Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192 stopped working on Squeezebox Touch after upgrading squeeze server to 7.7.4 Di
Just install EDO and it should work again over digital coax at least. best regards Armin armin1975's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=62700 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102594 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192 stopped working on Squeezebox Touch after upgrading squeeze server to 7.7.4 Di
Just a thought - make sure the setting in Audio Settings - Digital Output is for Digital Only - if this is set for Analog + Digital this will limit you to 96kHz. steve-g's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=52057 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102594 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192 stopped working on Squeezebox Touch after upgrading squeeze server to 7.7.4 Di
steve-g wrote: Just a thought - make sure the setting in Audio Settings - Digital Output is for Digital Only - if this is set for Analog + Digital this will limit you to 96kHz. So it looks like indeed after the server upgrade to 7.7.4 flaked out the SBT so it wasn't allowing 192, it may very well have been reset to 'digital plus analog' on the SBT outputs, as now after setting again to 'digital only' it's working fine with 7.7.4. Weird! Thanks everyone for help with this. mknappe's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20186 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102594 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
[SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192 stopped working on Squeezebox Touch after upgrading squeeze server to 7.7.4 Di
I was previously running 24/192 just fine out of my squeezebox touch coax SDPIF using the Enhanced Digital Output (0.8) plugin. Squeeze server running elsewhere on an iMac was running 7.7.3. When I upgraded squeeze server on the iMac to the latest 7.7.4, the touch stopped running 24/192, and showed a message Enhanced Digital Output unsupported by logitech on the SBT screen when I restarted the touch. Back to running 24/96 only, whether or not Enhanced Digital Output is installed or not. Anyone else run into this? Mike mknappe's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20186 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102594 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
bigblackdog;689846 Wrote: I have in some cases 2-6 different versions of favourite albums. Have reached the opinion that mastering variation rather than resolution is where I find my aged ears can detect the 'better sound' This can be easily demonstrated with the beatles remasters comparing the 24 bit with the 16 bit releases. I.e. There is no audible difference on blind A/B listening. Except that I've consistently picked out the 24bit versions in blind testing. -- firedog GIK Acoustics Room Treatments. Tranquil PC fanless server running Vortexbox OS; SB Touch slaved to Empirical Audio Pace Car; MF X-DAC-V3, MF X-150 as pre-amp, Grant Fidelity B-283MKII bufferClassDaudio SDS-470 amp; Devore Gibbon Super 8 Speakers; Dual 506 + Ortofon M20 (occasional use); sometimes use PC with M-Audio 192 as digital source. SB Boom in second room. Arcam CD82 which I don't use anymore, even though it's a very good player. firedog's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=11550 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
firedog;689849 Wrote: Except that I've consistently picked out the 24bit versions in blind testing. As as example, listen to the hand claps and the jangly guitar in Words of Love - the hand claps sound more like the real thing, and the guitar is more jangly in the 24bit. I think we had this here once. You have to comparethe 24bit version to a 16bit file coming from this 24bit file. The 24bit version is slightly different in loudness (afaik 0.2dB) and maybe treated a tiny bit different no matter what you read how they were done. Besides that hearing difference between 16 and 24bit is very unlikely with The Beatles. Even after remastering the noisefloor should be way to high. -- Wombat Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA monoblocks - Sommer SPK240 - self-made speakers Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
Wombat;689911 Wrote: I think we had this here once. You have to comparethe 24bit version to a 16bit file coming from this 24bit file. The 24bit version is slightly different in loudness (afaik 0.2dB) and maybe treated a tiny bit different no matter what you read how they were done. Besides that hearing difference between 16 and 24bit is very unlikely with The Beatles. Even after remastering the noisefloor should be way to high. i.e., the *mastering* of the 24/96 can be much better than the 16/44.1. So one really has to compare the same mastering. I recall a long thread on this issue a couple of years ago. -- garym *Location 1:* VB Appliance 6TB (1.10) LMS 7.7.1 Transporter, Touch, Boom, Radio w/Battery (all ethernet except Radio) *Location 2:* VB Appliance 3TB (2.0) LMS 7.7.1 Touch Benchmark DAC I, Boom, Radio w/Battery (all ethernet except Radio) *Office:* Win7(64) LMS 7.7.1 SqueezePlay Retired: SB3, Duet Receiver Controllers: iPhone (iPeng), iPad (iPengHD SqueezePad), CONTROLLER, or SqueezePlay 7.7 on Win7(64) laptop Ripping (FLAC) - dbpoweramp, Additional Tagging - mp3tag garym's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=17325 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
garym;689914 Wrote: i.e., the *mastering* of the 24/96 can be much better than the 16/44.1. So one really has to compare the same mastering. I recall a long thread on this issue a couple of years ago. It is even simpler here. The 24bit version is 44.1khz also. So simply dither down the 24bit version to 16bit and compare again. -- Wombat Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA monoblocks - Sommer SPK240 - self-made speakers Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
TheOctavist;689655 Wrote: there are no benefits to 192, or 96 for that matter. Let's be honest, that's an opinion. If every detail of sound reproduction would be understood, we would know right? Then there wouldn't be any more need of more RD in sound reproduction equipment, but the opposite is true. There are still new innovations made and patents granted in new ICs, amplification circuits and so on. So why are you trying to force your opinion onto others? -- lauret lauret's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=17632 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
lauret;689688 Wrote: Let's be honest, that's an opinion. If every detail of sound reproduction would be understood, we would know right? Then there wouldn't be any more need of more RD in sound reproduction equipment, but the opposite is true. There are still new innovations made and patents granted in new ICs, amplification circuits and so on. So why are you trying to force your opinion onto others? It's an opinion backed-up by many people's practical experience. The only real push behind 24/96 or 24/192 as a playback format in the home comes from: 1) the hardware industry who want to sell the latest and greatest must-have upgrade 2) the software industry who want to (re)sell us the same old stuff again and again, usually at inflated high res prices. In controlled listening tests it has proved simply impossible to reliably or accurately discriminate between the SAME 24/96 or 24 /192 MASTER played back at 24/96 or 24/192 or correctly downsampled to 24/44.1 or 24/48. If you can find proof otherwise then I'd be delighted to examine it, as I'm sure would plenty of other folks around here. I fully appreciate that a lot of people simply don't believe the above statement. That doesn't make it untrue. 24/96+ has many benefits during recording/mastering. As a home delivery/playback format... none have yet been identified by anyone other than hardware/software manufacturers and some self-appointed golden-eared journalists. -- Phil Leigh You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it ain't what you'd call minimal... Touch(wired/W7)+Teddy Pardo PSU - Audiolense 3.3/2.0+INGUZ DRC - MF M1 DAC - Linn 5103 - full Aktiv 5.1 system (6x LK140's, ESPEK/TRIKAN/KATAN/SEIZMIK 10.5), Pekin Tuner, Townsend Supertweeters,VdH Toslink,Kimber 8TC Speaker Chord Signature Plus Interconnect cables Stax4070+SRM7/II phones Kitchen Boom, Outdoors: SB Radio, Harmony One remote for everything. Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
lauret;689688 Wrote: Let's be honest, that's an opinion. If every detail of sound reproduction would be understood, we would know right? Then there wouldn't be any more need of more RD in sound reproduction equipment, but the opposite is true. There are still new innovations made and patents granted in new ICs, amplification circuits and so on. So why are you trying to force your opinion onto others? I think Octavist mean no audibility for humans that's is a proven fact not an opinion. Equipment can still be improved and have better spec, even better spec than necessary it may add up somewhere . This is another matter and can be discussed further and of-course new and better equipment is always welcome. However 24/192 as a consumer format is silly . The problem that can be solved with native 24/192 on Touch is the need to have a server that can transcode . it would simply be more practical and compatible with the files you have, if one happens to own one of these oddities or being a hobby producer etc. But the SOX algorithm from 24/192 to 24/96 would be transparent to a human listener . So there is no sound-quality reasons for the Touch to handle 24/192 it is a question of server resources and practicalities . versus production price , it is a compromise I can live with there is very limited content in native 24/192 . In almost all practical cases the transcoded stream would be information transparent to. As I doubt that there is any microphones that pick up 48kHz and if it as an analog tape master behind it and other technical limits of the recording there is no content that warrant higher sample rate to capture the signal, especially not if it an SACD rip it would only be ultrasonic gunk . A s a consumer I usually get the 24/96 version if there is a choice between 192 and 96 . If you run a limited resources server make 24/96 copies of the few 24/192 recordings you have and listen to those . If your DAC of choice produce different sound with 24/96 vs 24/192 it must be broken and then the solution is again something else than getting native 24/192 on a mid priced mass-market item, there must be dozens of other more worthwhile improvements you can do on the Touch itself. most blatant example the onboard DAC and analog section is good but not on par with the best so a couple of cents on better parts here would improve everything all your CD's internet radio and hirez files would be better. There would always be something else to improve first before focusing on 24/192 when you reach wiess dcs or benchmark quality on the Touch then it's time for the 24/192 upgrade because then there would be nothing else left to do. But only then would it be worth the effort. Why the absurd focus on a number ? like 24/192 ? I would be so happy if most of the recordings in the world would reach up to the 16/44.1 standard . Sample rate above 16/44.1 is virtually of no consequence at all compared to all other issues we have regarding crappy recordings and mastering . I do enjoy some the few better than average recordings I have, but they are exceptions not norm. -- Mnyb Main hifi: Touch + CIA PS +MeridianG68J MeridianHD621 MeridianG98DH 2 x MeridianDSP5200 MeridianDSP5200HC 2 xMeridianDSP3100 +Rel Stadium 3 sub. Bedroom/Office: Boom Kitchen: Touch + powered Fostex PM0.4 Misc use: Radio (with battery) iPad 64gB wifi +3g with iPengHD SqueezePad (in storage SB3, reciever ,controller ) Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
lauret;689688 Wrote: Let's be honest, that's an opinion. If every detail of sound reproduction would be understood, we would know right? Then there wouldn't be any more need of more RD in sound reproduction equipment, but the opposite is true. There are still new innovations made and patents granted in new ICs, amplification circuits and so on. So why are you trying to force your opinion onto others? http://www.mendeley.com/research/audibility-of-a-cdstandard-ada-loop-inserted-into-highresolution-audio-playback/ http://www.lavryengineering.com/documents/Sampling_Theory.pdf -- TheOctavist VortexboxSBT(stock(TT failed dbt)Forssell MDAC-2Klein and Hummell 0300D Sota Sapphire/Lyra KleosBespoke Valve Phono StageMastersound Due VentiLink Audio K100 TheOctavist's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=52700 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
Phil Leigh;689696 Wrote: It's an opinion backed-up by many people's practical experience. The only real push behind 24/96 or 24/192 as a playback format in the home comes from: 1) the hardware industry who want to sell the latest and greatest must-have upgrade 2) the software industry who want to (re)sell us the same old stuff again and again, usually at inflated high res prices. In controlled listening tests it has proved simply impossible to reliably or accurately discriminate between the SAME 24/96 or 24 /192 MASTER played back at 24/96 or 24/192 or correctly downsampled to 24/44.1 or 24/48. If you can find proof otherwise then I'd be delighted to examine it, as I'm sure would plenty of other folks around here. I fully appreciate that a lot of people simply don't believe the above statement. That doesn't make it untrue. 24/96+ has many benefits during recording/mastering. As a home delivery/playback format... none have yet been identified by anyone other than hardware/software manufacturers and some self-appointed golden-eared journalists. I have in some cases 2-6 different versions of favourite albums. Have reached the opinion that mastering variation rather than resolution is where I find my aged ears can detect the 'better sound' This can be easily demonstrated with the beatles remasters comparing the 24 bit with the 16 bit releases. I.e. There is no audible difference on blind A/B listening. -- bigblackdog bigblackdog's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=37719 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
