"24/192 Music downloads, and why they make no sense" - Page 12 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > General Interest > Everything Else

Everything Else Anything related to audio / video / electronics etc) BUT remember- we have many new forums where your thread may now fit! .... Parts, Equipment & Tools, Construction Tips, Software Tools......

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 8th March 2012, 08:02 PM   #111
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Virginia
Dan Larvy (from Larvy Engineering) published in 2004 an article that concludes that 192kHz (as opposed to 88.1 or 96kHz) is useless. All the above considerations (including the impulse response) are covered.
I agree with his conclusion... not that matters anyway

Last edited by SoNic_real_one; 8th March 2012 at 08:06 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 8th March 2012, 08:47 PM   #112
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by a.wayne View Post
...that there is a huge difference between 16/44.1 and 24/192.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Syzygies View Post
24, 96 is about 3.3x the information content per second of 16, 44.1.
Pay attention, Syzy.
  Reply With Quote
Old 8th March 2012, 08:55 PM   #113
a.wayne is offline a.wayne  United States
diyAudio Member
 
a.wayne's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Front Row Center
Quote:
Originally Posted by counter culture View Post
How you expect to be taken seriously with posts like this is beyond me, a.wayne....and how the rest of you expect to be taken seriously.
Quote:
Originally Posted by counter culture View Post
With the exception of abraxalito who I know cherishes no hope of being taken seriously.
Quote:
Originally Posted by counter culture View Post
Pay attention, Syzy.
..........
  Reply With Quote
Old 8th March 2012, 09:00 PM   #114
a.wayne is offline a.wayne  United States
diyAudio Member
 
a.wayne's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Front Row Center
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoNic_real_one View Post
Dan Larvy (from Larvy Engineering) published in 2004 an article that concludes that 192kHz (as opposed to 88.1 or 96kHz) is useless. All the above considerations (including the impulse response) are covered.
I agree with his conclusion... not that matters anyway
Interesting read Sonic ..have you listened .... ?
  Reply With Quote
Old 8th March 2012, 09:23 PM   #115
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: At the output stage
Send a message via Yahoo to mr_push_pull
Quote:
Originally Posted by a.wayne View Post
Interesting read Sonic ..have you listened .... ?
I think it's been written that the masters are different.
__________________
we all love a good ol' stereotype until it's against us
  Reply With Quote
Old 8th March 2012, 09:47 PM   #116
SY is offline SY  United States
diyAudio Moderator
 
SY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Chicagoland
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr_push_pull View Post
I think it's been written that the masters are different.
Yes, this was talked about in the Meyer/Moran paper. That's one reason they added in an extra D/A -> A/D step.
__________________
You might be screaming "No, no, no" and all they hear is "Who wants cake?" Let me tell you something: They all do. They all want cake.- Wilford Brimley
  Reply With Quote
Old 8th March 2012, 10:14 PM   #117
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Wellington
Quote:
Originally Posted by simon7000 View Post
...
So lets assume then that we need the timing to allow for less than 5 degrees of phase shift at 20 Khz. ...
Read very carefully: 5 degrees of phase shift of a 20 KHz signal (or 5 microseconds of delay) will be accurately recorded and reproduced through a competently designed 44.1 KHz A-D-A chain. Feel free to disagree, but understand that your argument is with Nyquist, not with me.
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th March 2012, 01:04 AM   #118
FrankWW is online now FrankWW  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: n/a
Quote:
>So lets assume then that we need the timing to allow for less than 5 degrees of phase shift at 20 Khz.

>>>Thats the same as moving an ear (1/20 ft * 5/360) about 1/1200 of an inch. Do you listen to music with your head in a clamp?

Earphones are a problem if there's phase shift. Your head is in a perceptual clamp. Small phase shifts at high frequencies can affect perception of timbre of instruments with high energy, high frequency harmonics such as trumpets and cymbals, even listening with speakers.

Quote:
>... The human ear can register rises and falls at a rate of 5.8 microseconds per dB. ...

>>>Show me some music with those kinds of rise times.

Cymbal crash rise time is @ 1millisecond. That's a pretty good rate of rise/dB

This is interesting They found @ 20 microsecs - I'm sure there are other similar, later papers out there. Kunchur, I believe, saw about 7 in his work but there's some objection cuz he's an astronomer or something like that, but his bibliography is good.

http://www.google.com/url?url=http:/...crVJeg&cad=rja

Click the image to open in full size.
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th March 2012, 03:08 AM   #119
frugal-phile(tm)
diyAudio Moderator
 
planet10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Victoria, BC, NA, Sol III
Blog Entries: 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by LineSource View Post
The Nyquist–Shannon sampling theorem states that perfect reconstruction of a signal is possible when the sampling frequency is greater than twice the maximum frequency of the signal being sampled, or equivalently, when the Nyquist frequency (half the sample rate) exceeds the highest frequency of the signal being sampled.
Rarely are the conditions required satisfied in practice, Nyquist?Shannon sampling theorem - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

When i read the Sony CD white paper in 1980 i happened to be taking a grad level sampling course. My 1st comment was that they would need to increase sampling by 8 times before it would be indisguishable from analog. This was further reinforced by a question i had wrt digital scopes. The scope jockies said, to paraphrase, that they wouldn't trust a scope that didn't have sampling 5-10x higher than strictly necessary.

dave
__________________
community sites t-linespeakers.org, frugal-horn.com, frugal-phile.com ........ commercial site planet10-HiFi
p10-hifi forum here at diyA
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th March 2012, 03:16 AM   #120
frugal-phile(tm)
diyAudio Moderator
 
planet10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Victoria, BC, NA, Sol III
Blog Entries: 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcx View Post
I would rather see higher sample rates at 16 bit than more of the totally foolish 24/44 Beatles releases
+1
  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
What Does Fostex "Rated Input" and "Music Power" mark02131 Full Range 5 13th October 2012 05:18 AM
New 24/192 "album" from SoundKeeper ronzeman Music 0 9th September 2010 04:07 PM
Linear voltage regulator: how to make good use of "sense" and "ground sense"? NeoY2k Analog Line Level 7 6th September 2008 11:35 PM
192/24 spdif soundcard ESI Julia vs Audiophile 192 vs ...? stolbovoy Digital Source 5 12th October 2005 06:25 PM
when does using a subwoofer make sense in a music-only setup? keyser Subwoofers 48 22nd November 2004 07:57 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 02:48 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