Muse - The Resistance [2LP Warner UK - Helium3 Limited Boxset] 24bit 192kHz vinyl rip

Hi Moulder, welcome back we missed you and your fine rips for sometime now. I will certainly have to check this out.

Here's more info for those unaware like I was. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Resistance_%28album%29

I missed your December rip as you posted it under "HQ-Audio" and "Bootleg". I tend check to Audiophile first. I suggest new members click the link at the bottom for moulder's "back catalog", fine stuff there.

thank you very much moulder. i listend to this one time when i got it on cd as a present. i thought it was too much glam compared to the other muse records. but i am very curious to check it again. repeated listens might change my opinion. and such a quality is always more than appreciated ;)

what is the VU_AA.C67?
I thought it was VU_AA.B34.
Is it a phono pre amp?
Its sound is superb!
thanks

@Marmeladov
VU_AA.C67 is the new version of the self-made vinyl preamp.
In older publications the version of the preamp was also lower ;-)

спасибо!) шикарная оцифровка, брал ее на нетлабе, тысяча благодарностей, доктор)

@lomik70
На нетлабе она лежит в виде посторонних APE, а тут скомпилирована в DVD-Audio. Всё остальное - то же самое)

moulder
Можем ожидать в ближайшее время что-нибудь интересненькое еще?))

@lomik70
Что-нибудь хорошее обязательно будет)

спасибо)) будем ждать

Anyone have luck playing/ripping this on a mac or PC? I've tried VLC, but no audio. Thanks in advance.

@9559
Everything plays perfectly! Check your software first)
You should use foobar2000 with DVD-A plugin for Win, and I don't know what to use for Mac.
But of course this release was intended for listening in standalone HiEnd DVD players/AV systems.

@moulder
is there a plugin for windows media player as well? i googled it, but i didn't get any useful results.

@ 9559

Yes this is a DVD-Audio only image. I know of nothing on the Mac side that will play directly from the ISO image. You can however use DVDAExplorer to extract the music to WAV's and use them like any other 24/192 WAV. I use XLD to convert to Apple Lossless and send them to iTunes. I am listening to these tracks on iTunes right now from a full 24/192 version. My DAC only does 24/96 so there is an XLD option for Apple Lossless to use a lower sample rate to save some drive space. Go to Applications, Utilities, Audio MIDI Setup and set your Audio Output source to the maximum supported settings.

You can download the Mac version of DVDAExplorer from: http://rapidshare.com/files/339399216/DVDAExplorer_MacOS.zip
Windows users can find it here: http://avaxhome.ws/software/software_type/multimedia/Rippers/DVDAExplorer2008.07.21_and_HowToUse.html

Select "Convert to WAV". I set the options to "Merge Groups", "Recover from stream errors". For copy protected DVD-A's select "Ignore stream encryption".

You can also burn it to a DVD-R with Roxio Toast and play on a home audio DVD-Audio player. It will not play on your DVD video player.


@ holster28 - No there is no plug in for Windows Media Player that I know of. Use foobar2000 or convert to WAV. But perhaps Windows Media player only does 24/96. This looks to be the link for the foobar DVD-A plug in http://sourceforge.net/projects/dvdadecoder/

@ Moulder

Thanks for bringing this wonderful rip for all of us to experience. This old man is getting much enjoyment from something new.

@Dr. Robert

thank you for the link

interesting choice, i've always wished muse would try their hand at an audiophile release... i
wonder how the master transfer compares to cd.

oh yeah thanks moulder!

@pdiddy
CD is only 16/44.1, and this LP was mastered from much higher source ;-)
This vinyl rip is probably the best sounding Muse ever)

First of all thank you for your work, appreciated, but the size is overkill. Now, take a while and read my “educational rant.”

1. I know I won't change _your_ mind, but hopefully I will enlighten others with "objective truth" and not subjective placebo facts.
2. There's no point to 24bit 192kHz sampling format, it won't bring you anything compared to 24bit 96KHz.
a - size is much bigger (a big disadvantage when used with PMPs)
b – 192kHz will more likely introduce "errors" when played via your DAC (unless you own very expensive DAC) and some optical outputs can’t handle more than 96kHz stereo. And then you can own oversampling DAC which will errase most differences if any.
c - when it was “grabbed” from LP, the ADC equipment usually handles 96KHz format in a better form/shape than when it tries to work in 196KHz mode, unless you have _very_ expensive ADC and it is very shiny outside. (point b + c  google for it).
http://www.dbtechno.com/documents/Sampling_Theory.pdf
d - Having "self-made" pre-amp, no matter if you're Einstein-like genius making pre-amps since you were a kid, will introduce an order of magnitude more "bugs/differences" to original analogue wave than the difference between 96 kHz vs 192 kHz sampling rate. Even if you would own B-52 preamp from Ray Samuels Audio (5thousands $), it still has “its own character” likely to color music and THEN store it, and this change is again, order of magnitude bigger than 96 vs 192kHz difference. Having an analogue source like vinyl we all need to deal with processing pipeline, I just pointed the uselessness of 192kHz grabbing.