there are no benefits to 192, or 96 for that matter. -- TheOctavist VortexboxSBT(stock(TT failed dbt)Forssell MDAC-2Klein and Hummell 0300D Sota Sapphire/Lyra KleosBespoke Valve Phono StageMastersound Due VentiLink Audio K100 TheOctavist's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=52700 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
JohnSwenson;675313 Wrote: If squeezeplay can do 96, then its just adding an extra number in a few places in the code and adding 192 to the alowed sample rates for squeezeplay in the server. It should not be difficult. John S. I have done it. See http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?p=689367 For the Vortexbox people. May be you can even add sampling rates up to 384 (I have not tried). Squeezeplay can be run headless by calling it with Xvfb. I do it on my Alix box. You might be able to use Squeezeplay instead of the MPD, squeezeslave pair. -- giulio giulio's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=53337 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
WOW, AWESOME!! So I looked at the code and can't figure out how it starts. All I see are the definitions of three classes, but no instantiation of any of them, no call to a function or any such thing. How does it get started? What am I missing? It looks like the startup stuff should be in __INIT__.py but that is just comments about the program, it doesn't actually DO anything. Thanks so much for doing this. I love python (I can't stand perl), so actually being able to do something in python with regards to squeezebox is great. Thanks again, John S. The 'slimpy' file in the main directory is a python file, maybe I should have given it a .py extension, but on Linux that isn't necessary because of the shebang. I'll add it to the README. -- lauret lauret's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=17632 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
lauret;675539 Wrote: The 'slimpy' file in the main directory is a python file, maybe I should have given it a .py extension, but on Linux that isn't necessary because of the shebang. I'll add it to the README. The __init__.py file is there so that python uses that directory. Without, you can't import files in that directory into your program. Aha, I see now, somehow I missed that. I'll give it a try tonight. Thanks again. John S. -- JohnSwenson JohnSwenson's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=5974 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
firedog;675333 Wrote: there the situation with vortexbox is summed up as follows by one user (not fully tested by me, not my opinion, so don't flame me please): (1) Using Vortexbox, the Vortexbox player cannot play files without gapping. (2) Using Squeezeslave, you can play gapless files just fine, but not any hi-res files. (3) Using MPD, you can play gapless and high res file, but you have to suffer a poorly designed and cranky remote control interface. Could you provide a link to this post? I couldn't find it in my searches on the computeraudiophile.com forum. I'm curious to see when it was written, and what remote-control interface the author was complaining about. The latest version of MPaD has a nice user interface: http://www.katoemba.net/makesnosenseatall/mpad/ In any case, (3) validates MPD Client MPD VortexBox Player: gapless playback of hi-res FLAC. -- Ron Olsen Ron Olsen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=9233 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
If anybody is willing to install the pyaudio module (when running debian/ubuntu it is a matter of installing python-pyaudio), you can try out my rewrite of squeezeslave in python. It probably does not function very well on all systems at this point, because I only started writing it yesterday, but it works right here. Also, if there are any python programmers here, please take a look and provide comments, suggestions, or patches please. You can find the code right here: http://github.com/terual/slimpy Please read the README, because you probably have to add a rule to convert.conf and to be able to stream 192kHz, you have to patch the server with the provided patch. -- lauret lauret's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=17632 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
firedog;675333 Wrote: there the situation with vortexbox is summed up as follows by one user (not fully tested by me, not my opinion, so don't flame me please): (1) Using Vortexbox, the Vortexbox player cannot play files without gapping. (2) Using Squeezeslave, you can play gapless files just fine, but not any hi-res files. (3) Using MPD, you can play gapless and high res file, but you have to suffer a poorly designed and cranky remote control interface. This is correct accept part of #3. Many people prefer MPoD and MPaD to the SqueezeBox interface. It works really well. -- agillis rip, tag, get cover art All you do is insert the CD! http://vortexbox.org agillis Lead Developer VortexBox agillis's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=21140 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
agillis;675006 Wrote: Yeah the only way to do it now is to use VortexBox Player instead of an SBT. Using VBP gets you only the use of the SBS interface. VBP is the actual player. It will play 192 and other hi-res, but not gapless. So don't try listening to Abbey Road, DSOTM, or a lot of classical music in anything above 16/44 if you want gapless. To the actual question here, no. The Touch chip can do 192, but John Swenson has determined that the software/firmware etc isn't set up for anything above 96. There's not a simple tweak that can alter the situation. Don't look for that to change. -- firedog GIK Acoustics Room Treatments. Tranquil PC fanless server running Vortexbox OS; SB Touch slaved to Empirical Audio Pace Car; MF X-DAC-V3, MF X-150 as pre-amp, ClassDaudio SDS-470 amp; Devore Gibbon Super 8 Speakers; Dual 506 + Ortofon M20 (occasional use); sometimes use PC with M-Audio 192 as digital source. SB Boom in second room. Arcam CD82 which I don't use anymore, even though it's a very good player. firedog's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=11550 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
firedog;675119 Wrote: Using VBP gets you only the use of the SBS interface. VBP is the actual player. It will play 192 and other hi-res, but not gapless. So don't try listening to Abbey Road, DSOTM, or a lot of classical music in anything above 16/44 if you want gapless. You can get gapless FLAC playback with VortexBox Player if you use MPD as the server instead of SBS/LMS. MPD can be controlled by MPaD (iPad), MPod (iPhone) and other client apps; see http://mpd.wikia.com/wiki/Clients. -- Ron Olsen Ron Olsen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=9233 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
Ron Olsen;675120 Wrote: You can get gapless FLAC playback with VortexBox Player if you use MPD as the server instead of SBS/LMS. MPD can be controlled by MPaD (iPad), MPod (iPhone) and other client apps; see http://mpd.wikia.com/wiki/Clients. Ron, but isn't it true that even that way you don't get gapless playback of hi-res? Or have I been given bad information? -- firedog GIK Acoustics Room Treatments. Tranquil PC fanless server running Vortexbox OS; SB Touch slaved to Empirical Audio Pace Car; MF X-DAC-V3, MF X-150 as pre-amp, ClassDaudio SDS-470 amp; Devore Gibbon Super 8 Speakers; Dual 506 + Ortofon M20 (occasional use); sometimes use PC with M-Audio 192 as digital source. SB Boom in second room. Arcam CD82 which I don't use anymore, even though it's a very good player. firedog's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=11550 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
Ron Olsen;675171 Wrote: I think using MPD as the server for VortexBox Player gives gapless playback of all FLAC files, regardless of resolution, but I can't verify this as I have no hi-res gapless FLAC albums with which to test. Andrew wrote this wiki page: http://info.vortexbox.org/tiki-index.php?page=MPoD about using MPoD and MPaD which says they provide gapless FLAC playback through VortexBox Player, but he mentions nothing about hi-res here. Since hi-res playback is an intrinsic feature of VortexBox Player, I would assume that gapless playback of hi-res FLAC is supported in this context. If you have a hi-res gapless FLAC album, try it yourself and see if it works. I tried running VortexBox player from my SBT (VBP as chosen player from the Touch interface) - it did not run hi-res gapless. Every time it got to a gap it stopped playing. SBS itself does play them gapless. -- firedog GIK Acoustics Room Treatments. Tranquil PC fanless server running Vortexbox OS; SB Touch slaved to Empirical Audio Pace Car; MF X-DAC-V3, MF X-150 as pre-amp, ClassDaudio SDS-470 amp; Devore Gibbon Super 8 Speakers; Dual 506 + Ortofon M20 (occasional use); sometimes use PC with M-Audio 192 as digital source. SB Boom in second room. Arcam CD82 which I don't use anymore, even though it's a very good player. firedog's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=11550 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
firedog;675241 Wrote: I tried running VortexBox player from my SBT (VBP as chosen player from the Touch interface) - it did not run hi-res gapless. Every time it got to a gap it stopped playing. SBS itself does play them gapless. Your experiment used SBS as the server for VortexBox Player, and gapless FLAC playback does not work, as expected. The experiment you have to try is to use an MPD client to control playback of VortexBox Player, not SBS. If you have an iPhone, iPad, or iPod Touch, use MPaD or MPoD. If you have an Android device, use MPDroid. See http://mpd.wikia.com/wiki/Clients for a list of MPD clients you can use to carry out this experiment. MPD Client MPD VortexBox Player: Gapless FLAC playback SBS VortexBox Player: No gapless FLAC playback. SBS SB Touch: Gapless FLAC playback. -- Ron Olsen Ron Olsen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=9233 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
firedog;675241 Wrote: I tried running VortexBox player from my SBTSo you ran the player as a server and the server as a player? Got it. :-) :-) Just kidding. Interesting experiment. -- Henry66 Henry66's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=38863 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
If you want both gapless and hirez playback support why don't you use Squeezeplay. I'm running it on my headless (Xvnc server) client Linux PC which is connected to USB DAC. -- kipeta kipeta's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=51816 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
Cause he wants 192 which sp doesn't do. -- garym Location 1: Vortexbox Appliance 6TB (1.10) SbS 7.6.2 Transporter, Touch, Boom, Radio w/Battery (all ethernet except Radio) Location 2: Win7(64) laptop LMS 7.7.1 Touch Benchmark DAC I, Boom, Radio w/Battery (all ethernet except Radio and laptop) Office: Win7(64) LMS 7.7.1 SqueezePlay Retired: SB3, Duet Receiver Controllers: iPhone (iPeng), iPad (iPengHD SqueezePad), CONTROLLER, or SqueezePlay 7.7 on Win7(64) laptop Ripping (FLAC) - dbpoweramp, Additional Tagging - mp3tag garym's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=17325 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
garym;675295 Wrote: Cause he wants 192 which sp doesn't do. If squeezeplay can do 96, then its just adding an extra number in a few places in the code and adding 192 to the alowed sample rates for squeezeplay in the server. It should not be difficult. Adding 192 to the Touch drivers is much harder because you have to change values in a whole bunch of registers in both the processor and the DAC chip. I did a quick look at it once and it was not obvious what values needed to be put in those registers. John S. -- JohnSwenson JohnSwenson's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=5974 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
CDLehner;673766 Wrote: Sorry for the resurrection...but I'm trying to find out if anyone has yet cracked a way for SBT to output 192? Someone at AVS told me they thought so, and there was a thread at the SB forums; I thought maybe this was it...but I don't have the time (patience...lol) to read 33 pages of posts. I tried skimming back through the last few, but it appears things had moved on to mostly talking about the Oppo. So...can anyone point me in the right direction? Has the SBT been cracked to output 192? Thanks, CD Yeah the only way to do it now is to use VortexBox Player instead of an SBT. -- agillis rip, tag, get cover art All you do is insert the CD! http://vortexbox.org agillis Lead Developer VortexBox agillis's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=21140 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
CDLehner;673766 Wrote: Sorry for the resurrection...but I'm trying to find out if anyone has yet cracked a way for SBT to output 192? Someone at AVS told me they thought so, and there was a thread at the SB forums; I thought maybe this was it...but I don't have the time (patience...lol) to read 33 pages of posts. I tried skimming back through the last few, but it appears things had moved on to mostly talking about the Oppo. So...can anyone point me in the right direction? Has the SBT been cracked to output 192? Thanks, CD No it has not been done. It will take some rewritting of the drivers, which is not going to happen anytime soon. John S. -- JohnSwenson JohnSwenson's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=5974 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
JohnSwenson;674008 Wrote: No it has not been done. It will take some rewritting of the drivers, which is not going to happen anytime soon. John S. Bummer; thanks. CD -- CDLehner CDLehner's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=21868 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
Sorry for the resurrection...but I'm trying to find out if anyone has yet cracked a way for SBT to output 192? Someone at AVS told me they thought so, and there was a thread at the SB forums; I thought maybe this was it...but I don't have the time (patience...lol) to read 33 pages of posts. I tried skimming back through the last few, but it appears things had moved on to mostly talking about the Oppo. So...can anyone point me in the right direction? Has the SBT been cracked to output 192? Thanks, CD -- CDLehner CDLehner's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=21868 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24-192 passthrough on digital outputs?
