Are we just kidding ourselves?

[sandyk]

Please don't antagonize him as accepted science has little weight against his theoretical positions. You'd do better to stick toothpicks under your fingernails.

 

That's the beauty of C.A. Closed minded know-it-alls like yourself are having it pointed out to you by many other members, that your views on most Computer Audio subjects are antiquated and aren't shared by a simple majority of members. The majority of members appear to be in agreement that there is life after 16/44.1,especially with recent DSD recordings and DSD DACs , and that things like clean power to PCs and even the choice of USB cables does matter! The thing that YOU don't appear to get, is that the higher resolution formats are being held back by deaf old speaker designers like yourself,who think they know better than everyone else, and that the speaker and room interface is all that matters.

FFS, it's now the 21st century. Start designing wider bandwidth speakers that people want for the new formats, instead of what YOU personally believe is all that is required.

[sandyk]

Most ultrasonic microphones are instrumentation/calibration mikes and not recording mikes. Point is, they're not that rare.

 

George

Your reply doesn't mesh in too well with the quote you have chosen.

 

Alex

[Allan F]

Is Walberg Mark Waldrep?

 

Best,

Richard

 

Yes, Richard, that should be Mark Waldrep of AIX Records, not Mark 'Walberg'!

[firedog]

Not worth it. "Mayem13" is a handle that gives away his real reason for posting....

 

That's the beauty of C.A. Closed minded know-it-alls like yourself are having it pointed out to you by many other members, that your views on most Computer Audio subjects are antiquated and aren't shared by a simple majority of members. The majority of members appear to be in agreement that there is life after 16/44.1,especially with recent DSD recordings and DSD DACs , and that things like clean power to PCs and even the choice of USB cables does matter! The thing that YOU don't appear to get, is that the higher resolution formats are being held back by deaf old speaker designers like yourself,who think they know better than everyone else, and that the speaker and room interface is all that matters.

FFS, it's now the 21st century. Start designing wider bandwidth speakers that people want for the new formats, instead of what YOU personally believe is all that is required.

[beanbag]

While you theorize about the filter's impulse or step response and it's ability or lack there of to faithfully reproduce dynamic rise and decay of a signal, best not to forget the limitations on the acoustic side of things where we're dealing with mechanics....and sadly things are far worse........except for plasma. Maybe add a bit of sulfer hexaflouride to your Vandy's enclosure to stabilize that ringing passive radiator?.......at least until it leaks out and further impacts global warming.

 

+1

 

Just look at impulse responses of typical "high end" speakers, and all this stuff about transients and ultrasonic ringing seems really minor.

[alfe]

+1

 

Just look at impulse responses of typical "high end" speakers, and all this stuff about transients and ultrasonic ringing seems really minor.

 

DSD will solve that!!!! ¨-)

[mayhem13]

You quoted me, but I didn't claim any of those things.

 

I wanted to make sure I understood your use of the term 'inharmonic'.

[mayhem13]

Then according to you, 24/96.24/192 and DSD is a big con job, and anybody who hears a benefit from these higher resolution formats is delusional ?

 

If they are claiming an improvement in SQ of the same master over 16/44?....then yes, it's a con job.

[semente]

Quote from this article:

 

"In lab tests, people can distinguish between sounds as little as five milliseconds apart".

 

How can a sample rate of 44.1k be sufficient to capture the timing changes our ears are both capable of hearing and used to hearing when we hear live music?

 

If I am not mistaken 44,100Hz equals 44.1 samples for each milisecond or about nine samples for each five milisecond interval.

 

R

[semente]

George

It has been said many times already that Barry's 24/92 recordings have genuine musical content to higher than 57kHz.

Charts have also been posted several times in C.A. that show that there is life in music WAY above the 27kHz that you quote.Likewise, it is also fairly easy to demonstrate that improved amplifier S/N benefits low level ambience.

If you can hear hiss or low level hum with your ears right near the speaker cones, as you can with many amplifiers, then low level ambience will be degraded, just as it is with an Air Conditioner running on low.

 

Alex

 

Hi Alex,

 

You mention that those recordings have "content" above 20kHz but at what level?

And can you actually hear it?

Or reproduce it?

Would it make sense to playback such recordings with speakers/tweeters that have a resonance peak of 5-15dB somewhere between 25 and 35kHz?

 

Cheers,

Ric

[Jud]

While you theorize about the filter's impulse or step response and it's ability or lack there of to faithfully reproduce dynamic rise and decay of a signal, best not to forget the limitations on the acoustic side of things where we're dealing with mechanics....and sadly things are far worse........except for plasma. Maybe add a bit of sulfer hexaflouride to your Vandy's enclosure to stabilize that ringing passive radiator?.......at least until it leaks out and further impacts global warming.

 

Yep, absolutely true - can't neglect the impact of any part of the signal chain, particularly the mechanical pieces. Re the sulfur hex, do you remember the Hill Plasmatronics speakers? Dedicated to the World’s Finest Speaker | hillplasmatronics.com Still, that's not to say the time domain side of filtering should be ignored. While from a frequency domain point of view the ringing of any filter used in modern digital audio is ultrasonic, from a time domain point of view it may have audible impact. Miska, who designs filters for a living, says this ringing can smear signals in the time domain by as much as the wavelength of a 1kHz wave.

[4est]

Ha!

 

A close friend has Dukane Ionovac tweeters in one of his systems. It is a little eerie staring into the purple plasma...

