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 R&D 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