Phil Leigh;638046 Wrote: The hardware does not have the correct clock hardware circuit to play 176.4 by the way (although in theory it could do 192). The hardware on the Touch is perfectly capable of doing 176.4 and 192, its the Transporter that can't do 176.4. If someone would come up with a linux driver for the Hiface we could compile that and use the USB interface to a Hiface to get 192 out of a Touch. Thats probably the easiest solution at this point. John S. -- JohnSwenson JohnSwenson's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=5974 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=88465 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24-192 passthrough on digital outputs?
JohnSwenson;638301 Wrote: The hardware on the Touch is perfectly capable of doing 176.4 and 192, its the Transporter that can't do 176.4. If someone would come up with a linux driver for the Hiface we could compile that and use the USB interface to a Hiface to get 192 out of a Touch. Thats probably the easiest solution at this point. John S. oops - yes I got mixed up! sorry -- Phil Leigh You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it ain't what you'd call minimal... Touch(wired/XP) - Audiolense 3.3/2.0+INGUZ DRC - MF M1 DAC - Linn 5103 - full Aktiv 5.1 system (6x LK140's, ESPEK/TRIKAN/KATAN/SEIZMIK 10.5), Pekin Tuner, Townsend Supertweeters, Blue Jeans Belden Digital,Kimber 8TC Speaker Chord Signature Plus Interconnect cables Stax4070+SRM7/II phones Kitchen Boom, Outdoors: SB Radio, Harmony One remote for everything. Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=88465 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24-192 passthrough on digital outputs?
BTHOEM;637867 Wrote: Hi - I have two SB Touch devices, of which one is hooked up to my primary audio system with external 24-192 DAC. I understand that the built in DAC is limited to 24-96, but are there any technical reasons for why the Touch can not passthrough a 24 bits 192 kHz signal on the digital outputs? Love to see this beeing enabled, as I have experienced some unreliabilites with the realtime transcoding (sox) to 24-96 of my 24-192 albums. Thank you, Bjørn Tore The firmware is not coded to support this and this is unlikely to be changed according to previous posts by Logitech. The hardware does not have the correct clock hardware circuit to play 176.4 by the way (although in theory it could do 192). If you can't do realtime transcoding of 192 to 96 because your server is underpowered, just transcode them off-line via SOX. -- Phil Leigh You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it ain't what you'd call minimal... Touch(wired/XP) - Audiolense 3.3/2.0+INGUZ DRC - MF M1 DAC - Linn 5103 - full Aktiv 5.1 system (6x LK140's, ESPEK/TRIKAN/KATAN/SEIZMIK 10.5), Pekin Tuner, Townsend Supertweeters, Blue Jeans Belden Digital,Kimber 8TC Speaker Chord Signature Plus Interconnect cables Stax4070+SRM7/II phones Kitchen Boom, Outdoors: SB Radio, Harmony One remote for everything. Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=88465 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
[SlimDevices: Touch] 24-192 passthrough on digital outputs?
Hi - I have two SB Touch devices, of which one is hooked up to my primary audio system with external 24-192 DAC. I understand that the built in DAC is limited to 24-96, but are there any technical reasons for why the Touch can not passthrough a 24 bits 192 kHz signal on the digital outputs? Love to see this beeing enabled, as I have experienced some unreliabilites with the realtime transcoding (sox) to 24-96 of my 24-192 albums. Thank you, Bjørn Tore -- BTHOEM BTHOEM's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42479 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=88465 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
Mnyb;600792 Wrote: 24/96 makes little sense re DSD They should do it 88.2Of course. I have a few that will output 24/176.4. However, I was not questioning what was possible or preferable but questioning the veracity of this: Originally Posted by praganj There is one Oppo player which transforms SACD DSD stream in 24/96 and has one digital output with 24/96. -- Kal Rubinson Kal Rubinson's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=40032 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
lauret;600809 Wrote: OPPO should actually not even output such a high bitrate while playing SACDs, but I believe this is due to bad engineering from the OPPO side that it is possible with a mod and a specific OPPO player. More information: http://groups.google.com/group/surroundsound/web/digital-sacd-ripping-guide-using-the-modified-oppo-pcm-output-board-methodThat refers to the old 980H and I was referring to the newer BDP-83 models. All will output 88.2, not 96. -- Kal Rubinson Kal Rubinson's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=40032 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
JohnSwenson;568328 Wrote: The DAC chip in the Touch WILL do 192 as long as it is given a fast enough clock. The Clock circuits in the Touch ARE fast enough to support 192 with this DAC chip. For the DAC output two things have to be done in the ALSA driver: the DAC chip has to be programmed to run at 192, and the serial interface in the processor that generates the I2S signals has to be programmed to output 192. Programming the DAC chip is the easy part. Programming the serial port on the processor is more complicated. FORTUNATELY its already being done for other sample rates so figuring out which bits of which registers to change is not TOO hard. John S. Did you make any progress in the meantime? I would love to find out if this is possible with the touch. I don't have one yet, so my other option to play 192kHz files would be to make a kind of DIY-squeezebox with a thin-client and USB-DAC and then run squeezeslave. The modifications in the SBS are already pioneered by agillis, so I guess that would work already. -- lauret lauret's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=17632 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
Kal Rubinson;591697 Wrote: Which one? I know that most Oppos output 24/88.2 over HDMI while the 970 seems to output only 16bit data over S/PDIF. Kal 24/96 makes little sense re DSD They should do it 88.2 Do this simple math take the DSD sample frequency of SACD 2.8224 MHz 2822400/88200=32 (or 64 times 44.1kHz)This does not only make that math simple but also transparent as it matches the targett sample rate. -- Mnyb Main hifi: Touch + CIA PS +MeridianG68J MeridianHD621 MeridianG98DH and assorted amps SiriuS, Classe' Primare and Dynadio speakers, Contour 4 Contour Center, and Contour 1.3SE rear ch. Rel Stadium 3 sub. Bedroom/Office: Boom Kitchen: SB3 + powered Fostex PM0.4 Misc use: Radio (with battery) PLEASE FIX BUG 112 http://bugs.slimdevices.com/show_bug.cgi?id=112 Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
Mnyb;600792 Wrote: 24/96 makes little sense re DSD They should do it 88.2 Do this simple math take the DSD sample frequency of SACD 2.8224 MHz 2822400/88200=32 (or 64 times 44.1kHz)This does not only make that math simple but also transparent as it matches the targett sample rate. OPPO should actually not even output such a high bitrate while playing SACDs, but I believe this is due to bad engineering from the OPPO side that it is possible with a mod and a specific OPPO player. More information: http://groups.google.com/group/surroundsound/web/digital-sacd-ripping-guide-using-the-modified-oppo-pcm-output-board-method -- lauret lauret's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=17632 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
Mnyb;521351 Wrote: Have you heard a stockfish recording, they seems doctored to sound more audiophile big sound with lots of air and details, slam in the bass , but you soon realize they all sound the same . Exactly my point. Not only they all sound the same but is not even real music imo. No real bass drum or guitar in the world sounds like the ones on these recordings. The post production is just way over engineered. I like to call it botox music :). Yes, it's sounds clean, big and airy but it has no soul. No stockfish recording gives you goosebumps, but if that is Audiophile, I rather consider myself just a music lover instead. -- S2K -- Main HiFi: Transporter directly connected to a Classé CA-150 power amp with balanced leads. DIY monitor speaker with awesome Scan Speak units. Study: SB3, Denon amp and DIY monitor speakers with Vifa units. S2K's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=12675 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
praganj;590661 Wrote: What do you want to do with DSD stream ? Me? - absolutely nothing. -- Phil Leigh You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it ain't what you'd call minimal... Touch(wired/XP) - TACT 2.2X (Linear PSU) + Good Vibrations S/W - MF Triplethreat(Audiocom full mods) - Linn 5103 - Aktiv 5.1 system (6x LK140's, ESPEK/TRIKAN/KATAN/SEIZMIK 10.5), Pekin Tuner, Townsend Supertweeters, Blue Jeans Digital,Kimber Speaker Chord Interconnect cables Kitchen Boom, Outdoors: SB Radio, Harmony One remote for everything. Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
praganj;590640 Wrote: There is one Oppo player which transforms SACD DSD stream in 24/96 and has one digital output with 24/96.Which one? I know that most Oppos output 24/88.2 over HDMI while the 970 seems to output only 16bit data over S/PDIF. Kal -- Kal Rubinson Kal Rubinson's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=40032 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
[SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192 Files Unsupported When Native FLAC Is disabled
I have a few 24/192 files. I noticed that if FLACs are transcoded to PCM at the SBServer level (SettingsAdvancedFile TypeFLACDisable), then 24/192 files do not play, which they do (albeit presumably as 24/96) if FLAC is set to native. Intuitively, this seems strange to me, as it would appear that TinySBServer has no trouble doing the transcoding of 24/192 files to PCM while the more powerful SBServer can't do it. (This probably shows my utter ignorance about how the whole thing works!). Any comments? Guido F. -- guidof *Front End*: Marantz TT 15S1 Turntable, Virtuoso Wood Cartridge; Cambridge Azur 840C CD Player; Oppo BDP--83 Universal Player; Squeezebox Touch Music File Player (digital out to Cambridge Azur 840C DAC) *Preamps*: Conrad Johnson Motif (Phono); Adcom GFP-750 (Line) *Amps*: Music Reference RM-200 Mk II (Main); Little Tube Mk III (Phones) *Subwoofer Equalizer*: DSpeaker Antimode 8033 *Speakers*: Martin Logan SL3s; REL T1 Subwoofer *Headphones*: AKG K701 guidof's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=40448 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=83037 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
nicolas75;572562 Wrote: Well I've met some really good sound engineers, but they are usually more humble than you are ... You may be right, but I would be curious to see how it is s easy as you say. :-) Those (bad ?) sound engineers would be very happy to learn from somebody as smart as you are :-) No need to be humble when you are correct! :-) The point is it really isn't that hard. Say you've got a 24/96 file with significant content between 22-40k First, apply a savage high-pass filter and takes out everything below (say) 22k. Then apply a constant-time pitch shift to bring the residual content down to between 1-2k (That's quite a big shift - 5 octaves or so). What's left will be pretty obvious - either it's uncorrelated noise or it's the upper harmonics of instruments (mostly cymbals and other percussive instruments) in the original recording, which will follow the beat of the music. You can easily see hear which it is. If you play the two files side by side it should still sound like music... If you want to experiment, get hold of some DVD-A's... You can do all this with Audacity (which is free). Another method is to compare a DVD-A with its upsampled redbook equivalent using AudioDiffMaker - this will null out the common content, leaving just the extra information on the DVD-A - again, since this will mostly be above the fringe of peoples hearing you need to pitch-shift it down to understand it - but you can see straight away on the screen if it's just noise or something that correlates to the music. If you are imagining that someone would maliciously or creatively pass a 16/44 track through a software or hardware harmonics generator to create false correlated info above 22k - yes, that is essentially a variation on the reverse of the process I've just described. That's broadly how an Aphex Aural Exciter used to work - albeit not at the supersonic frequencies - (Rumours/Fleetwood Mac, anyone?). However, if you just add white/pink/otherwise shaped noise to a track it will be obvious. If you have what appear to be correlated harmonics of the music it's impossible to tell if they were on the original recording multi-track masters or artificially generated afterwards, since that is a legitimate effect used in pop/rock mastering frequently anyway! (I'be never heard of it being done on classical but that's not my field - I'd be surprised.) This is where common sense comes in. What age is the original master? What equipment was likely to have been used to capture the original sound? What effects were available then? If you can find a real-world example of a DVD-A, SACD or high-rez download where you suspect that the recording has been remastered by adding HF noise rather than musically correlated upper harmonics we can pursue this further... -- Phil Leigh You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it ain't what you'd call minimal... Touch(wired/XP) - TACT 2.2X (Linear PSU) + Good Vibrations S/W - MF Triplethreat(Audiocom full mods) - Linn 5103 - Aktiv 5.1 system (6x LK140's, ESPEK/TRIKAN/KATAN/SEIZMIK 10.5), Pekin Tuner, Townsend Supertweeters, Blue Jeans Digital,Kimber Speaker Chord Interconnect cables Kitchen Boom, Outdoors: SB Radio, Harmony One remote for everything. Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
