Mac Observer says 44/16 is all you need

[Blu]

Digital Music: Can You Hear Above 16-bit/44.1kHz? - The Mac Observer

 

Here we go again, another computer journalist jumping on the low resolution is enough bandwagon.

[sandyk]

Digital Music: Can You Hear Above 16-bit/44.1kHz? - The Mac Observer

 

Here we go again, another computer journalist jumping on the low resolution is enough bandwagon.

 

What next ?

All USB cables sound the same too, or a typical Class D amplifier,(especially many DIY offerings) with it's greatly reduced HF response in order to achieve good noise figures, is suitable for playing the latest DSD or other Hi Res material such as 24/192,and doesn't cause mains pollution which can often effect other low level devices ?

 

 

.."If you can't hear the difference between an original CD and a copy of your CD, you might as well give up your career as a tester. The difference between a reconstituted FLAC and full size WAV is much less than that, but it does exist." - Cookie Marenco. cookiemarenco.com"

 

Not only is Cookie Marenco an Audio engineer, and has better hearing than most of her male counterparts, she is leading the way with high resolution DSD recordings from Blue Coast Records.Likewise, Barry Diament is leading the way with his 24/192 high resolution recordings using only 2 wideband stereo microphones, and NO mixing or compression/limiting.

[mmerrill99]

Good to see you back in the saddle, so to speak, Alex. I wish you continued further improvement.

[alfe]

Alex,

 

You think that 16/44 is not good enough?

Listened to your rip of sumiyaki coffee in 16/44 brilliant, far better than some hi-res I have.

If you hear a difference with the less is more business (less processing better mark up), I hear only good or bad mastering.

[RealAudio]

What next ?

 

Not only is Cookie Marenco an Audio engineer, and has better hearing than most of her male counterparts, she is leading the way with high resolution DSD recordings from Blue Coast Records.Likewise, Barry Diament is leading the way with his 24/192 high resolution recordings using only 2 wideband stereo microphones, and NO mixing or compression/limiting.

 

 

You have no way to know if Cookie Mareco's hearing isn't beyond its sell by date just like pretty much every else in her age range. What we do know is that she has a strong financial interest in promoting high resolution by having a label with artists that without the allure of high resolution for those who accept the audiophile dsd high resolution meme would have an audience of zero, including family members.

[RealAudio]

Digital Music: Can You Hear Above 16-bit/44.1kHz? - The Mac Observer

 

Here we go again, another computer journalist jumping on the low resolution is enough bandwagon.

 

Given the fact that pretty much every release, both popular and classical, from almost every record label is only available in standard CD Redbook, that's a pretty popular bandwagon. Then again, that's a decision made by people whose income depends on it not the audiophile backbencher kibitzers.

[sandyk]

Alex,

 

You think that 16/44 is not good enough?

Listened to your rip of sumiyaki coffee in 16/44 brilliant, far better than some hi-res I have.

If you hear a difference with the less is more business (less processing better mark up), I hear only good or bad mastering.

 

Hi Alfe

I agree that well recorded RB CD can sound very good indeed, but I still hear even better results with material such as Barry Diament's 24/192 recordings in comparison with the 16/44.1 versions from the comparison pages in the areas of depth of image and more precise localisation.. Although from different masters, some recordings such as the DVD-A of "Carly Simon -No Secrets" is infinitely better than the CD version in every respect. Many of these differences are unlikely to be heard through lesser equipment though, as in my own DIY preamps,DAC and Class A Power Amplifier, I use numerous low noise power supplies to also help achieve the highest possible channel separation (dual mono techniques for preamp and PA too) and signal to noise ratio. I believe that channel separation is far more important than previously accepted.

LP can sound great, but rarely are the instruments and voices "pin point" like they can be with the very best SS amplifiers and digital files..I also make sure that my amplification has a better than average square wave response beyond 20kHz. The typical measurement figures for SS amplification are unable to reveal why a device with good S/N and very low THD figures in the region of <.0005% can be further markedly improved in sound stage combined with a natural "sweetness" more like some valve amplifiers, when the front end differential pair devices are nigh on perfectly matched for their collector currents .This is with dual devices, or well bonded thermally transistors, with almost identical current gain and base to emitter voltage readings.

Current Mirror Discussion - Page 15 - diyAudio

Perhaps I should also mention that the PSU for the ripping device can also be adjusted to give slightly less HF detail, or even added HF presence which can sound a little fatiguing.(overblown soundstage)

Given what we presently know about digital audio, this does not seem possible, yet I have been able to consistently.demonstrate this to Martin Colloms and others, including an NYC member over 5 years ago.

