The Optimal Sample Rate for Quality Audio

[sandyk]

Find out why “more” is not always “better!”

 

Lavry tech

I would be interested to know what connections (if any) you have with this commercial product.

That statement sounds to me, like something that could have come from their Advertising Department.

 

I also feel sure that many other highly talented DAC designers are likely to have very different views in this area.

 

Regards

SandyK

[sandyk]

" I would like to read an article promoting 192 as being the best sample rate. Could you provide one? "

Buffalobill

I take anything that comes from any manufacturer with a healthy dose of scepticism.

You could try Google though, for further information, although most of it is likely to be commercially related, and promoting their own "discoveries" and products. You are unlikely to find much peer reviewed material, as many from the "establishment" have a decidely anti high resolution agenda.( including a few C.A. members) That also applies to 24/88 and 24/96 !

I don't doubt that for the DAC designer, that 24/192 is harder to implement for best results than 24/96.

Nevertheless, on the few good 24/192 albums that I have, especially "Equinox" from Barry Diament of SoundKeeper Recordings,

I can still appreciate the improvement over the best 24/96 material from DVD-A etc. that I have, despite being 73 years old.

Barry's "Equinox" for example ,is extremely pure sounding with a complete lack of distortion and an excellent depth of image.

Alex

[sandyk]

"It's not about hearing ultrasonic sine waves alone, it's about sensing waveform shapes and changes steeper than "audible" (as continuous sines) frequencies."

Miska

I have always believed that it is about the steep changes, and have said so.Due to my age and hearing damage, I shouldn't be able to hear the things I do, yet I have a great deal of success with my audio projects elsewhere, where the constructors do not feel the need to modify the amplification sections.They say that I have got it right.

Regards

Alex

[sandyk]

"it seems like 192 adds that extra hint of convincing realism. It sounds somewhat more involving, with slightly better perceived dynamics and detail, as well as an improved three-dimensionality of the soundstage. "

 

That's exactly how my 73 year old ears hear it too, although according to most presently accepted theory, I shouldn't be able to do so. (grin)

I hope to hear the same with Barry's "Americas" as I did with "Equinox" in 24/192.

Alex