Phil Leigh;572649 Wrote: No need to be humble when you are correct! :-) The point is it really isn't that hard. Say you've got a 24/96 file with significant content between 22-40k First, apply a savage high-pass filter and takes out everything below (say) 22k. Then apply a constant-time pitch shift to bring the residual content down to between 1-2k (That's quite a big shift - 5 octaves or so). What's left will be pretty obvious - either it's uncorrelated noise or it's the upper harmonics of instruments (mostly cymbals and other percussive instruments) in the original recording, which will follow the beat of the music. You can easily see hear which it is. If you play the two files side by side it should still sound like music... If you want to experiment, get hold of some DVD-A's... You can do all this with Audacity (which is free). Another method is to compare a DVD-A with its upsampled redbook equivalent using AudioDiffMaker - this will null out the common content, leaving just the extra information on the DVD-A - again, since this will mostly be above the fringe of peoples hearing you need to pitch-shift it down to understand it - but you can see straight away on the screen if it's just noise or something that correlates to the music. If you are imagining that someone would maliciously or creatively pass a 16/44 track through a software or hardware harmonics generator to create false correlated info above 22k - yes, that is essentially a variation on the reverse of the process I've just described. That's broadly how an Aphex Aural Exciter used to work - albeit not at the supersonic frequencies - (Rumours/Fleetwood Mac, anyone?). However, if you just add white/pink/otherwise shaped noise to a track it will be obvious. If you have what appear to be correlated harmonics of the music it's impossible to tell if they were on the original recording multi-track masters or artificially generated afterwards, since that is a legitimate effect used in pop/rock mastering frequently anyway! (I'be never heard of it being done on classical but that's not my field - I'd be surprised.) This is where common sense comes in. What age is the original master? What equipment was likely to have been used to capture the original sound? What effects were available then? If you can find a real-world example of a DVD-A, SACD or high-rez download where you suspect that the recording has been remastered by adding HF noise rather than musically correlated upper harmonics we can pursue this further... Ssssh.. you just telled them how to do it :) ! Run track through aural exciter(or similar modern plugin) diff the output pitch shift the diff a couple of octaves up add to original track at suitable lower level to mimick that out put has faded a bit, or if ambitious filter at a slope that mimics popular microphones hf behavior, probably not very linear anymore.. Why all this bothering with SACD's anyway ? most music are of non DSD source anyway so a better fidelity 24/48 or 24/96 file must be somewhere ? They actually don't care enough to send a proper file, the reseller has to had it ripped. -- Mnyb Main hifi: Touch + CIA PS +MeridianG68J MeridianHD621 and assorted amps SiriuS, Classe' Primare and Dynadio speakers, Contour 4 Contour Center, and Contour 1.3SE for the rear ch. Rel Stadium 3 sub. Bedroom/Office: Boom Kitchen: SB3 + powered Fostex PM0.4 Miscellaneous use: Radio (with battery) I use a Controller various ir-remotes and a Eee-PC with squeezeplay to control this Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
Phil Leigh;572649 Wrote: No need to be humble when you are correct! :-) The point is it really isn't that hard. Say you've got a 24/96 file with significant content between 22-40k First, apply a savage high-pass filter and takes out everything below (say) 22k. Then apply a constant-time pitch shift to bring the residual content down to between 1-2k (That's quite a big shift - 5 octaves or so). What's left will be pretty obvious - either it's uncorrelated noise or it's the upper harmonics of instruments (mostly cymbals and other percussive instruments) in the original recording, which will follow the beat of the music. You can easily see hear which it is. If you play the two files side by side it should still sound like music... If you want to experiment, get hold of some DVD-A's... You can do all this with Audacity (which is free). Another method is to compare a DVD-A with its upsampled redbook equivalent using AudioDiffMaker - this will null out the common content, leaving just the extra information on the DVD-A - again, since this will mostly be above the fringe of peoples hearing you need to pitch-shift it down to understand it - but you can see straight away on the screen if it's just noise or something that correlates to the music. If you are imagining that someone would maliciously or creatively pass a 16/44 track through a software or hardware harmonics generator to create false correlated info above 22k - yes, that is essentially a variation on the reverse of the process I've just described. That's broadly how an Aphex Aural Exciter used to work - albeit not at the supersonic frequencies - (Rumours/Fleetwood Mac, anyone?). However, if you just add white/pink/otherwise shaped noise to a track it will be obvious. If you have what appear to be correlated harmonics of the music it's impossible to tell if they were on the original recording multi-track masters or artificially generated afterwards, since that is a legitimate effect used in pop/rock mastering frequently anyway! (I'be never heard of it being done on classical but that's not my field - I'd be surprised.) This is where common sense comes in. What age is the original master? What equipment was likely to have been used to capture the original sound? What effects were available then? If you can find a real-world example of a DVD-A, SACD or high-rez download where you suspect that the recording has been remastered by adding HF noise rather than musically correlated upper harmonics we can pursue this further... Well, what makes me think it wouldn't be that hard to cheat you, is that you seem to believe that the difference between high and low resolution file is what's happening above 22 Khz. I'am sorry, but I am convinced that what is above 22 KHz has almost no importance as far as sound quality is concerned. I am quite sure I couldn't hear the difference between a real high resolution 24/96 file, and the exact same file where everything above 22 KHz is suppressed. I still call it high resolution 24/96 file, and I doubt you can easily hear the difference (I mean listening to it, not looking at the spectrum ...) So a high resolution file is certainly not defined as a file with high frequencies (above 22 KHz) content. For me, the real difference between high and low resolution file, is that samples have 24 bits versus 16 bits. That is the real difference as far as sound quality is concerned, and that has nothing to do with high or low frequencies. Transforming a low resolution file in a high resolution one is everything but simply adding information above 22 KHz ... And if I would want to cheat you, I would certainly not use such a simple process than the ones you suggest ... -- nicolas75 nicolas75's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=15823 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
JackOfAll;572348 Wrote: If you've thrown away information above fs/2 when you downsampled it, you cant get it back by upsampling. So the binary file would never be identical in that case. What I mean is that if the file is binary identical, it means that my original high resolution file was upsampled from a low resolution one. If you use straightforward and simple upsampling and downsampling algorithm you can have - file A 44.1 Khz - file B upsampled to 88.2 Khz from file A - file C downsampled to 44.1 from file B - file D upsampled to 88.2 from file C I guess file B and D are binary identical. It means that even if you never heard of file A existence, you can reliably suppose that file B is an upsampled one ... -- nicolas75 nicolas75's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=15823 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
Phil Leigh;572355 Wrote: Nope. It's really easy to test if the information is noise or not. You just need to know how to use DSP tools to pitch-shift stuff without time-shifting it... Anyone who has actually worked in modern recording studios knows how to do this. :-) Not sure about that. If I want to generate a high resolution file from a low one, I will obviously not use standard audio software with standard tools well known by sound engineers. I will write my own software to mix may be some real high resolution music at low level, or whatever else ... Most sound engineers I ve met are obviously very good in their own field, with their professional tools and software. But software algorithms are usually not public. I guess a higly experienced programmer with good signal theory knowledge, could easily cheat them. -- nicolas75 nicolas75's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=15823 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
nicolas75;572442 Wrote: Not sure about that. If I want to generate a high resolution file from a low one, and don't want people to know that, I will obviously not use standard audio software with standard tools well known by sound engineers. I will write my own software to mix may be some real high resolution music at low level, or whatever else ... Most sound engineers I ve met are obviously very good in their own field, with their professional tools and software. But they are not experts in signal theory or mathematical algorithms used in audio. Software algorithms are usually not public. I guess a higly experienced programmer with good signal theory knowledge, could cheat them. Nope. Isn't going to happen. You just can't cheat that way. It's got nothing to do with signal theory. It's s easy to detect what's going on. You can't just take any old hi-rez music and mix it in with a std-rez file. It would take me 5 minutes to isolate EXACTLY what's going on and you do NOT need to be a forensic audiologist. I've spent 25 years+ in and out of studios. I know exactly how to tell if what's up there is REAL upper-end harmonics or artificially generated crap. Sorry to disillusion you. The tools to do this are freely available to anybody to try for themselves... -- Phil Leigh You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it ain't what you'd call minimal... Touch(wired/XP) - TACT 2.2X (Linear PSU) + Good Vibrations S/W - MF Triplethreat(Audiocom full mods) - Linn 5103 - Aktiv 5.1 system (6x LK140's, ESPEK/TRIKAN/KATAN/SEIZMIK 10.5), Pekin Tuner, Townsend Supertweeters, Blue Jeans Digital,Kimber Speaker Chord Interconnect cables Kitchen Boom, Outdoors: SB Radio, Harmony One remote for everything. Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
Phil Leigh;572549 Wrote: Nope. Isn't going to happen. You just can't cheat that way. It's got nothing to do with signal theory. It's s easy to detect what's going on. You can't just take any old hi-rez music and mix it in with a std-rez file. It would take me 5 minutes to isolate EXACTLY what's going on and you do NOT need to be a forensic audiologist. I've spent 25 years+ in and out of studios. I know exactly how to tell if what's up there is REAL upper-end harmonics or artificially generated crap. Sorry to disillusion you. The tools to do this are freely available to anybody to try for themselves... Well I've met some really good sound engineers, but they are usually more humble than you are ... You may be right, but I would be curious to see how it is s easy as you say. :-) They would be very happy to learn from somebody as smart as you are :-) -- nicolas75 nicolas75's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=15823 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
R Johnson;572099 Wrote: Thanks! Very noticeable difference graphically. Would it be audibly noticeable to me? Still to be determined... BTW, what software have you used? Any suggestions for free / low cost software to do this sort of analysis? try this: http://www.sonicvisualiser.org/ does a good visual graphic representation of frequencies in the files. As far as audacity, I've come across a couple of hi-res tracks it couldn't read correctly and apparently gave a false result. -- firedog Tranquil PC fanless WHS server running SqueezeServer; SB Touch slaved to Empirical Audio Pace Car; MF X-150 amp, MF V DAC3, Devore Gibbon Super 8 Speakers; Mirage MS-12 sub; Dual 506 + Ortofon 20 (occasional use); sometimes use PC with M-Audio 192 as digital source. SB Boom in second room. Arcam CD82 which I don't use anymore, even though it's a very good player. firedog's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=11550 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
JackOfAll;572163 Wrote: There has been quite some discussion about HDTracks and upsampled files over at the 'Audio Asylum PC Audio forum' (http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/pcaudio/bbs.html). A quick search should find the relevant threads. More than a few hi-res recordings have been ripped from SACD's that were themselves upsampled from 16/44k1 CD's. There are plenty of SACD releases out there that are nothing more than upsampled CD's. Also bear in mind that the track I chose to use to demonstrate had plenty of high frequency content up to 44K1 (half the 88k2 sample rate) so it shows the brickwall effect very well. There are plenty of high-res recordings that don't have much if any high freq above 20K. Could be for many reasons, not necessarily digital brickwall at half the original sampling rate. eg. analogue low pass filter. Or some of the Linn recordings that are advertised as 192K, were mixed at 96K then mastered at 192K. (But they clearly state that.) Even when HF content is present, in some cases it is not obvious. Someone with experience like BruceB can look at the high frequency content and differentiate DSD aliasing artefacts from real content. Which I believe he is now doing for all the SACD rips he does for HD Tracks after the upsampling != high res bruhaha. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that the only well defined case is the following one : You downsample a high resolution file, then upsample to the original sample rate, which gives you the very same, binary identical, original file. In that case, you are sure that there is no more information in the high resolution file, than in the downsampled one. Otherwise you can say nothing. I think it is easy to write a software which upsample a file, and mix it with high resolution noise, or whatever kind of reverse dithering dsp. This will add artificial high resolution data you can hardly distinguish from real high resolution recording. -- nicolas75 nicolas75's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=15823 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