Incidentally, about the time that my health took a nosedive, I was able to generate music files that sounded even better when played from system memory ,than those saved to Corsair Voyagers using an external low noise +5V supply and modified USB cable. This was by fitting an internal 128GB Samsung 840 SSD for music only,powered by a small PCB with a +12V to 5V regulator followed by a JLH PSU add-on for extremely low noise and very low impedance. The SSD also used a short SATA 3 6GB/S dual screened (internally) cable.

Kind Regards

Alex

[wgscott]

Digital Music: Can You Hear Above 16-bit/44.1kHz? - The Mac Observer

 

Here we go again, another computer journalist jumping on the low resolution is enough bandwagon.

 

Looked perfectly reasonable to me, and nuanced enough to treat the recording issue separately.

[wgscott]

Not only is Cookie Marenco an Audio engineer, and has better hearing than most of her male counterparts, she is leading the way with high resolution DSD recordings from Blue Coast Records.Likewise, Barry Diament is leading the way with his 24/192 high resolution recordings using only 2 wideband stereo microphones, and NO mixing or compression/limiting.

 

 

I guess this just shows to go you that you can be a talented audio engineer without having to know how a computer copies a data file without degrading it.

 

It is also a good illustration of why appeal to authority is not a great strategy for obtaining a correct answer to a question.

[trithio]

Not only is Cookie Marenco an Audio engineer, and has better hearing than most of her male counterparts, she is leading the way with high resolution DSD recordings from Blue Coast Records.Likewise, Barry Diament is leading the way with his 24/192 high resolution recordings using only 2 wideband stereo microphones, and NO mixing or compression/limiting.

 

In my book that is by definition a conflict of interests. Of course someone who is 'leading the DSD way' is going to say it is the best and audibly better and so on. Of course someone who sells 24/192 is going to advertise it as much as he can. Doesnt mean they are wrong. But surely doesnt mean they are right either. It just makes them good salesmen. And nothing more.

And I agree with wgscott above on those potentially hurtful authority games. And with the OP article.

But that's just my book.

[sandyk]

In my book that is by definition a conflict of interests. Of course someone who is 'leading the DSD way' is going to say it is the best and audibly better and so on. Of course someone who sells 24/192 is going to advertise it as much as he can. Doesnt mean they are wrong. But surely doesnt mean they are right either. It just makes them good salesmen. And nothing more.

And I agree with wgscott above on those potentially hurtful authority games. And with the OP article.

But that's just my book.

 

Exactly the kind of replies expected from both wgscott and yourself.

Many members here are voting with their wallets for high res, especially DSD 128. As usual, their reports are being dismissed by people like yourself based on out of date BS about 16/44.1 being all that is necessary for perfect music reproduction.

As for your dislike of appeals to authority, as it irks you so much ,tough. Get over it ! The people quoted know a lot more about their subjects than people like the "ill tempered audiophool" and some recent blow- in called Trithio (whoever he is in real life), and may , or may not have any claim to authority in such matters, or ANY subject.

I don't have any claim to authority, and simply report what I hear, using better than average gear, then have others confirm my reports before posting them in forums.

[regnaD kciN]

I, for one, dislike "appeals to authority" when the authority in question doesn't know what they're talking about. The notion that a "reconstituted FLAC" sounds different, even slightly, from the WAV from which it has been generated is pure fantasy-world thinking and can be easily disproved. If Ms. Mancuso thinks otherwise, let's see her identify a sound file, any sound file, where, if it compressed to FLAC and then decompressed ("reconstituted") back to WAV, one can run a compare utility on the two WAV files and find anything other than an exact match. I've tried it, and they match exactly every time. Or are we somehow supposed to believe that, although the two files are bit-identical, one will still sound different because the DAC somehow knows it's been "sullied" by having spent part of its existence as a FLAC? Seriously, this is the sort of thing that makes "audiophile," in the public's eye, synonymous with "credulous moron."

[trithio]

Exactly the kind of replies expected from both wgscott and yourself.

Many members here are voting with their wallets for high res, especially DSD 128. As usual, their reports are being dismissed by people like yourself based on out of date BS about 16/44.1 being all that is necessary for perfect music reproduction.

