Oh, please. i was pretty happy, once the analog stages improved, with the technical design of my first Philips CD player...
Imagine with the last DACs i use !
It's sad that you have had little or no interest in understanding the basics of digital audio processing. It's not rocket science. Parroting flawed intuitive feelings of how things should be put out by others should be beneath you.
That is all the point with digital. Purely objective, easy to understand, but so far from our analog reptilian way to think. And not a lot of room for art ;-)
Sorry boys, you still don't get it. Here are a couple of people who are a lot, a lot closer to properly getting it, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mRg-Rrd2blY. Some excellent points are made in this - key is that digital that is 0.001% wrong can sound like total crap; unless you worry about the "other stuff" then it ain't gonna happen ...
Edit: Unfortunately, Cliff, in particular completely misunderstood what I was saying.
Edit: Unfortunately, Cliff, in particular completely misunderstood what I was saying.
Last edited:
John and others who keep mentioning 16 bits.
NOBODY, who is serious about his art, records music material at 16 bits these days and probably have not done so for at least 20 years!
Higher resolution recording/editing systems were already available around 1990 and so were the A-D chips/hybrids. dCS and dbx /UltraAnalog (Bob Adams) custom designs come to mind but there might have been others. Since then industry stayed that way. By 1993 Crystal and AKM had 20 bit A-Ds in their catalogs and by 1996 Sony have already been archiving their material directly from sigma-delta modulators in DSD format!
Once such recorded material have been loaded into workstation it remained either in 24 bit or in 32 bit float format right up to the last stage of (properly) decimating down (with dither) to final release format as a 16 bit CD.
Sound manipulation on any half way decent workstation was done either in 48 bits/48 bits double precision on Motorola 56k family DSPs or later, when computer processors became more powerful, also in 32 bits/32 bits double precision. Today it's even more bits..
As to the CD as "crippled" release format... 16 bit x 6 dB = 96 dB (DR), right?
Here's the spectragram of 997 Hz -110 dB dithered/noise shaped (for better view) test signal that started life as 24 bit file. It was loaded into workstation, dithered at 32 double precision float and was saved as 16 bit file. All lower bits have been truncated.
Now, where does that -110 dB tone come from? It's a 16 bit file now
Sony link:
AES E-Library A New CD Mastering Processing Using Direct Stream Digital
Attachments
Last edited:
Those of us who keep mentioning 16 bits are NOT talking about 16 bits on THE RECORDING SIDE. We're talking about 16 bits on THE PLAYBACK SIDE, and while ACTUALLY LISTENING TO MUSIC.
se
Seems to me that the record industry's lack of interest in producing decent quality recordings will soon make our best efforts seem pointless. Crap in = crap out.
I agree with the point made earlier that so few recordings make anywhere near full use of CD's potential that i dont see much point in 24/96 and none at all in 24/192.
I agree with the point made earlier that so few recordings make anywhere near full use of CD's potential that i dont see much point in 24/96 and none at all in 24/192.
You haven't presented any facts. All we've had has been the hand waving of a bunch of twitchy, neurotic "audiophiles" who have no business talking about EGO of all things.
se
The "facts" are, that 16 bit recordings are perfectly adequate, technically, and when correctly reproduced - the objectivists have been saying this for decades now, and they are correct. But sometimes when 16 bit replay does not "sound adequate" to someone then the comment from that person is that:
a) It's a bad recording
and/or
b) 16 bits isn't good enough
If one insists that their reproduction system is superior, and therefore it must be be one of those two factors, then it certainly smells like ego to me ...
a) It's a bad recording
and/or
b) 16 bits isn't good enough
If one insists that their reproduction system is superior, and therefore it must be be one of those two factors, then it certainly smells like ego to me ...
Yes, it doesn't look good.
http://www.tcelectronic.com/media/1013907/lund_2006_stop_counting_samples_aes121.pdf
Table on pages 7 and 8.
electroj,
Thanks for some sanity in this discussion. At the same time we keep mixing playback and recording sides of things and that has a lot to do with this endless argument. I agree though the Redbook standards should be enough for us to enjoy our music but if the hacks in the studio are going to mess it up before we ever get to playing it back we are wasting our time trying to improve audio systems if the source material is at fault in the end. I only know of one person on here who keeps saying that the recording side is perfect, it is not when the so called technician behind the mix console doesn't understand the gain structure required to get it right. Much of this goes back to those in the industry accepting inferior material from those who think you can do this at home who know nothing about recording in the first place..
That paper basically says we are in deep Sh*t from poor understanding of basic factors affecting the digital chain.
Thanks for some sanity in this discussion. At the same time we keep mixing playback and recording sides of things and that has a lot to do with this endless argument. I agree though the Redbook standards should be enough for us to enjoy our music but if the hacks in the studio are going to mess it up before we ever get to playing it back we are wasting our time trying to improve audio systems if the source material is at fault in the end. I only know of one person on here who keeps saying that the recording side is perfect, it is not when the so called technician behind the mix console doesn't understand the gain structure required to get it right. Much of this goes back to those in the industry accepting inferior material from those who think you can do this at home who know nothing about recording in the first place..
That paper basically says we are in deep Sh*t from poor understanding of basic factors affecting the digital chain.
I hope others didnt see the 50 without the point (.) in front of the 50. It is 1/2 percent.
THx-RNMarsh
This wont solve anything perhaps...... there is a Mastering School which tells how you ought to record etc.
Listen and decide for your self: Dither versus truncation distortion ? Hear it for yourself
Granted it is one master producer in UK and not necessary the way all do it or think or make same trade-offs etc (thats to CMA with SE)
Would you choose distortion or noise? or neither?
IIRC, in the begining there wasnt dither... after people heard stuff they didnt like about 16 bit/44.1.... dither was invented later to solve that complaint. It was the best we could do at the time, I suppose. But now? You choose. His comments have merit though i would not take every word as the gospel... a lot is personal opinion.
THx-RNMarsh
Listen and decide for your self: Dither versus truncation distortion ? Hear it for yourself
Granted it is one master producer in UK and not necessary the way all do it or think or make same trade-offs etc (thats to CMA with SE)
Would you choose distortion or noise? or neither?
IIRC, in the begining there wasnt dither... after people heard stuff they didnt like about 16 bit/44.1.... dither was invented later to solve that complaint. It was the best we could do at the time, I suppose. But now? You choose. His comments have merit though i would not take every word as the gospel... a lot is personal opinion.
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
I am listening to the PONO via Sennheiser HD800. Better everywhere.
When I have a source capable of driving the HiFiman planar, they sound excellent [which is why I had to design my own buffer/amp to have more drive current. I had tried a HPA called HeadRoom Microamp which was also too limited]. With the 300 Ohm HD800, there is not the muffled sound I had before to a mild degree. Still not using bal output.
Lowered distortion is evident with the higher Z of the HD800 as its load.
THx-RNMarsh
When I have a source capable of driving the HiFiman planar, they sound excellent [which is why I had to design my own buffer/amp to have more drive current. I had tried a HPA called HeadRoom Microamp which was also too limited]. With the 300 Ohm HD800, there is not the muffled sound I had before to a mild degree. Still not using bal output.
Lowered distortion is evident with the higher Z of the HD800 as its load.
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.