nicolas75;572334 Wrote: You downsample a high resolution file, then upsample to the original sample rate, which gives you the very same, binary identical, original file. If you've thrown away information above fs/2 when you downsampled it, you cant get it back by upsampling. So the binary file would never be identical in that case. nicolas75;572334 Wrote: I think it is easy to write a software which upsample a file, and mix it with high resolution noise, or whatever kind of reverse dithering dsp. This will add artificial high resolution data you can hardly distinguish from real high resolution recording. Sure, you could. Although I would expect someone with experience (like BruceB I mentioned in the post above) to be able to look at the HF content and decide whether it is real - harmonics, noise, digital artefacts. -- JackOfAll JackOfAll's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3069 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
nicolas75;572334 Wrote: Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that the only well defined case is the following one : You downsample a high resolution file, then upsample to the original sample rate, which gives you the very same, binary identical, original file. In that case, you are sure that there is no more information in the high resolution file, than in the downsampled one. Otherwise you can say nothing. I think it is easy to write a software which upsample a file, and mix it with high resolution noise, or whatever kind of reverse dithering dsp. This will add artificial high resolution data you can hardly distinguish from real high resolution recording. Nope. It's really easy to test if the information is noise or not. You just need to know how to use DSP tools to pitch-shift stuff... Anyone who has actually worked in modern recording studios knows how to do this. :-) -- Phil Leigh You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it ain't what you'd call minimal... Touch(wired/XP) - TACT 2.2X (Linear PSU) + Good Vibrations S/W - MF Triplethreat(Audiocom full mods) - Linn 5103 - Aktiv 5.1 system (6x LK140's, ESPEK/TRIKAN/KATAN/SEIZMIK 10.5), Pekin Tuner, Townsend Supertweeters, Blue Jeans Digital,Kimber Speaker Chord Interconnect cables Kitchen Boom, Outdoors: SB Radio, Harmony One remote for everything. Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
There seems to be a total misunderstanding by many as to the ability to just look at a waveform display of an audio file and deduce from this its original sample rate if it has been upsampled. The reality is that this is not possible. There is no fingerprint that can be discovered in a downloaded music file to determine if you have been tricked into buying an upsampled track. Here is our friend Bruce implying that he can do this: I'm finding more and more labels that take the RBCD layer and just upsample it to DSD and call it an SACD. I've checked almost a hundred today for HDtracks and over half are upsampled. Go figure Regards, Bruce A. Brown Puget Sound Studios Seattle, WA http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?1037-Upsampled-SACD-sp=10655 However in reality there is nothing to check in an audio file that will give you conclusive evidence as to the original sample rate of the source material if it was upsampled. You can't look at the file's properties to determine its original sample rate. You can't look at a waveform display to determine its original sample rate. Once an audio file is upsampled, all traces of its original sample rate are gone and even if you were the greatest audio engineer in the world, you can't do it. I am making this comment for these reasons: 1. To correct misunderstandings. 2. To emphasize over and over again that if you dare to spend your money on anything represented to be high resolution audio, you are doing it on pure faith and trust that the vendor is being honest with you. And lets define for a moment what honesty means. It means if you are a vendor selling alleged high resolution audio, then you are OBLIGATED to know the ORIGINAL source of the material you are selling and HOW it was converted to a downloadable format. And this information needs to be DISCLOSED to the potential buyer. If you dont do this, you have NO RIGHT to represent that you are selling alleged high resolution audio. And a vendor has no right to assume that just because an album is available on SACD that it is high resolution. Conclusion: Let the buyer beware! -- mortslim mortslim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=11039 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
I would have thought that a 44.1k track with no frequencies higher than 22.050k would be a bit of an obvious giveaway... That's exactly what you would get if you upsampled redbook. -- Phil Leigh You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it ain't what you'd call minimal... Touch(wired/XP) - TACT 2.2X (Linear PSU) + Good Vibrations S/W - MF Triplethreat(Audiocom full mods) - Linn 5103 - Aktiv 5.1 system (6x LK140's, ESPEK/TRIKAN/KATAN/SEIZMIK 10.5), Pekin Tuner, Townsend Supertweeters, Blue Jeans Digital,Kimber Speaker Chord Interconnect cables Kitchen Boom, Outdoors: SB Radio, Harmony One remote for everything. Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
mortslim;572076 Wrote: There is no fingerprint that can be discovered in a downloaded music file to determine if you have been tricked into buying an upsampled track. You can get a pretty good idea from looking at a spectrum plot of the wave. If a hi-res file has no HF above 22K then it's pretty obvious it has been upsampled from 16/44. (Not talking about hearing HF's, just whether the file has obviously been brickwalled at 22k. It still will be after upsampling.) -- JackOfAll JackOfAll's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3069 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
Here is an 24/88k2 file from Linn. [image: http://www.vacuumtube.org.uk/images/orig.png] Here is the same file, after I've downsampled to 16/44k1 and then upsampled back to 24/88k2. Notice anything? [image: http://www.vacuumtube.org.uk/images/upsample.png] -- JackOfAll JackOfAll's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3069 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
JackOfAll;572088 Wrote: Here is an 24/88k2 file from Linn. ... Here is the same file, after I've downsampled to 16/44k1 and then upsampled back to 24/88k2. Notice anything? Thanks! Very noticeable difference graphically. Would it be audibly noticeable to me? Still to be determined... BTW, what software have you used? Any suggestions for free / low cost software to do this sort of analysis? -- R Johnson R Johnson's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=36462 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
R Johnson;572099 Wrote: Thanks! Very noticeable difference graphically. Would it be audibly noticeable to me? Still to be determined... BTW, what software have you used? Any suggestions for free / low cost software to do this sort of analysis? Audacity is fine and free -- Phil Leigh You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it ain't what you'd call minimal... Touch(wired/XP) - TACT 2.2X (Linear PSU) + Good Vibrations S/W - MF Triplethreat(Audiocom full mods) - Linn 5103 - Aktiv 5.1 system (6x LK140's, ESPEK/TRIKAN/KATAN/SEIZMIK 10.5), Pekin Tuner, Townsend Supertweeters, Blue Jeans Digital,Kimber Speaker Chord Interconnect cables Kitchen Boom, Outdoors: SB Radio, Harmony One remote for everything. Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
Thanks, Phil. I downloaded Audacity. I looked at some spectra from the two HD Tracks selections I've purchased. Selection #1 (24/96) clearly has content out to better than 30KHz. Selection #2 appears to roll off sharply at 19KHz ending at 21-22KHz, and looks very much like the CD version's spectrum. I was hoping that #2, an SACD transfer, would be a real 24/88.2 file. Maybe it's 24, but at least so far as I can tell, it's just upsampled 44.1. I'd like to thank Mortslim for his research in this matter. Perhaps he's been overly concerned about legal niceties, but I've now seen evidence that I've paid for a high-resolution download that's NOT what I thought I was buying. -- R Johnson R Johnson's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=36462 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
There has been quite some discussion about HDTracks and upsampled files over at the 'Audio Asylum PC Audio forum' (http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/pcaudio/bbs.html). A quick search should find the relevant threads. More than a few hi-res recordings have been ripped from SACD's that were themselves upsampled from 16/44k1 CD's. There are plenty of SACD releases out there that are nothing more than upsampled CD's. Also bear in mind that the track I chose to use to demonstrate had plenty of high frequency content up to 44K1 (half the 88k2 sample rate) so it shows the brickwall effect very well. There are plenty of high-res recordings that don't have much if any high freq above 20K. Could be for many reasons, not necessarily digital brickwall at half the original sampling rate. eg. analogue low pass filter. Or some of the Linn recordings that are advertised as 192K, were mixed at 96K then mastered at 192K. (But they clearly state that.) Even when HF content is present, in some cases it is not obvious. Someone with experience like BruceB can look at the high frequency content and differentiate DSD aliasing artefacts from real content. Which I believe he is now doing for all the SACD rips he does for HD Tracks after the upsampling != high res bruhaha. -- JackOfAll JackOfAll's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3069 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
mortslim;568179 Wrote: So you cant just do some linux programming to change a chip that maxes out at 96kHz to get a higher sample rate. The chip is hardware limited in its sample rate and no after market programming will change that. You cant make a silk purse out of a sows ear. The DAC chip in the Touch WILL do 192 as long as it is given a fast enough clock. The Clock circuits in the Touch ARE fast enough to support 192 with this DAC chip. For the DAC output two things have to be done in the ALSA driver: the DAC chip has to be programmed to run at 192, and the serial interface in the processor that generates the I2S signals has to be programmed to output 192. Programming the DAC chip is the easy part. Programming the serial port on the processor is more complicated. FORTUNATELY its already being done for other sample rates so figuring out which bits of which registers to change is not TOO hard. John S. -- JohnSwenson JohnSwenson's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=5974 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
JohnSwenson;567711 Wrote: It might work. As can be seen from the webpage of the manufacturer of the DAC in the squeezebox, the ability to output at any given sample rate is HARDWARE dependent. http://www.akm.com/prod-dac.asp So you cant just do some linux programming to change a chip that maxes out at 96kHz to get a higher sample rate. The chip is hardware limited in its sample rate and no after market programming will change that. You cant make a silk purse out of a sows ear. -- mortslim mortslim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=11039 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
mortslim;568179 Wrote: As can be seen from the webpage of the manufacturer of the DAC in the squeezebox, the ability to output at any given sample rate is HARDWARE dependent. http://www.akm.com/prod-dac.asp So you cant just do some linux programming to change a chip that maxes out at 96kHz to get a higher sample rate. The chip is hardware limited in its sample rate and no after market programming will change that. You cant make a silk purse out of a sows ear. Wrong. The Touch uses an AK4420 which is 192 capable. 192 support can indeed be added via a firmware change to the ALSA driver, as JS has explained before. -- Phil Leigh You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it ain't what you'd call minimal... Touch(wired/XP) - TACT 2.2X (Linear PSU) + Good Vibrations S/W - MF Triplethreat(Audiocom full mods) - Linn 5103 - Aktiv 5.1 system (6x LK140's, ESPEK/TRIKAN/KATAN/SEIZMIK 10.5), Townsend Supertweeters, Blue Jeans Digital,Kimber Speaker Chord Interconnect cables Kitchen Boom, Outdoors: SB Radio Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
Can I take this thread back (for a moment) to the original concern? Is there any propect of Logitech producing a 192-capable ALSA driver or of the source code becoming available to support a DIY-ALSA effort? Anyone know? Thanks. -- pieronip pieronip's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7653 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