3. Listening experience is the _same_:
a - Nyquist–Shannon theorem is saying, that by sampling with 96KHz you are able to store 48Khz high frequency wave signal, far above the limit what musical instruments can produce (ppl usually hear 20thousands and feel to 30 thousands). 44.1 Khz sampling (thus 22.05kHz) is not enough, 96kHz is perfectly fine in 10/10 cases.
b – Nyquist also proved, that by increasing the frequency of samples per second (96 thousands vs 192 thousands of samples per second), e.g. having a higher “density”, that it will not increase the perceived quality! Even 44.1 Khz/24bit is "precise" (but will "miss" 23kHz wave), 96Khz is enough and 192KHz is annihilation overkill.


If _you_ can hear the difference, it is because the playback occurred in different DAC mode (and likely produced more errors than in "proved" and ubiquitous 96kHz mode) or/and it was recorded in different ADC mode. But there's NO difference in perceived quality a human can hear. Better put, there's no IMPROVED quality. The difference might be there. That's why "sample bit resolution" is more important (hence 24bit rocks compared to 16bit, Apple Beatles Boxset) than the sampling frequency.

in short: 192kHz is increasing your ego, nothing more, and storage place to all that download it

P.S. you (by your description) own a pretty decent equipment yet your files are 94MB of size (and not 200 or 500 that rapidshare offers). Time to earn money for new account? For dial-up users, downloading 200MB is the same as downloading 100MB. They are either lucky or not, its not like 3MB of size.

@musicalbox
Well, the questions you've asked are quite clear. But if you look upon the comments for The Beatles - Abbey Road, or Pink Floyd - DSOTM, you will find all the answers there. I CAN and I DO hear the difference. My vinyl preamp is especially designed for ripping only and has NO TONAL CHARACTER at all, is ABSOLUTELY NEUTRAL and produces exactly THE SAME music signal. In the double blind listening it beats off $25000 factory-made ones. In other words, if I can do something good, why should I break the deal? Not so many people here can spend so much time and effort for building the perfect system as I can. So it will be better for all to listen to the real quality instead of making flames. And the archive size is 98765432 bytes - which can be considered as a conceptual thing)

@musicalbox
Every point you make is absolutely spot-on, but you should have expected the response you received from moulder. When ego is involved in any undertaking, mere logic with scientific objectivity is pointless. As someone who has been in the audio business for over 26 years (engineering, design & development as well as marketing), I've witnessed owners as well as developers of audiophile equipment come to physical blows regarding these kinds of ego-driven issues.

For those who _think_ they hear magical differences with these bloated uploads, more power to you. Imagination, fantasy and - above all, ego - are more persuasive elements than cold, hard facts.

Peace.

@audiophillos
...Jedem das Seine...

@moulder: Well sir, you're right. John Petrucci (of Dream Theater fame) shreds so fast, that he is able to melt the sun... so he can perfectly put so many "solo guitar bits" and notes to a one second, that by listening his work with only 96 thousands of samples you won't get the whole picture, you basically miss the whole chorus here and there. Thus 196 kHz is a necessity for Mr. Petrucci :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evTTHS9hwvU

Good to hear you have such a stellar pre-amp! The point was not "bashing" your pre-amp (I didn't want to offend you, I believe you’re a cool guy) but to show people, that factors like (I'll take a help from recent chat with LezDawson):

*Mastering*, record not being in innocent vacuum packed shape, record being a little bit off centre, stylus causing little distortions (but I'm sure yours is Sierra Leone made ”diamantus supremus”), ADC having a bad "electricity" day or amp which isn't burnt properly and cables not exactly from super-sonic-silver-carbonic-copper-ultra-pepsi-light-matterial will usually "add" more to original signal (wave), than the fact that we somehow "missed" 100 thousands samples per second.
Which in 99.9% cases would be exactly the same samples as their neighbours (once again, you already have 96 thousands of samples there).

