TheOctavist;695661 Wrote:
> **The test was performed by reducing the level of a 24 bit file by 50
> dB, which causes some of the original signal's level to drop below the
> -96 dBFS limit of 16 bit resolution, and then converting to 16 bit in
> various ways. The resulting files were then raised i
Wombat;695617 Wrote:
> So i ask you again. Can you tell us where you have the samples in the
> dithertest you offered over filedropper?
> Did you create them yourself, then please tell me how so i can compare
> on my own.
> I think when you drop in samples you should explain a bit.
**The test wa
Wombat;695639 Wrote:
> Nice shape your listening room seem to have. I can imagine this is a
> very resolving setup, enjoy!
I don't know. Some say bays are good some say they aren't.
I'm thinking of building 2 x 4ft tall panels (similar to my temporary
ones at the first point of reflection) to
Jeff Flowerday;695516 Wrote:
> Well I'm back to no subs today. Got my brand new Focal 1028BEs.[/IMG]
Nice shape your listening room seem to have. I can imagine this is a
very resolving setup, enjoy!
--
Wombat
Transporter (modded) -> RG142 -> Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks -> Somm
Bob stuarts old paper is mentioned .
I did not mention it myself as you can all see in my sig :) I'm a bit
sold on Meridian equipment.
But it is an interesting read, arguing that the real limit that would
include *real* golden ears and all humans would be 20bit 58kHz sampling
somewhere , this is
stop-spinning;695608 Wrote:
>
> If this is the case, then why is wireless discouraged for sound quality
> reasons? Surely this the best way to isolate an electrically noisy
> computer source from the likes of a PC for example (assuming the
> simplicity of the SB Touch is much more electrically q
So i ask you again. Can you tell us where you have the samples in the
dithertest you offered over filedropper?
Did you create them yourself, then please tellme how so i can compare.
I think when you drop in samples you should explain a bit.
--
Wombat
Transporter (modded) -> RG142 -> Avantgarde
stop-spinning;695608 Wrote:
>
> If this is the case, then why is wireless discouraged for sound quality
> reasons? .
Yeah why , indeed ;) these are opinions from audiphiles the same people
that can argues that digital cables in silver sounds better or use
shakti stones and you read in on the in
If you have a reliable wireless connection then there should be no
difference in the sound quality of a wired connection. Bits are bits.
If you have a bad wireless environment you could experience dropouts in
the music from buffer underruns.
--
w3wilkes
2 Duets - 1 for upstairs and 1 for downs
So in essence the musical data should be copied perfectly over wireless
to the SB Touch from the source (just like when you copy a hi-res photo
or video file from one computer to another and the image is still all
there when viewed from the target PC without any loss whatsoever).
If this is the c
10 matches
Mail list logo
