, especially if the producers and engineers were doing their job. This sort of thing can be hit and miss, since it really depends on how it was all created in the first place. You won't hear any differences (such as clarity) in a hi-res file if a song wasn't finished off right.

Then how can you tell if you can't hear differences because the mixing and mastering was done well like in Joanne, or because the production wasn't finished well?

[StarstruckIllusion 52,790]

congrats. I know many have wanted this

[Windowlicker 3,572]

1 hour ago, Katie14 said:

Then how can you tell if you can't hear differences because the mixing and mastering was done well like in Joanne, or because the production wasn't finished well?

Because it's not distorted or clipped. Distortion and clipping will always happen when a file is compressed for CDs or sent to places like iTunes or Spotify. I never said the differences weren't there. My point is that if the sound is just as stuffy on a hi-res file as it is on a compressed one then they didn't do a good job.

[DrewPa 3,762]

If I got it well, the HD audio is the non compressed digital master used before putting it in a CD... The sound in a CD is very good, but the data are often compressed, and that led to what Audiophiles often describe as the "coldness" of the digital music, compared to the analogic reproduction of the Vinyl sound, less "detailed", but more "warm" since there's no loss of informations in it. 

MP3 or MP4 are totally compressed digital files with all the sub-details (apparently not perceived by human ears but still important for the quality, as listening to somebody singing in front of you without a microphone rather than in a stadium with his/her voice filtered... sorry if I can't make myself clearer  ) erased in order to provide a smaller file... of course, if you listen to music on your phone with earphones most of the time you can barely hear the difference, but for people (like me), who have a decent HI-FI system at home and like to listen to music without (or with a very good) earphones the difference is BIG, in therm of warmness and "immersion" in music.

Blu-ray audio (the physical counterpart of the HD Files) are great because they manage to bring together the purity of a digital supports as CD with the "roundness" and "naturalness" of a Vinyl... Too bad even Audiophile have some prejudice towards it, I bought some album in BD-Audio and they are glorious, and I pray every day for a release of all Gaga catalogue in this format.

So, It's a great news for me, expect that I can't buy them from France  

[lordmaler 896]

Is there zippyshare xclusive release? 

 

I don't know do you all know that Government Hooker on vinyl has different mix than CD version so I am curious how this one sounds.

[ARTPOPheartstop 514]

22 hours ago, PropaGaga said:

Interscope has finally made all of Gaga's albums available in audiophile 24bit on HDtracks. I know some fans have been wanting this for a while, so I figured I'd post and let everyone know! 

 

Who is this account and why is it verified?