bhaagensen;419498 Wrote:
Anyway, I'm sure ( in the I'm just guessing sense) the next (next)
device from SD will support 24/96 if for nothing else than to keep up
with the competition. I think the discussion on the audible merits of
such formats will continue for a long time. But most
sleepysurf;421429 Wrote:
Well said!
Slim/Logitech needs to be working on the SB4, with 24/96 (ideally
24/192) streaming. That, paired with a Benchmark (or equivalent 24/192
DAC), would be the cats meow! If they don't stay competitive, Sooloos,
Sonos, Linn, etc. will grab that market!
Phil Leigh;421481 Wrote:
Well, they would if anyone gave a flying stuff about 24/192! -
completely pointless. Even 24/96 is pointless for domestic replay. I've
yet to meet anyone who can tell the difference between 24/96 and 24/48
downsampled properly...
I agree that 24/192 might be
darrenyeats;420810 Wrote:
When given the option, I am more interested in pursuing better original
recordings e.g. MoFi rather than being fixated on a higher-rez delivery
format.
I think that's the more sensible option, if recordings were mastered
properly in the first place people might
I think what is very instructive is the parallel experience in video.
The industry has gone from standard def to HD which is being adopted
fairly quickly now. There are no arguments from the videophile or
man-on-the-street about whether there's a perceivable difference in
quality between SD and
darrenyeats;420810 Wrote:
I think what is very instructive is the parallel experience in video.
The industry has gone from standard def to HD which is being adopted
fairly quickly now. There are no arguments from the videophile or
man-on-the-street about whether there's a perceivable
sckramer;419265 Wrote:
Hi,
Could the SB3's software be changed to allow it to pass through 24/96
digital only? Maybe by adding an option to disable, or bypass the
internal DAC?
Or is it completely impossible with the hardware?
I was thinking maybe it was limited to 24/48 because of
funkstar;419326 Wrote:
It's not just the DAC that has the limitation, the timing circuits for
the digital output is also limited to 48khz, so there is no way for
anything higher than 24/48 to be unsed on a SB3 (or any of the other
players based on that hardware).
bummer,
Time for a SB4...
sckramer;419383 Wrote:
bummer,
Time for a SB4... (or SB3 v2) Same exact form factor (because it's
perfect)
support 24/96+ spdif passthru, maybe wireless-N...
save the exotic DAC output stage for the transporter
I'm not clear why you think this is such a big deal. Can you actually
sckramer;419383 Wrote:
save the exotic DAC output stage for the transporter
I really don't see the point of a device that will do 24/96 -without-
having the decent output stages.
The audible difference between 24/48 and 24/96 are debatable from what
I've read. And the down sampling via SOX is
funkstar;419405 Wrote:
I really don't see the point of a device that will do 24/96 -without-
having the decent output stages.
The audible difference between 24/48 and 24/96 are debatable from what
I've read. And the down sampling via SOX is very high quality.
I see the point , I have a
Mnyb;419434 Wrote:
* For the same reason it's downright unusable on all but the most
powerful NAS boxes, The most economical server upgrade if you already
have sunked plenty of $ into a NAS can be to get yourself a transporter
if you have a lot of 24/96 files.
Or just create a
radish;419439 Wrote:
Or just create a downsampled copy of your library. The disk space is a
lot cheaper than a TP ;)
But thats not that much fun ;)
My audiophile instict's explicitly removes all thoughts about degrading
the preciusss files ;)
--
Mnyb
funkstar;419405 Wrote:
I really don't see the point of a device that will do 24/96 -without-
having the decent output stages.
The audible difference between 24/48 and 24/96 are debatable from what
I've read. And the down sampling via SOX is very high quality.
agreed on both, but I'm using
sckramer;419444 Wrote:
agreed on both, but I'm using an external DAC (stage3 modded psaudio
dl3), thats the whole point
yep I bet it's negligable, I was asking if it was as simple as
letting it pass thru spdif, but the HW can't do it, so say lah vee
cool that SOX down converts, I didnt
Phil Leigh;419388 Wrote:
I'm not clear why you think this is such a big deal. Can you actually
hear the difference between 24/96 and 24/48 (when properly downsampled -
e.g. by SOX)?
it's not a big deal, never heard the difference -- I dont have a way to
get a native stream to my dac...
--
sckramer;419383 Wrote:
bummer,
Time for a SB4... (or SB3 v2) Same exact form factor (because it's
perfect)
support 24/96+ spdif passthru, maybe wireless-N...
save the exotic DAC output stage for the transporter
Or buy a Transporter or just use the SOX that is built into SC 7.3.2.
Anyway, I'm sure ( in the I'm just guessing sense) the next (next)
device from SD will support 24/96 if for nothing else than to keep up
with the competition. I think the discussion on the audible merits of
such formats will continue for a long time. But most stand-alone dac's
and processors seem
Hi,
Could the SB3's software be changed to allow it to pass through 24/96
digital only? Maybe by adding an option to disable, or bypass the
internal DAC?
Or is it completely impossible with the hardware?
I was thinking maybe it was limited to 24/48 because of the DAC chip
--
sckramer
sckramer;419265 Wrote:
Hi,
Could the SB3's software be changed to allow it to pass through 24/96
digital only? Maybe by adding an option to disable, or bypass the
internal DAC?
Or is it completely impossible with the hardware?
I was thinking maybe it was limited to 24/48 because of
20 matches
Mail list logo