Mnyb;567550 Wrote: And as seen in other treads the performance of the Touch CPU is such that, 192 support would most likely be external server only and *maybe* Transcode to WAV on the server also . I just tried, the touch can decode a 24bit 192khz flac just fine (69% cpu), however alsa nicely converts it to 96khz before spitting it out. (not using squeezeplay here) -- qball qball's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=32031 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
The source code for the existing alsa drivers are already in SVN. This task will have three primary tasks: understanding the exisitng code, understanding the registers of the frescsale processor (for the S/PDIF) and the AKM DAC chip(for analog out) and then figuring out what values to put in those registers. Looking at the existing code it might be possible to figure out what settings to use based just on what is done for other sample rates and extrapolating up to 176 and 192. It might work. Just getting a development environment up and running to test it out is not that easy, I'm one of the few people outside of Logitech to be successful in that. My estimate is that I could do it in 2-3 weeks if I had nothing else to do. Unfortunately thats not going to happen. John S. -- JohnSwenson JohnSwenson's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=5974 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
More inconsistent statements from Bruce (the owner of the studio that HDTracks uses to prepare its downloadable music files): We are extracting the direct DSD data stream. It does not enter the analog domain. http://www.computeraudiophile.com/content/SACD-sound-quality-vs-computer-audio-sound-quality Any DSD processing that I do goes to the analog domain and then back to DSD http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?1037-Upsampled-SACD-sp=10655 Bruce has zero credibility in my opinion based upon these inconsistent statements. This process of digital to analog to digital again results in additional loss of fidelity. And these are more details not revealed by HDTracks. -- mortslim mortslim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=11039 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
RGibran;564026 Wrote: No one is trying to scam anyone. If they feel it's a better product, then the public has to make that decision wheter to purchase or not. Actually, that's not true. The problem is that the material was marketed as hi-res (24/88 or 96) that wasn't upsampled. Consumers can't make an informed decision without the basic info needed for that decision. Bruce is just the technician in the pipeline, so I don't know what his responsibility here is. Was he doing what he was told? Or was he ever told to report on material that wasn't true hi-res, or even to check if it was hi-res or not? HD Tracks till this point is apparently claiming that they were unaware that they were receiving upsampled material. They don't appear to be the only ones in the industry that were unaware that SACD was routinely made from upsampled 24/44.1. And the record labels were apparently very happy to charge premium prices to consumers without revealing the type of source material the SACD came from. That's obviously a scam, as they knew that the public would assume the material was from a superior hi-res source, and they cultivated this assumption. Note that earlier in the thread the question wasn't are SACD's hi-res, but are they being converted using upsampling or not? HD Tracks willingness to remove this material from their web site seems to back up their claim to have been duped; however, until they start giving at least partial credit or refunds for this material (which they claim they will), there remains a question about their involvement. Certainly from this point on they have no excuse for such material appearing on their site, unless they add info to the site that material may be upsampled from 24/44.1. -- firedog Tranquil PC fanless WHS server running SqueezeServer; SB Touch slaved to Empirical Audio Pace Car; MF X-150 amp, MF V DAC3, Devore Gibbon Super 8 Speakers; Mirage MS-12 sub; Dual 506 + Ortofon 20 (occasional use); sometimes use PC with M-Audio 192 as digital source. SB Boom in second room. Arcam CD82 which I don't use anymore, even though it's a very good player. firedog's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=11550 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
Well, well, well. To be hung by your own words !! Bruce has been hoisted by his own petard !! RGibran;564026 Wrote: *the first thing I do is upsample* I'm loving it :) -- mortslim mortslim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=11039 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
What about the suckers... sorry I mean consumers, who bought the SACDs? Were they told that what they were buying were just ultra-expensive CDs? -- Henry66 Henry66's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=38863 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
On 07/24/2010 08:30 AM, Henry66 wrote: What about the suckers... sorry I mean consumers, who bought the SACDs? Were they told that what they were buying were just ultra-expensive CDs? You do mean expensive, heavily copy protected things that contained the same content as CDs? Nope, Sony claimed that DSD was better. In and of itself. Its not a bad archival format. But it never was really an audiophile format, Even at best,there is wicked noise shapeing to move any 20kHz-40kHz noise out of hearing. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688page=17 Post #170 4/09/2010 by Bruce B We have never upsampled any transfers, period http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688page=18 Post #176 4/10/2010 by firedog In an earlier response to me, HDTracks said they do not upsample http://www.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.mpl?forum=pcaudion=75147highlight= Posted by Bruce B (P ) on May 29, 2010 at 13:42:55 In Reply to: Are you trying to justify this scam by saying it's not the first time it has been done? posted by hermanesque on May 29, 2010 at 13:20:01: I'm not trying to justify anyting. If it sounds better, then the goal was accomplished. A lot of material in the past was recorded at only 24/44.1 during the beginning of digital. Unfortunately most of the time, that's the only record we have of that performance. It's not a scam. If that's the only copy of a performance, *the first thing I do is upsample* before I do any processing. Bottom line, it just sounds better in the end. If you use plugins for processing, most of them upsample internally to 64bit anyway. In the analog domain, the transformers add color and overtones that were not there. Most of the time that also sounds better. No one is trying to scam anyone. If they feel it's a better product, then the public has to make that decision wheter to purchase or not. -- RGibran RGibran's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10220 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
mortslim;563721 Wrote: Here is what the poster firedog who has done a lot of criticizing of my consumer protection efforts here on the slim forums had to say on a different websites forum: So HDTracks got duped. Doesn't really bother me, except that I think they should notify everyone who downloaded the tracks in question (they have acc't info on record) and offer a partial refund or credit towards next purchase. To simply take the tracks off the site and expect visitors to a)notice; and b)then ask for a refund, is unrealistic. Simply a way for them to get away without compensating the customers. http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=81861.0 I guess firedog is a closet fan of mine after all ! And the scandal grows and grows !!! No, I'm not a fan, and I'd appreciate it if you'd not put words in my mouth. I still think the evidence on the thread shows that most of your long winded posts were based on incorrect technical and legal assumptions on your part, brought about by a)ignorance; and b)jumping to conclusions without checking facts. The fact that HD Tracks got duped has no relevance to most of the material you have written on the thread. And as they claimed from the start, they won't knowingly place uploaded material on their site. My above criticism of them regarding refunds still stands. That's a separate issue. I just don't like the corporate practice of refunding money or rebates b/c we all know it is a way not to actually refund anything in many cases. Long experience shows that such a system results in a very low payout. -- firedog Tranquil PC fanless WHS server running SqueezeServer; SB Touch slaved to Empirical Audio Pace Car; MF X-150 amp, MF V DAC3, Devore Gibbon Super 8 Speakers; Mirage MS-12 sub; Dual 506 + Ortofon 20 (occasional use); sometimes use PC with M-Audio 192 as digital source. SB Boom in second room. Arcam CD82 which I don't use anymore, even though it's a very good player. firedog's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=11550 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
How difficult would it be to simply upsample 24/44.1 material and the mix in some supersonic noise to make it look like it's hirez? I presume these upsampled tracks were discovered when someone found there was no energy above 44.1 (or 48) kHz. As far as I know there is no sure-fire test for whether a source is hirez anyway. -- Leigh Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10619 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
Over a year ago, the same issues were disclosed on the following forum: http://www.sa-cd.net/forum Use that forum's search box for BIS thread and then click to the appropriate pages cited below: (BIS is the name of a record label and bissie is Robert von Bahr, CEO, BIS Records) (Bruce is the owner of Puget Sound Studios) Thread: BIS thread, page 61 June 12, 2009 Post by bissie June 9, 2009 (606 of 1549) HDtracks said: Concerning the issue of HDtracks selling BIS content at 88.2/24 and the content of our high resolution store in general, all hi-res content on HDtracks is native hi-res. We have conversion charts posted on our welcome page for our hi-res store. HDtracks receives files in 88/24, 96/24, 176/24, 192/24 and DSD (SACD). All DSD files must be converted to PCM because the web does not support DSD (SACD). HDtracks has done extensive listening tests to find the best way to convert there formats. We believe that in double blind listening tests on the best equipment one cannot tell the native file from the HDtracks files. The HDtracks Team Hi, HDtracks, before anyone else tells you, let me do it. We do record most of our SACD:s in 44,1/24. We delivered physical SACD:s to you, (Edit: via our contact person in the US) which were, of course, upsampled to DSD. You reconverted them to 88,2/24 and, if I understand correctly, charge a premium for them as against 44,1/24. This shouldn't be. Very best - Robert (von Bahr, CEO, BIS Records). Post by canonical June 9, 2009 (608 of 1549) In case anyone is wondering what brought about the above 3 posts ... I was browsing the HDTracks site a short time ago, and was surprised to notice that HDTracks were still selling BIS recordings in their hi-rez 96 kHz store ... 3 weeks after this issue erupted here. So, I popped off an email to HDTracks, asking them to clarify the matter. I got back a response almost immediately ... they appeared to be completely unaware of the matter. To their credit, they acted immediately to fix the matter up ... literally within about 20 minutes of my emailing them ... Here is their reply ... === Thank you for your email and pointing this out to us. We take this matter very seriously and we have removed the BIS catalog from our hi-res store while we get to the bottom of this. In our negotiations with our label partners, for hi-res content, we have asked that they provide us with native hi-res content only. We have made it clear that we only want native hi-res files and nothing else, nothing upsampled and we trusted our partners to provide us with this. Unfortunately, thanks to you and the others on the SA-CD.net forum, it has been brought to our attention that it appears that this is not the case. We are currently in the process of contacting our label partners to reconfirm that what they have sent us is in fact native hi-res. If we find out that they are not, they will be taken off of our hi-res section of the site immediately. Please be assured that HDtracks would not and will not intentionally sell anything in the hi-res store that is not native hi-res. Again, thank you for bringing this to our attention. Sincerely, The HDtracks Team Post by bissie June 9, 2009 (609 of 1549) canonical said: In case anyone is wondering what brought about the above 3 posts ... I was browsing the HDTracks site a short time ago, and was surprised to notice that HDTracks were still selling BIS recordings in their hi-rez 96 kHz store ... 3 weeks after this issue erupted here. So, I popped off an email to HDTracks, asking them to clarify the matter. I got back a response almost immediately ... they appeared to be completely unaware of the matter. To their credit, they acted immediately to fix the matter up ... literally within about 20 minutes of my emailing them ... Here is their reply ... === Thank you for your email and pointing this out to us. We take this matter very seriously and we have removed the BIS catalog from our hi-res store while we get to the bottom of this. In our negotiations with our label partners, for hi-res content, we have asked that they provide us with native hi-res content only. We have made it clear that we only want native hi-res files and nothing else, nothing upsampled and we trusted our partners to provide us with this. Unfortunately, thanks to you and the others on the SA-CD.net forum, it has been brought to our attention that it appears that this is not the case. We are currently in the process of contacting our label partners to reconfirm that what they have sent us is in fact native hi-res. If we find out that they are not, they will be taken off of our hi-res section of the site immediately. Please be assured that HDtracks would not and will not intentionally sell anything in the
