krzys;582845 Wrote:
The only drawback is that you cannot measure the whole system since
Audiolense is generating his own signal and you cannot pass it trough
the SB device. I hope that my SB Touch is perfect ;-)
Chris
Can you clarify what you mean? I don't quite understand it all yet.
p-cubed;582945 Wrote:
Any indication of when a 24-96 release of the Beatles catalog will
happen?
None. The next release is a vinyl box, mastered from the digital. And
before you ask, they haven't released any details of exactly how they
are making the master. Since no announcement has been
opaqueice;582922 Wrote:
Apart from that, as I said I'm willing to bet that no one can tell them
(i.e. the 24 bit version and its 16 bit dithered counterpart) apart
blind.
I've done it multiple times, even when sitting in an adjoining room.
Instead of just being a knee-jerk skeptic,
the USB release is high-rez IMO, I'm not convinced a 96 or 192 would
have any real audible benefit over those.
--
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
opaqueice;582922 Wrote:
1) Master the hi-res version to sound better
2) everyone will (incorrectly) assume it's the extra bits
3) profit.
BS
high-res is very close to master if not the master itself.
44.1/16 is downsampled, filtered and tortured version of it
--
michael123
I've just run the 24-bit USB version of Come Together vs the 16-bit
remaster (ripped as 44.1/24 with DBP).
The diff is -81dB (or about 13.5 bits) The difference file boosted by
50dB is full of random noise as you'd expect but the track is still
there within the noise - words and music clearly
On 15/10/10 09:27, Phil Leigh wrote:
I've just run the 24-bit USB version of Come Together vs the 16-bit
remaster (ripped as 44.1/24 with DBP).
The diff is -81dB (or about 13.5 bits) The difference file boosted by
50dB is full of random noise as you'd expect but the track is still
there
firedog;582960 Wrote:
I've done it multiple times, even when sitting in an adjoining room.
Instead of just being a knee-jerk skeptic, why don't you listen and
then decide?
And i ask again: Did you try the 24bit version against the 16bit
version done from the same files and how were the
Wombat;583004 Wrote:
And i ask again: Did you try the 24bit version against the 16bit version
done from the same files and how were the 16bit files created?
It is NOT woth anything if you listened some fuzzy feeling 24bit
version against some other version coming from a completely other
I quotet firedog cause he once mentioned hearing differences on a
Coltrane fromn HDtracks. Hdtracks only sells the 24/96 version of a new
transfer, no 16bit version to buy.
A spectrum plot leads to nothing. This diffmaker is nice iy ou could
handle it. And if you could try to bitreduse the
Wombat;583012 Wrote:
I just wonder why still no one has tried the 24bit Beatles version
directly with a 16bit version from these files, not the cd release.
There are million ways you can downsample 24bit album,
I once downsampled few of my high-res albums with r8brain to bring with
me to
On 15/10/10 13:17, Wombat wrote:
I just wonder why still no one has tried the 24bit version directly
with a 16bit version from these files, not the cd release.
I Hope Robin Bowes now does :)
No time just now - I have asked Phil to try with diffmaker.
R.
--
Feed that ego and you starve
On 15/10/10 13:41, Robin Bowes wrote:
On 15/10/10 13:17, Wombat wrote:
I just wonder why still no one has tried the 24bit version directly
with a 16bit version from these files, not the cd release.
I Hope Robin Bowes now does :)
No time just now - I have asked Phil to try with diffmaker.
http://src.infinitewave.ca/
--
michael123
michael123's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=23745
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=72852
Ok I will try to explain, sorry for my basic English.
Ideally when measuring your system/room response, you want to include
all the components of your audio chain. With Audiolense (and many many
measuring software), the measuring signal is generated by the software
and you cannot play it trough
Robin Bowes;583018 Wrote:
On 15/10/10 13:41, Robin Bowes wrote:
On 15/10/10 13:17, Wombat wrote:
I just wonder why still no one has tried the 24bit version directly
with a 16bit version from these files, not the cd release.