Yep, absolutely true - can't neglect the impact of any part of the signal chain, particularly the mechanical pieces. Re the sulfur hex, do you remember the Hill Plasmatronics speakers? Dedicated to the World’s Finest Speaker | hillplasmatronics.com Still, that's not to say the time domain side of filtering should be ignored. While from a frequency domain point of view the ringing of any filter used in modern digital audio is ultrasonic, from a time domain point of view it may have audible impact. Miska, who designs filters for a living, says this ringing can smear signals in the time domain by as much as the wavelength of a 1kHz wave.

[sandyk]

Hi Alex,

 

You mention that those recordings have "content" above 20kHz but at what level?

And can you actually hear it?

Or reproduce it?

Would it make sense to playback such recordings with speakers/tweeters that have a resonance peak of 5-15dB somewhere between 25 and 35kHz?

 

Cheers,

Ric

 

At age 75 , and with industrial type hearing damage I can still hear clear differences between the 24/192 version and the other format comparisons of " Maria" from Barry Diament's format comparison page.

I listen mainly via headphones for family reasons, and the Audio Technica W1000 headphones have a reasonable treble extension. Again, I will repeat that's it's the rise time of the waveform that matters, NOT how high a sine wave response we can hear, otherwise I would be relegated to listening to A.M. " Talk Back" radio. (YUK!!!)

 

Attached is a Sound Forge 9 screen grab from another excellent track on the "Americas" 24/192 album from Barry. Click on the photo for one from Image Shack, then click on it again for a larger and clearer photo.

 

Alex

 

[alfe]

Can we expect DSD 1024 or PCM 2822,4 and I'm sure some guys will hear the difference:)

[sandyk]

Ha!

 

A close friend has Dukane Ionovac tweeters in one of his systems. It is a little eerie staring into the purple plasma...

 

A friend of mine had Ohm Walsh speakers with Plasma Tweeters.

[sandyk]

Can we expect DSD 1024 or PCM 2822,4 and I'm sure some guys will hear the difference:)

 

Are you Mayhem13s long lost twin brother , separated from him at birth ?

[Jud]

Can we expect DSD 1024 or PCM 2822,4 and I'm sure some guys will hear the difference:)

 

To get 2822.4 did you do it in your head or use a calculator? Tell the truth, now.

[alfe]

Are you Mayhem13s long lost twin brother , separated from him at birth ?

 

I'll be delighted to be his brother,aren't we all brothers in the audiophile community,peace and love Alex

[alfe]

To get 2822.4 did you do it in your head or use a calculator? Tell the truth, now.

 

Without calculator I'm not wearing my gloves today;)

[semente]

At age 75 , and with industrial type hearing damage I can still hear clear differences between the 24/192 version and the other format comparisons of " Maria" from Barry Diament's format comparison page.

I listen mainly via headphones for family reasons, and the Audio Technica W1000 headphones have a reasonable treble extension. Again, I will repeat that's it's the rise time of the waveform that matters, NOT how high a sine wave response we can hear, otherwise I would be relegated to listening to A.M. " Talk Back" radio. (YUK!!!)

 

Attached is a Sound Forge 9 screen grab from another excellent track on the "Americas" 24/192 album from Barry. Click on the photo for one from Image Shack, then click on it again for a larger and clearer photo.

 

Alex

 

Hi Alex,

 

Could you analyse the same file using Spek?

 

Spek – Free Acoustic Spectrum Analyzer / Spectrogram Viewer

 

The graph you posted doesn't present the sound level in a clear manner.

 

Thanks,

Ric

[Boris75]

Can we expect DSD 1024 or PCM 2822,4 and I'm sure some guys will hear the difference:)

 

Lol, sure they will, especially with cryogenic quantum power cords.

[wisnon]

Well the DirectStream upsamples all to 28mhz anyway for internal processing.

[Paul R]

If they are claiming an improvement in SQ of the same master over 16/44?....then yes, it's a con job.

 

Only if the master is at 16/44.1, which is getting more and more unlikely today. (grin) Surely you are not saying the capabilities of even a rather modest speaker are limited to the reproduction signature of a 16/44.1 PCM signal ran though a completely NOS DAC are you? Selling anyone with a half a brain that load would be a con job for the record books!

 

-Paul

[mourip]

If one is comparing apples to apples then I personally find that a higher resolution version can make a nice difference.

 

The problem is getting a chance to compare apples to apples and what would be the point? Some recordings issued in DSD are simply well and others not so much. I have been disappointed with DSD reissues of classical music from High Definition Tape Transfers but then I have no other apple to compare them to. Just because something has been released in DSD it does not mean that it is an enjoyable performance or was well recorded. Who wants to hear every detail of an uninspired or poorly recorded performance?

 

I have made much greater strides in achieving musical enjoyment by going to Windows Server 2012 with Audiophile Optimizer than by buying DSD downloads. I find that most of my Redbook recordings are no longer fatiguing even with much more information being revealed. The exception to this being the 24bit recordings by Eiji Oue / Minnesota Orchestra on reference Recordings. These are gold all the way around. I also find 2L DSD recordings to be enjoyable and well really recorded... but tio be honest I have not downloaded the lower res versions for comparison. Perhaps I should do that just for intellectual curiosity.

 

I guess that I find locating good music to be more critical to my own enjoyment than finding copies in Hi-Res. Finding both however will always be a good score!

[RealAudio]

At age 75 , and with industrial type hearing damage I can still hear clear differences between the 24/192 version and the other format comparisons of " Maria" from Barry Diament's format comparison page.

 

I hate to say this, but that assertion is sort of like that obese guy who thinks he looks great in a speedo.