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
Ive distilled down to its essence the two most important comments (from my above post) that were posted a year ago on another website from the owner of BIS Records as to HDTracks knowledge: June 12, 2009 Hi, HDtracks, before anyone else tells you, let me do it. We do record most of our SACD:s in 44,1/24. We delivered physical SACD:s to you, (Edit: via our contact person in the US) which were, of course, upsampled to DSD. You reconverted them to 88,2/24 and, if I understand correctly, charge a premium for them as against 44,1/24. This shouldn't be. Very best - Robert (von Bahr, CEO, BIS Records). If they were unaware of the matter, they must have stopped reading emails. Immediately when this question was raised, I contacted our representative in the US (who negotiated the deal) and told her to please inform HDtracks immediately that they are selling 44,1 as 88,2. She said she did, twice. We have no direct contact whatsoever with HDtracks or any other DSP - for that we use an intermediary company. Since 44,1/24 still is considered Hires I don't see any other problems. Robert -- mortslim mortslim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=11039 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
Here are the similar comments by Bruce a year apart from each other: June 12, 2009 When we did the DSD transfers of the BIS label, we did not listen to all of the discs. We had over a hundred SACD's to rip in a week. We had no way of knowing or even questioning the source data. We have had SACD's that come in here sounding like crap even though the source files were pure DSD. No one is to blame here. HDtracks was as clueless as we were. Regards, Bruce 07-16-2010 I'm finding more and more labels that take the RBCD layer and just upsample it to DSD and call it an SACD. I've checked almost a hundred today for HDtracks and over half are upsampled. Go figure Regards, Bruce A. Brown Puget Sound Studios Seattle, WA -- mortslim mortslim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=11039 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
Here's an interesting development. It seems it was all the fault of the record labels, and Pugent Sound and HDTracks never had a clue till those dang pesky consumers started 'bitchin'! http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?1037-Upsampled-SACD-sp=10655 -- RGibran RGibran's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10220 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
RGibran;563574 Wrote: Here's an interesting development. It seems it was all the fault of the record labels, and Pugent Sound and HDTracks never had a clue till those dang pesky consumers started 'bitchin'! http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?1037-Upsampled-SACD-sp=10655 I can't believe you read those posts that way! - Bruce (Puget Sound) clearly knows what is on the SACD's he was given... He's just doing the job he was asked to do by transferring whatever crap was on the SACD's into the format requested by HDTracks... -- Phil Leigh You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it ain't what you'd call minimal... Touch(wired/XP) - TACT 2.2X (Linear PSU) + Good Vibrations S/W - MF Triplethreat(Audiocom full mods) - Linn 5103 - Aktiv 5.1 system (6x LK140's, ESPEK/TRIKAN/KATAN/SEIZMIK 10.5), Townsend Supertweeters, Blue Jeans Digital,Kimber Speaker Chord Interconnect cables Kitchen Boom, Outdoors: SB Radio Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
RGibran;563574 Wrote: Pugent Sound and HDTracks never had a clue Love the sarcasm !!! And congratulations on the great discovery -- mortslim mortslim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=11039 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
Here's Bruce's quote from the other forum: I'm finding more and more labels that take the RBCD layer and just upsample it to DSD and call it an SACD. I've checked almost a hundred today for HDtracks and over half are upsampled. Go figure Regards, Bruce A. Brown Puget Sound Studios Seattle, WA http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?1037-Upsampled-SACD-sp=10655 This new concession by Puget Sound just confirms what I have been saying all along. There is a glaring lack of transparency as to what the consumer is purchasing when so-called high resolution audio is bought. And the risk is that the consumer is paying for what he thinks is high resolution but receiving instead plain old CD resolution. And this opens up a whole Pandora's box of new questions and issues. -- mortslim mortslim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=11039 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
Well, well, well, this is getting more interesting by the minute ! Take a gander at this thread over at Computer Audio Asylum: Poking around over SA-CD.net it appears HDtracks was aware of this problem a year ago It looks like HDtracks knew a year ago they had been selling upsampled files which to their credit it also looks like they pulled. What really makes you wonder is why after the first time they continued to blindly accept files from the labels and sell them without testing them. They can blame the label the first time they got burned but after that it's their fault. http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/pcaudio/messages/7/75208.html -- mortslim mortslim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=11039 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
Here is a comment on another website's forum on the same issue: Your BIS HDracks hirez 4/88.2 stuff was found to be NOT; i.e it was simply upsampled from 24/44.1 and HDTracks pulled it from their catalog. Same with quite a few other faux hirez selections (some Verve, etc). Bruce Brown, Puget Sound, who is their outsourced SACD ripper and overall master transfer engineer, found this out through waveform sleuthing, etc. HDTracks is in the midst of a large re-assessment of their label vendors sourced product and will hopefully put out an alert with refunds once completed. in the meantime, if you are dissatisfied that you bought 24/44.1 thinking it was true 24/88.2 then you can email/contact them and a refund or credit will be offered. Many on my forum have expressed horror that HDTracks is waiting till their customers find this out, but I'm assuming they are simply waiting till they have a full comprehensive list of upsampled selections. I guess you can take either angle. Oh, since you like the sound then maybe the upsample ain't so bad..:) However, the point is that it's not fair that it was presented as native 24/88.2. http://www.computeraudiophile.com/content/Listening-hi-res-files-my-home-system-first-time#comment-45921 -- mortslim mortslim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=11039 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
Here is an interesting recent comment on another website: I bought it from HD Tracks, not Verve or BIS. It is up to HD Tracks to make it right. They know they have a problem yet they remain silent. I sent an email asking for a refund, no response. Their website is still up selling files they claim are Hi-res when they know they might not be. There isn't anything on their site that indicates a problem. They are either incredibly stupid when it comes to marketing or they are crooks. Their silence is deafening. http://www.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.mpl?forum=pcaudion=75181highlight= -- mortslim mortslim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=11039 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
Bruce needs to take The Watergate Quiz -- What Do You Know (And When Did You Know It)? He just discovered now? How? If he had the capability to figure it out now, why didnt he figure it out before? Why wasnt it discovered before? Was it just because those pesky consumers started asking too many questions that brought too much heat to the subject? -- mortslim mortslim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=11039 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
firedog;556042 Wrote: Mortslim- 1. Where's your apology for wasting our time on this? Finally, after all your numerous posts purporting to present the truth, all the legal,and all the ethical aspects...it turns out you were misinformed the whole time. The lesson: try getting the facts before you make all sorts of assumptions, esepecially in an area in which you don't have expertise. 2. And even after knowing you were wrong in the first place, you can't leave it alone. Stop beating a dead horse! This and other forums have established that HDTracks makes a good faith effort to provide authentic hi-res files, and they have said they will give refunds if a track turns out not to be true hi-res. We're all capable of deciding if the hi-res tracks are worth the money to us or not. We don't need your help. I'm sure, once again, you'll keep the thread going, because this seems to have developed into an odd obsession with you. It has for me too - an obsessive desire to stop receiving email updates with the nonsense you continually post on this thread. Please some of us, even if silent, are interested in this subject. I find quite weird your demand about an apology ... If you don't want to receive email updates about this thread, and feel like you are wasting your time (please do not speak for myself about my own time), may be you could stop subscription to this specific thread ? -- nicolas75 nicolas75's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=15823 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
I've downloaded some classical and jazz tracks recently and been very happy with the sound. This may be because they aren't volume compressed anyway, unlike pop music. Example: 24/96 Concerto for Orchestra from the Everest Label. Lots of dynamics. -- firedog Tranquil PC fanless WHS server running SqueezeServer; SB Duet through Empirical Audio Pace Car; MF X-150 amp, MF V DAC3, Devore Gibbon Super 8 Speakers; Mirage MS-12 sub; Dual 506 + Ortofon 20 (occasional use); sometimes use PC with M-Audio 192 as digital source. SB Boom in second room. Arcam CD82 which I don't use anymore, even though it's a very good player. firedog's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=11550 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
mortslim;555951 Wrote: Puget Sound Studios claims that it captures a pure unencrypted DSD data stream from the Playback Designs Music Playback System 5 (MPS-5) SACD transport machine to do the conversion from SACD discs to create the downloadable files being sold by HDTracks. Is that possible? ... Andreas stated that, yes, a pure unencrypted DSD data stream can be captured from the Playback Designs transport. 17.98-11.98=6 6/11.98= 50% premium or $6. higher price Is it worth it to pay 50% more for the same music allegedly encoded at higher fidelity when the facts are that the more expensive downloads master file was not an original recording at the alleged higher spec but was instead a conversion from an SACD, not even a copy of an SACD? Mortslim- 1. Where's your apology for wasting our time on this? Finally, after all your numerous posts purporting to present the truth, all the legal,and all the ethical aspects...it turns out you were misinformed the whole time. The lesson: try getting the facts before you make all sorts of assumptions, esepecially in an area in which you don't have expertise. 2. And even after knowing you were wrong in the first place, you can't leave it alone. Stop beating a dead horse! This and other forums have established that HDTracks makes a good faith effort to provide authentic hi-res files, and has said they will give refunds is a track turns out not to be. We're all capable of deciding if the hi-res tracks are worth the money to us or not. We don't need your help. I'm sure, once again, you'll keep the thread going, because this seems to have developed into an odd obsession with you. It has for me too - an obsessive desire to stop receiving email updates with the nonsense you continually post on this thread. -- firedog Tranquil PC fanless WHS server running SqueezeServer; SB Duet through Empirical Audio Pace Car; MF X-150 amp, MF V DAC3, Devore Gibbon Super 8 Speakers; Mirage MS-12 sub; Dual 506 + Ortofon 20 (occasional use); sometimes use PC with M-Audio 192 as digital source. SB Boom in second room. Arcam CD82 which I don't use anymore, even though it's a very good player. firedog's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=11550 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
On 06/19/2010 05:30 PM, Leigh wrote: Attached is a waveform of the first song of the album, three masterings: Top is HDTracks 24/96, middle is MFSL, bottom is 1st release AM CD. Original image is: http://gromit.orf5.com/pics/fcawaveform.png A half second look at the top tracks shows that there is no fidelity there, high or low. Its shameful what they do to music these days -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
Puget Sound Studios claims that it captures a pure unencrypted DSD data stream from the Playback Designs Music Playback System 5 (MPS-5) SACD transport machine to do the conversion from SACD discs to create the downloadable files being sold by HDTracks. Is that possible? An associate spoke to the owners of Playback Designs concerning their machine. First, Playback Designs partner Jonathan Tinn was contacted. He stated that he didnt think that it was possible because of the limitations of the Sony license. However he stated that he was on the business side of the company and referred the caller to the companys other partner, Andreas Koch, who was the engineer and could answer technical questions. Then Andreas Koch was contacted. He stated he knew Bruce, owner of Puget Sound Studios and he knew Bruce was converting SACD discs into downloadable files by HDTracks. He also stated that as far as he knew, Puget Sound was the only studio that is doing this. Andreas stated that, yes, a pure unencrypted DSD data stream can be captured from the Playback Designs transport. -- mortslim mortslim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=11039 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