As for your dislike of appeals to authority, as it irks you so much ,tough. Get over it ! The people quoted know a lot more about their subjects than people like the "ill tempered audiophool" and some recent blow- in called Trithio (whoever he is in real life), and may , or may not have any claim to authority in such matters, or ANY subject.

I don't have any claim to authority, and simply report what I hear, using better than average gear, then have others confirm my reports before posting them in forums.

 

Oh my, you are a nasty one . Didnt my post clearly say that it was just _my_ personal opinion!?

I dont care much about other people's wallets and how they vote with them. It's their business. My wallet however does not vote for slick salesmen. Especially not the kind you mentioned above. That's my wallet's free opinion. Hope you will not rip my wallet off now or demand that I burn that pagan thing

[trithio]

I, for one, dislike "appeals to authority" when the authority in question doesn't know what they're talking about. The notion that a "reconstituted FLAC" sounds different, even slightly, from the WAV from which it has been generated is pure fantasy-world thinking and can be easily disproved. If Ms. Mancuso thinks otherwise, let's see her identify a sound file, any sound file, where, if it compressed to FLAC and then decompressed ("reconstituted") back to WAV, one can run a compare utility on the two WAV files and find anything other than an exact match. I've tried it, and they match exactly every time. Or are we somehow supposed to believe that, although the two files are bit-identical, one will still sound different because the DAC somehow knows it's been "sullied" by having spent part of its existence as a FLAC? Seriously, this is the sort of thing that makes "audiophile," in the public's eye, synonymous with "credulous moron."

 

+10

Ms Mancuso surely sounds like a lot of fun

[sbgk]

I, for one, dislike "appeals to authority" when the authority in question doesn't know what they're talking about. The notion that a "reconstituted FLAC" sounds different, even slightly, from the WAV from which it has been generated is pure fantasy-world thinking and can be easily disproved. If Ms. Mancuso thinks otherwise, let's see her identify a sound file, any sound file, where, if it compressed to FLAC and then decompressed ("reconstituted") back to WAV, one can run a compare utility on the two WAV files and find anything other than an exact match. I've tried it, and they match exactly every time. Or are we somehow supposed to believe that, although the two files are bit-identical, one will still sound different because the DAC somehow knows it's been "sullied" by having spent part of its existence as a FLAC? Seriously, this is the sort of thing that makes "audiophile," in the public's eye, synonymous with "credulous moron."

 

are audiophiles not part of the public and who are you to claim to know what the public thinks, such mock outrage reminds me of cult members who strive to differentiate themselves from non-believers.

[sandyk]

I, for one, dislike "appeals to authority" when the authority in question doesn't know what they're talking about. The notion that a "reconstituted FLAC" sounds different, even slightly, from the WAV from which it has been generated is pure fantasy-world thinking and can be easily disproved. If Ms. Mancuso thinks otherwise, let's see her identify a sound file, any sound file, where, if it compressed to FLAC and then decompressed ("reconstituted") back to WAV, one can run a compare utility on the two WAV files and find anything other than an exact match. I've tried it, and they match exactly every time. Or are we somehow supposed to believe that, although the two files are bit-identical, one will still sound different because the DAC somehow knows it's been "sullied" by having spent part of its existence as a FLAC? Seriously, this is the sort of thing that makes "audiophile," in the public's eye, synonymous with "credulous moron."

 

I, and many others are readily able to hear differences between high quality 24/96 .wav files converted to .flac, just as many others are able to hear differences between .wav files saved to different storage mediums but played from System memory. Furthermore, I can hear differences between self generated music .wav files with identical check sums stored on different media, and have had confirmation of those differences via comparison .wav files sent to HiFiCritic magazine, via a series of 6 separate Blind A/B/A 3 minute sessions. So stick that in your pipe and smoke it , Mr. Know-it-all !

 

Links to Comparison .wav file threads.