But then again, we could have missed some inter-galactic 70kHz+ wave, and imagine that, finding a civilization out there! (nickname joke)

I want to believe...
=)

@musicalbox
It is better to listen to the Music instead of making flame. I won't start making rips and uploads in 24/96. Downsampling kills the emotional and temporal sequence of the material recorded on LP. Maybe the next step for me will be DXD (24bit 352.8 kHz) format ;-)
P.S.: In a couple of days I will upload a DXD sample rip, and if you won't will be able to hear the difference between it and 24/96 downsampled version of the same track, it will be only your responsibility ;-)

@moulder: I hope I'm not pointlessly flaming here, not intended :)

The reason DXD exists is the same reason why we see in the most respectable audiophile magazine in UK test of various HDMI cables: ranging from 100 pounds to almost a thousand pounds... and guess what, they *see* differences (warm, precise, fast)...man, how good laugh I had! (for not technical people -> 2$ HDMI cable is the same as 10000$ one, it's digital signal with error correction)

This reason is called _market_, and when there is one, why not utilize it? If there wasn't stupidity in this world, some people would never become billionairs...

well, I'm not talking about "downsampling", I'm talking about recording it in 24/96. So you will not have the need to downsample it via any software (although I'm sure iZotope RX Advanced will do excellent work).

I know that in studio the format 24/196 is widely used, but we're not talking about archivings of a signal, we're talking about a transfer rip and if its worth to avaxers...

@musicalbox
This LP was mastered from HiBit source, not 16/44.1. So this is the reason)

@moulder
...Dummköpfe sind geboren jedes minuziös...

@audiophillos
You are absolutely right about Dummköpfe. First look around yourself, and only after that begin searching for them in outer dimensions ;-)
P.S.: I understand your opinion, but I won't change mine ;-)
P.P.S.: Stop flaming ;-)

Don't listen to musicalbox, he spouts out crap all the time. I guess the Abbey Road engineers don't know shit either...wasting their time transferring the Beatles masters to 192khz for the remaster...man they should have listened to musicalbox here and come up with a better product.

I`m totally agree with Moulder, his DSOTM and Abbey road are the most wonderful and clear LP rips I`ve ever found in Avaxhome.ws
I even can say that abbey road from moulder is much better than Dr.Robert abbey road rip. (I`m happy with both, Dr.Robert you did a greath job ;-) )

brother moulder, listen to me:

you, me, toejam, Dr.Robert, Petrucci and others have BIG ego, we need to get weight to stand ours egos because others can see it out of our body, are visibles....lol
if i good remember Beatles was remastered at 192...or more?
have special reason or was only placebo?!?

next time upload in 384k/48b, must be good for ours egos.(lol)

cheers brother, stay with your good taste and amazing job.
adimirators are around ... jealous too, you know....is the 'resistance'..ha ha lol
thanks so much! :-)

@jorgeluiz
They will not force us ;-)

yes, they will not control us,
we will be victorious.

lol, we are free, avax is a revolution in the net for free people!

cheers moulder and for all free brothers/users in avax!

Thank you very much. Same old debate... It is funny how you throw arguments back and forth about the bitrate and sample frequency yet nobody mentions compression. This is the sole reason this version is better than the CD version. But it is far better because of the improved dynamics - which ironically are due to the huge technical shortcomings of the vinyl technology itself... Keep 'em coming.

Awesome post! Thank you very much!

Well, the argument was certainly stimulating, but I unfortunately am the harbinger of bad news:
Rapidshare has blocked the link list.

I hate being the one to say it, but is a re-up possible?
Thank you very much!

R$ blocked the files... And nobody even write me in PM ;-(
Will re-upload soon, wait for the news ;-)

@all
Links for .APE and .CUE are online. Write me in PM for the links.
DVD-A will be online soon.

Thanks moulder for incredible work.
Is there any chance to upload only "24/96" version ?
192 is a bit overkill for my headamp Benchmark DAC1 USB ..and I am not sure if I dont loose some quality to downsample from 192 to 96 ?
THanks anyway..even if your answer is negative ;o)

cheers!

@chozze
No chance from me ;-) Downsampling kills temporal and emotional sequence of the Music, so I won't do that)
But if you want to make it yourself and if you are unable to dismantle/upgrade/throw away your Benchmark ;-))))), than you should use SSRC High precision resampler by Naoki Shibata - and nothing else) It is the only way to keep the Music alive in low-res.
BTW, using DAC1 for headphones is not such a good idea... Of course, nothing is perfect under the Moon, but...

haha alright, thanks moulder for the advise, will look for the resampler you advised or maybe I will keep 3GBs on my hard drive ;o)

btw I know, but I am using it in both ways, as the DAC and preamp for my stereo power amp and as the headphones amp too..its not so bad device when it in fact can utilize both premp and headamp in one ..for the price ;o)

Links are dead. Any chance of re-uploading them, please? Thanks!

@all
PM me for the new links ;-)

reupload?? pleasee?? :)