The consumer is being asked by HDTracks to pay a 50% premium for downloads alleged to be at 88khz/24bit compared to downloads of the same music at CD quality of 16/44.1. For example: Mahler Symphony No. 7 in E minor $11.98 88khz/24bit $17.98 17.98-11.98=6 6/11.98= 50% premium or $6. higher price Is it worth it to pay 50% more for the same music allegedly encoded at higher fidelity when the facts are that the more expensive downloads master file was not an original recording at the alleged higher spec but was instead a conversion from an SACD, not even a copy of an SACD? -- mortslim mortslim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=11039 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
mortslim;549653 Wrote: If that is the case, the following issues arise: 1. Does Playback Designs have permission from Sony to build a feature into its machine for an unencrypted DSD audio stream to be outputted from its SACD transport? This #8220;feature#8221; is not published (to presumably keep it low profile) and no other company currently manufactures an SACD player or transport with this same #8220;feature#8221; (except for maybe EMM Labs, a company that previously employed an employee who now is a co-owner of Playback Designs). On the other hand, Oppo, a boutique #8220;audiophile#8221; manufacturer, explicitly makes clear that this is not allowed by the Sony license of the SACD technology. 2. If Playback Designs is manufacturing an SACD player or transport not in compliance with Sony#8217;s SACD license, has Playback Designs breached its license agreement with Sony? Has Playback Designs violated any of Sony#8217;s patent rights or other intellectual property rights of Sony if it has made a player or transport that may circumvent a restriction of the Sony SACD license? Has Playback Designs run afoul of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, Section 1201, if it has built a circumvention of an access control into its machine? All we can do is ask the questions. It is up to Playback Designs and Sony to give us definitive answers. 3.From the point of view of the consumer and squeezebox owner, all of these issues are a concern because they go to the issue of what is being purchased when the intent is to purchase #8220;high definition#8221; audio for playback on a squeezebox. Are these consumers getting what they think they are getting? 4. When a squeezebox owner purchases downloadable music from HDTracks that is represented to be #8220;24/88.2#8221;, does this consumer know and understand what he is purchasing? 5. Do you think HDTracks has made a full disclosure of what it is selling? 6. If Playback Designs is violating its license with Sony, or if it is violating the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, Section 1201, is it OK for Puget Sound Studios to use a Playback Designs machine to prepare downloads for sale by HDTracks? 7. If Playback Designs is violating its license with Sony, or if it is violating the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, Section 1201, is it OK for HDTracks to sell music derived from a Playback Designs machine? 8.If Playback Designs is violating its license with Sony, or if it is violating the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, Section 1201, is it OK for a consumer to purchase music derived from a Playback Designs machine? 1. and 2) Don't know if what you claim is true, and don't care. If you are correct (a big if), then I'm sure Sony would sue. Since they aren't, I conclude that either you don't know what you are talking about, or Sony doesn't care. Certainly if Sony doesn't care, neither do I. You certainly haven't been convincing that what you say the DMCA means is correct and applies here. Furthermore, just last week you selectively quoted a newspaper article to make it seem it was backing up your position, when it wasn't. Conclusion:(a)either you don't know how to read and interpret written material, in which case many of your claims have no credibility; or,(b)you intentionally distorted the article as a result of your obsession with this topic. If b is true, that also puts your credibility in doubt. 3)No, not at all. I don't care what the process is as long as it results in a hi-res file, and that the result isn't purely the result of upsampling. Puget Sound studio and HDTracks have both categorically denied your claims, and in writing. That's good enough for me, until I get PROOF they are lying. So far you have presented only your opinions and interpretations. Not good enough for me, because I don't see you as a credible source on either the legal or technical aspects of the so-called issues. 4 and 5) They could give a more explicit explanation of what they do, it would be nice. But they gave me a satisfactory answer when I contacted them, one I have no reason to doubt at this point. Does the consumer truly understand - probably not, just like with most of what he buys. I don't think most consumers even are interested in the technical details - they just want it to sound good. Again, as long as HDTracks is providing material from sources as they claim, it's fine. 6, 7, and 8) Don't care. It's not my problem. The DMCA is basically a crap law put in to protect certain corporations, and take away rights from other corporations and consumers. A classic example of lobbyists getting lawmakers to write unbalanced laws that favor their specific industry over other industries and consumers. I don't know if anything illegal is going on, but if it is I'll look at buying the tracks as a form of non-violent civil disobedience. If the companies involved want to press charges against me, then I'll have to pay the
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
This thread is about the desire of the original poster to have the Touch play back 24 bit / 192 sample rate music. The comments that have followed have discussed the issues implicit in the original post: 1. Is the Touch capable of playing 24/192 or any other high resolution audio? 2. If the Touch is capable of high resolution audio, can the human ear even discern it? 3. Even if the Touch is capable of playing high resolution audio, and further, even if the human ear can discern this level of fidelity, is there music available at this spec? 4. If music is available at this spec, and indeed at any spec higher than that of a traditional red book CD (16 bit / 44.1 kHz), is the consumer and squeezebox owner who purchases music at any purportedly higher spec receiving what he thinks he is paying for? It is this last issue which has most fascinated me. The reason it has is because of my background in recording music and my impression that a lot of other consumers and squeezebox owners without this background may have a misunderstanding about this issue #4. My purely altruistic motive is to help others understand issue # 4 so that they hopefully spend their hard earned money wisely. And parallel with this motive is my desire to see online retailers who claim to sell this type of music make a full disclosure of exactly what they are selling to prevent misunderstandings. The real world illustration of issue #4 has focused on certain offerings of online retailer HDTracks which are represented to be 24 bit / 88.2 kHz. The uninitiated most likely will assume that this music has been originally recorded at 24/88.2 (which is a PCM digital format). However through investigation it turns out that indeed at least in the case of the San Francisco and Chicago orchestras, the music was not originally recorded at 24/88.2. I state at least because those are the only two record labels that I have investigated so far and indeed may be only the tip of the iceberg. Puget Sound Studios has represented that we do all the SACD/DSD/DVD-A transfers for HDtracks and other sites. This implies to me that there are many other labels that also are offering downloads that originated at some different spec and some different format than 24/88.2. What is the significance of the original recording being at a different spec and different format than 24/88.2? There would then have to be some conversion to 24/88.2 and that conversion process might result in loss, thus there is the risk that the fidelity is not as good as music that was originally recorded at 24/88.2. Just because the spec of the downloaded music may say 24/88.2 and indeed even if its inspected file properties confirm this spec, that doesnt mean the music actually has the fidelity of music originally recorded at 24/88.2 (this is an important point that those without a background in recording may not understand). No one is saying that the resulting download is bad, just that it may not have the full fidelity of originally recorded 24/88.2. This goes to the issue of full disclosure so that each consumer can understand what they are buying. We now know that at least with the San Francisco and Chicago orchestras, the music was recorded not to the PCM format, but to a different format known as DSD. Then this DSD digital file was pressed onto an SACD. And then Puget Sound Studios on behalf of HDTracks converted the music on the SACD to the downloadable files at issue in this illustration. So not only has there not been in this instance an original recording at 24/88.2, but the second misunderstanding of the consumer might be to assume that there has been a perfect bit for bit rip of the SACD to derive the downloadable file offered by HDTracks. But that is not the case either. Since an SACD is a medium for content recorded in the DSD format, not the downloadable PCM format, a perfect rip is not possible. The bits are different on the SACD when compared to the bits in the downloadable file. There has been a conversion, not a copy. And this conversion may result in some loss of fidelity. Again, we come back to the bottom line issue of full disclosure. None of this information is mentioned by HDTracks. And this information has raised a new issue. HOW does Puget Sound Studios do the conversion? SACD is supposed to be in an encrypted format that can only be unencrypted by an SACD player or transport that has an SACD chipset that decodes the encryption. Per the Sony license (who owns the intellectual property rights in SACD), the DSD digital data on the SACD is not supposed to be available from a digital out of the player or transport in an unencrypted form. The only digital audio that can be output is from the red book CD layer of a hybrid disk that outputs at no better than PCM 24/44.1. Why? Generally to protect copyright holders of the music on the SACD from illegal copies being made, but also to
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
Phil Leigh;549685 Wrote: If it sounds great That question does not define the issue. The issue is whether the purchased music has significantly greater fidelity than the same music on a regular CD? The anecdotal feedback to date is that it is questionable as to whether the music of the download is of significantlyi greater fidelity. That being the case, why should a squeezebox owner pay out his hard earned cash at a very significantly higher price if he is not getting something significantly better? And call me old fashioned, but I believe that a buyer should have a right to know exactly what he is buying before he buys it. And a retailer should be clear as to what exaactly it is selling to avoid potential confusion. And finally, I respect intellectual property rights. I take the macro view on this. If consumers of music don't respect the intellectual property rights of the producers of the music, then this will discourage if not outright terminate the incentive for producers of music to produce any more music. And then you have killed the goose that lays the eggs. Phil Leigh;549685 Wrote: no encryption is being circumvented Puget Sound Studios is now representing that it indeed is obtaining unencrypted DSD data from the SACD through the digital outs of a Playback Designs SACD transport. Phil Leigh;549685 Wrote: the Sony chipset is STILL being used and so no licence agreement is violated That is a non sequitur. The conclusion does not follow from the premise. It's like saying that it is OK to speed on the highway just because a lot of other people are doing it. The dime has already been dropped. http://www.dropadime.net/ -- mortslim mortslim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=11039 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] 24/192
RGibran;546959 Wrote: Just as SACD and DVD-A have all but been abandoned, so too will Hi-Res in whatever formats if the peddlers of such dont step up and do the right thing and fully disclose the pertinent details of their products offerings. This trust your ears thing will backfire on them if they keep up their current marketing model. Even audiophools will eventually stop putting their hands in the fire if they keep getting burned. The new 24/96 Diana Krall Quiet Nights offering from HD Tracks is a night and day difference from the CD but NOT in a good way, IMHO! Hi-res is no different than any other format. It can be well done and sound good, giving value over 16/44; or it can be badly executed and be a rip off. However, I do agree that if the rip-off tracks are too prevalent, the format will die. -- firedog Tranquil PC fanless WHS server running SqueezeServer; SB Duet through Empirical Audio Pace Car; MF X-150 amp, MF V DAC3, Devore Gibbon Super 8 Speakers; Mirage MS-12 sub; Dual 506 + Ortofon 20 (occasional use); sometimes use PC with M-Audio 192 as digital source. SB Boom in second room. Arcam CD82 which I don't use anymore, even though it's a very good player. firedog's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=11550 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74688 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
