Popular Post Ralf11 Posted April 25, 2017 Popular Post Share Posted April 25, 2017 and then, there was this study... Meyer, E. B. and D. R. Moran. 2007. Audibility of a CD-Standard A/DA/A Loop Inserted into High-Resolution Audio Playback. JAES 55(9): 775-779. Abstract: Claims both published and anecdotal are regularly made for audibly superior sound quality for two-channel audio encoded with longer word lengths and/or at higher sampling rates than the 16-bit/44.1-kHz CD standard. The authors report on a series of double-blind tests comparing the analog output of high-resolution players playing high-resolution recordings with the same signal passed through a 16-bit/44.1-kHz “bottleneck.” The tests were conducted for over a year using different systems and a variety of subjects. The systems included expensive professional monitors and one high-end system with electrostatic loudspeakers and expensive components and cables. The subjects included professional recording engineers, students in a university recording program, and dedicated audiophiles. The test results show that the CD-quality A/D/A loop was undetectable at normal-to-loud listening levels, by any of the subjects, on any of the playback systems. The noise of the CD-quality loop was audible only at very elevated levels. tmtomh and hvbias 2 Link to comment
Ralf11 Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 The real question is what led to the mis-apprehension as to DR. Maybe it was some confusion about bit depth(?) Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now