 

Audio Networking: A potpourri of computer network audio findings, including updates on the Naim UnitiServe, gigabit switches, CAT 5/6 cable and ripping issues. Review By Martin Colloms

 

 

Computer Audio deep thinking, not scoffing, required: different sounding rips - General HIFI Discussion - HIFICRITIC FORUM - HIFICRITIC FORUM : hi fi audio systems forum

Initial thread.19th August 2011

 

 

Re differences in audio file quality, HIFICRITIC investigates HDDand SSD sound quality - Page 2 - General HIFI Discussion - HIFICRITIC FORUM - HIFICRITIC FORUM : hi fi audio systems forum

See : Martin Colloms Post 30: Friday, 18 November 2011 10:36:42 AM

 

 

Kethel ripping results second session - General HIFI Discussion - HIFICRITIC FORUM - HIFICRITIC FORUM : hi fi audio systems forum 19/12/2012

http://www.hificritic.com/forum/default.aspx?g=posts&t=897 Originally

 

 

See replies 1 and 10

 

 

Re differences in audio file quality, HIFICRITIC investigates HDDand SSD sound quality - Page 4 - General HIFI Discussion - HIFICRITIC FORUM - HIFICRITIC FORUM : hi fi audio systems forum

See : Martin Colloms Post 68 Monday, 30 January 2012 3:13:48 PM

 

 

Problem when hocus-pocus works? - Page 5 - General HIFI Discussion - HIFICRITIC FORUM - HIFICRITIC FORUM : hi fi audio systems forum

Most recent. See replies 86 to 91

[alfe]

In my book that is by definition a conflict of interests. Of course someone who is 'leading the DSD way' is going to say it is the best and audibly better and so on. Of course someone who sells 24/192 is going to advertise it as much as he can. Doesnt mean they are wrong. But surely doesnt mean they are right either. It just makes them good salesmen. And nothing more.

And I agree with wgscott above on those potentially hurtful authority games. And with the OP article.

But that's just my book.

 

It's not a conflict of interests it's interest dot.

Look at the price:)

[sandyk]

Didnt my post clearly say that it was just _my_ personal opinion!?

This forum has become rife with your "personal opinions" recently.

In case you haven't noticed, this forum is Computer Audiophile"and is NOT affiliated with Hydrogen Audio, where Rule No.8 precludes Subjective Reports.

[trithio]

This forum has become rife with your "personal opinions" recently.

In case you haven't noticed, this forum is Computer Audiophile"and is NOT affiliated with Hydrogen Audio, where Rule No.8 precludes Subjective Reports.

 

I take it your opinions are non personal .

Anyway, I understand you have some health issues right now. Take care of that. And you may come back to beat trithio after that . And make subjective order on CA

[wgscott]

In fairness to trithio, you need to tell him (her?) about your idea that two files with the same md5sum or sha1 checksum played from the same equipment can sound different, so that he (she?) can get a full appreciation for what it is supposed to be like here.

[wgscott]

+10

Ms Mancuso surely sounds like a lot of fun

 

Alex enjoys misrepresenting other people's observations in an attempt to corroborate his fantasies about how bit-identical files sound different, so I'll give her the benefit of the doubt.

[kumakuma]

Alex enjoys misrepresenting other people's observations in an attempt to corroborate his fantasies about how bit-identical files sound different, so I'll give her the benefit of the doubt.

 

Bill, you are spoiling things. We need to let trithio experience Alex in all his glory for himself.

[sandyk]

In fairness to trithio, you need to tell him (her?) about your idea that two files with the same md5sum or sha1 checksum played from the same equipment can sound different, so that he (she?) can get a full appreciation for what it is supposed to be like here.

 

I would assume that Trithio is quite able to read my earlier reply in this thread, to work that out for his/her/it self.

I don't give a damn whether you and several others refuse to accept this or not.It's your loss, not mine.

Far more qualified members than yourself have already verified my findings, as well as various Sydney members including David L. (Audiophile Neuroscience") who has been present at 3 Sydney listening sessions, and dared to report the results in the forum what he heard for himself at a couple of different locations using different gear, but using the same comparison files on both CD-R and Corsair Voyagers. Not only did David L hear the differences directly from a demo CD-R with identical content to the comparison CD-Rs previously sent to The Bronx, but also from the Corsair Voyager via PC/ Laptop.

The results from the directly played CD-R ruled out the PC/laptop in use as a cause of the differences.

As a result of one of these sessions , David asked me if I could build an external +5V Linear PSU with a modified USB cable for use with his external music HDD. I was happy to oblige. The results were posted elsewhere in the forum by David .

[elcorso]

Don't worry Alex, now the Mac Observer is the new music authority...?

 

Still based on "theorems"...!

 

Please remember that we are immune to Kryptonite... The new name is Trithionite?

 

This is like the Ebola malady, sometimes seems to be extinguished, but always new shoots appear.

 

Cheers!

 

Roch

[sandyk]

The new name is Trithionite?

 

Perhaps Doubly Blind Trithion is more appropriate?