I Hope Robin Bowes now does :)
No time just now - I
Hi: 24bit=144dBThis can't at the moment be converted to analog. Max
dynamic out of a Current DAC is: 132dB (PCM1794 / PCM1792 in mono and
balanced configuration).
I once asked a Burr Brown sales manager why they annonced 24bit whaen
it not was possible to convert this to analog. He returned
michael123;583015 Wrote:
But..I do not understand your point. There are less (destroying music)
steps in 24bit mastering..
My point is that i am fed up with reading about how much superior 24bit
material is.
I listen gear since a while now. I listen some very expensive
Avantgarde Trio
Wombat;583025 Wrote:
You don´t have to wait for Phil. I already wrote:
sox input24.wav --bits 16 output16.wav dither -a -f low-shibata
works! noise shaped dither with a not to high amplitude. Diffmaker
shows ~ -120dB at ear sensitive frequencies.
And Michael. Sox with some 90% and
Wombat;583030 Wrote:
I myself think to hear some more relaxed playing on music with higher
samplerate. Downsampling just adds that tiny bit of hardness but not
like day and night. Dithering back 24bit to 16 without resampling, as
with HDCD for example didn´t show me any disadvantage at all
michael123;583029 Wrote:
Do not know what you consider as 'works'.
Ear Sensitive is below 15KHz? For which age?
This sox line works with the Beatles files Robin Bowes wants to try.
Ear sensitive is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal-loudness_contour
In the ear sensitive mids this sox
On 15/10/10 14:54, Wombat wrote:
michael123;583029 Wrote:
Do not know what you consider as 'works'.
Ear Sensitive is below 15KHz? For which age?
This sox line works with the Beatles files Robin Bowes wants to try.
Correction: with the Beatles files *Wombat* wants Robin Bowes to try ;)
On 15/10/10 13:54, michael123 wrote:
http://src.infinitewave.ca/
See, that's what I mean. I don't have the time at the moment to read
through what that all means and how to interpret it.
R.
--
Feed that ego and you starve the soul - Colonel J.D. Wilkes
http://www.theshackshakers.com/
Robin Bowes;583033 Wrote:
On 15/10/10 14:54, Wombat wrote:
michael123;583029 Wrote:
Do not know what you consider as 'works'.
Ear Sensitive is below 15KHz? For which age?
This sox line works with the Beatles files Robin Bowes wants to try.
Correction: with the Beatles files
firedog;582960 Wrote:
I've done it multiple times, even when sitting in an adjoining room.
Instead of just being a knee-jerk skeptic, why don't you listen and
then decide?
You made a dithered 16 bit version from the 24 bit, and could tell them
apart blind?
Again, telling the CD version
michael123;582962 Wrote:
BS
high-res is very close to master if not the master itself.
44.1/16 is downsampled, filtered and tortured version of it
Did you ever compare CD vs 24bit?
Audacity, else?
No.
Again, CD versus 24 bit is not a meaningful test of whether 24 bit does
any good,
Ok I will try to explain, sorry for my basic English.
Ideally when measuring your system/room response, you want to include
all the components of your audio chain. With Audiolense (and many many
measuring software), the measuring signal is generated by the software
and you cannot play it trough
Firedog thanks for the question, it made me do some search and discover
the Waveinput plugin for SBS.
http://wiki.slimdevices.com/index.php/WaveInput_plugin
In theory it let you send the soundcard output to the SBS. If it works
the test signal from Audiolense could then be sent to SBS and
opaqueice;582925 Wrote:
Do I hear more information on the main system? I'm trying, but I
can't think of any sense in which that's true. It's simply that music
has more impact, more clarity, a greater sense of space - it simply
sounds much more like it does live.
There you go, you've just
Just decided to experiment with direct connection and I'm glad I did.
Going direct instead of through my BAT 3iX tube pre-amp really wakes up
my Vandersteen Quatros (I bought the BAT before I bought the Quatros).
Going direct really brightens things up. But I have to attenuate at
least 20dB to
30 matches
Mail list logo
