Recommend remixes for listening on a DAC?

[djnforce9]

Hello,

 

I have switched to a DAC from a sound card and I am NEVER going back. I do realize that the encoding of the music on this site will never use the full potential of it; however, I still feel it unmasks a lot of subtlties in the music I never heard (even for songs on this site that I listened to for years now such as DJ Pretzel's 'Hot Flashes Man' remix). I am asking for song reccomendations that would sound great with my DAC. Children of the Monkey Machine's ambient tracks were neat but I also like highly melodic music too. Suggestions? You would know the site's content better than I; I've fallen way behind lol.

[Nabeel Ansari]

A DAC is a digital to audio converter. It's how sound from a computer turns from byte streams to an electrical current to be sent to speakers. A sound card has DAC's on it, that's how you plug your speakers into them. So first of all, no, you haven't switched to a DAC from a sound card, you've simply moved to a device with a higher quality DAC than your previous sound card had on it.

 

Now that that's cleared up, any lossless music (WAV, FLAC, AIFF, etc.) will sound great run through higher quality DAC's. You will not find any of these formats on OverClocked ReMix's regular postings, but you will in many of the albums. mp3's sound worse on higher quality DAC's because it exposes the bad distortions that come from lossy compression. If you listen closely, it sounds almost like a combination of phasing and being thrust underwater.

 

Furthermore, I doubt you're actually hearing that many new subtleties unless your previous sound card was ridiculously dysfunctional and/or noisy, especially not on mp3's, which are designed to remove a lot of subtle information from audio signals. This is because of perceptual effect, people are often tricked by their brains into hearing something they're not because of perhaps wanting to believe it or because it's their expectation. Yes, better DAC's sound better, but not even close to the degree you're making it out to be. Give it some time to normalize, and your ears (and perception ability) will smooth out.

 

Finally, DAC quality doesn't really matter all that much if your speakers are bad, so if you want better sound, you should probably look into the transducers actually making the sound for you (the speakers, or headphones) before you start taking your new audio output device so seriously.

 

All music will sound better with better gear (except if it's lossy compressed). There's not really any particular tracks that can be recommended for this. All OCR music is on standard encodings, so it won't really vary from track to track.

[timaeus222]

There's not really any particular tracks that can be recommended for this. All OCR music is on standard encodings, so it won't really vary from track to track.

 

Well, it is true that most OCR tracks are on "standard encodings" (some are still lower than 192 kbps or are not VBR1 because of project files being lost, for example), but the "lossiness" does vary from track to track (even those of similar encodings), so I think his request is still valid. It might be difficult to find something that isn't very subtle, but I would still try.

 

What I mean is that some people's finalization techniques give a more pristine treble "sheen" to the overall soundscape, and sometimes bass "warmth," whereas the results of some other people's finalization techniques come off as "rough around the edges." Yet, they may all still, for example, use VBR1 encoding. It depends on the audio system and other similar factors with regards to whether or not a listener can hear the difference, but I'll try to pick some examples that I find especially noticeable.

 

In order of lower/lossier to higher/more-polished (1 < 2 < 3), yet similar bitrates (VBR1 or 192):

1. http://ocremix.org/remix/OCR01221 (the recording) [192]

2. http://ocremix.org/remix/OCR03110 (EX: the guitar at 1:13) [VBR1]

3. http://ocremix.org/remix/OCR02653 [VBR1], http://ocremix.org/remix/OCR02687 [VBR1]

 

(I'd recommend listening to them as downloaded MP3s, rather than on the YouTube Preview)

 

Granted, I don't know what headphones or speakers you use, so I'm not saying you will necessarily hear a difference between using your old setup to your new one, but what I am saying is that if you do want to give yourself the best opportunity for hearing such a difference, I would try the tracks listed on "3".

 

If you don't mind, I'll also put one non-OC ReMix that I think might be a good candidate for checking subtle fidelity contrasts. I would pay attention to the granular, watery, "metal-chain-like" sound around at 0:03 - 0:15, for example. It's subtle, but I have heard a difference before in the lossiness when comparing the MP3 vs. the FLAC.

https://soundcloud.com/overclocked-records/5-oasis-epsilon

[Nabeel Ansari]

Yes, I was wrong to say all of OCR is on the same encodings; however, the essence of what I'm saying is that a better DAC will not really yield any perceivable difference on mp3's. Subtleties are literally erased (that's how it compresses so well), so they can't be heard.

[timaeus222]

Yes, I was wrong to say all of OCR is on the same encodings; however, the essence of what I'm saying is that a better DAC will not really yield any perceivable difference on mp3's. Subtleties are literally erased (that's how it compresses so well), so they can't be heard.

I agree with MP3 compression essentially masking the subtleties; although, since djnforce9 isn't necessarily asking about just MP3s, but OCR's remixes in general, I'll additionally suggest trying FLACs rather than MP3s when possible, such as on an OCR album, to get the best possible non-WAV fidelities so that if there are differences, there is still a decent chance you can hear them. @djnforce9: do tell us how this turns out for you.

[Nabeel Ansari]

I agree with MP3 compression essentially masking the subtleties; although, since djnforce9 isn't necessarily asking about just MP3s, but OCR's remixes in general, I'll additionally suggest trying FLACs rather than MP3s when possible, such as on an OCR album, to get the best possible non-WAV fidelities so that if there are differences, there is still a decent chance you can hear them. @djnforce9: do tell us how this turns out for you.

 

But I did that too

[SnappleMan]

Dynamic range does more for fidelity than bit/sample rate these days. Harmonic distortion due to peak normalization causes very similar artifacts to file compression, so the first step is getting music that's mixed/mastered properly, that way you're guaranteed to have pure music coming at your ears without any damaging distortion.