Proven: Good Old Redbook CD Sounds the Same as the Hi-Rez Formats - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Source & Line > Digital Source

Digital Source Digital Players and Recorders: CD , SACD , Tape, Memory Card, etc.

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 30th October 2007, 03:04 AM   #1
diyAudio Member
 
ashok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 3RS
Default Proven: Good Old Redbook CD Sounds the Same as the Hi-Rez Formats

Anyone read this article ?
http://theaudiocritic.com/blog/index...Id=41&blogId=1
__________________
AM
  Reply With Quote
Old 30th October 2007, 03:37 AM   #2
BudP is offline BudP  United States
diyAudio Member
 
BudP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: upper left crust, united snakes
Actually, I didn't read the paper at the end of the link. but do regard the premise as correct, with one caveat. The red book player or dac must have a full, poured, instrumentation ground plane or it cannot compete.

If you have this rarity, or the foolish Electron Pools in it's place, the difference between Red Book, SACD,very well done vinyl and 1/4 track tape is only a matter of the degree of "ease" in performance. That "ease" is related to how much information is still attached to transient impulse, such as information content supporting, low level coherent gain riders, such as the sound of instrument bodies as they accept and release information, in attack and decay conditions. Tonality, detail, and dynamic color are all so close as to be indistinguishable. But only if the ground plane is taken care of.

Bud
  Reply With Quote
Old 30th October 2007, 03:53 AM   #3
diyAudio Member
 
Cloth Ears's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Quote:
Originally posted by ashok
Proven: Good Old Redbook CD Sounds the Same as the Hi-Rez Formats
Not quite. They said:
"the new hi-rez formats generally sound better than standard CDs, but not because the processing technology is superior. The hi-rez discs are aimed at a more sophisticated market, and therefore the recording sessions and production techniques tend to be more sophisticated, more puristic, in terms of microphoning, compression, editing, etc. "

From the article:
"Meyer and Moran do not say that 14 or 15 bits in a truncated CD are just as good as 20. What they say is that spot-on 16-bit/44.1-kHz processing is as good as it gets, audibly."

I mean, what microphone out there is able to pickup >22kHz sound and is used for recording? I know of precisely zero...
__________________
Jont.
"It is impossible to build a fool proof system; because fools are so ingenious."
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Looking for a good proven project for P17WJ / MDT33 b jmillerdoc Multi-Way 0 1st March 2009 05:07 PM
It's proven: 16/44.1 as good as 24/96 abzug Digital Source 17 5th March 2008 03:44 AM
Sounds good, i like it, you may appreciate too. destroyer X Class D 95 22nd February 2005 10:09 PM
Who determines what sounds good? Theli Multi-Way 68 9th February 2004 06:01 AM
24/96 and 24/192 is no good. MP3 sounds better! peranders Digital Source 92 30th July 2002 10:30 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 04:49 AM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2