AVS/AIX High-Resolution Audio Test: Ready, Set, Go! - Page 6 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 35Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #151 of 215 Old 08-13-2014, 12:33 PM
Senior Member
 
hawkster27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 207
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by m. zillch View Post
For all we know low bass distortion is what really counts and in that regard your speakers trounce most people here who have speakers that go to +30kHz.
Interesting. My Klipsch RSW 12 sub [22-120Hz (+-)3dB] helps as well.
hawkster27 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #152 of 215 Old 08-13-2014, 01:00 PM
Senior Member
 
HowardV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Los Angeles, California
Posts: 452
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 25 Post(s)
Liked: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by southleft View Post
The diagram showing the receommended component chain shows the PC's output connected to the DAC using a USB cable. Why not use the Optical digital output found on many home computers? Or, for that matter, why not use the HDMI-out if it's available?
Optical has limited bandwidth. HDMI can introduce jitter. An asynchronous USB connection is usually considered optimal.
amirm likes this.

Oppo BDP-105 Blu-Ray
Spectron Premiere MKII 7 Channel Class D Amp (500w x 7)
2 Anthony Gallo Reference SA Amps
5 Anthony Gallo Reference 3.5 Speakers
Sunfire Super JR Subwoofer
Sony Z2 Series laptop as dedicated HTPC
HowardV is offline  
post #153 of 215 Old 08-13-2014, 01:27 PM
AVS Special Member
 
m. zillch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,009
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 135 Post(s)
Liked: 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkster27 View Post
If a reasonably capable system such as mine isn't up to the task, what kind of reaslistic audience is there for HD in a world of soundbars and mp3 playback via smartphone? A few hundred one-percenters who can afford the gear and a professionally calibrated playback room?
Plus think of how limited their offerings are. Sorry I don't have any more recent data than this, but here:

"And by 2007, over 200 billion CDs had been sold. So how does that measure up to other formats?
  • 99.7% CD 16 bit 44.1 khz 3 million titles
  • 0.2% SACD DSD 1 bit High Resolution 6500 titles (mostly classical/jazz)
  • 0.06% DVD-Audio Up To 24 bit 192 Khz 1800 titles (mostly classical/jazz)
  • 0.03% Hi-Res Downloads 24 bit 88/96 Khz 1000? (mostly classical/jazz)
So, 99.7% of the digital music commonly available is 16 bit 44 khz CD quality audio (or compressed versions of the same). If your goal is to listen to music, rather than equipment, there’s essentially only one native format right now as nothing else has really caught on."

http://nwavguy.blogspot.com/2011/07/...-so-1980s.html

Of course things may change once people realize the fantastic, night and day difference they are missing out on, which drives the market to produce more hi-res stuff.
tubetwister likes this.
m. zillch is offline  
post #154 of 215 Old 08-13-2014, 05:39 PM
Senior Member
 
granroth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Gilbert, AZ
Posts: 396
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Liked: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by m. zillch View Post
Of course things may change once people realize the fantastic, night and day difference they are missing out on, which drives the market to produce more hi-res stuff.
Which can't happen, since the market simply won't be exposed to high-res music. What they will be exposed to is music that is labeled high-res, but isn't.

The problem is that the powers that be have decided that high-res music can come from one of four sources: MQ-P (PCM 48Khz/20bit or higher), MQ-A (Analog), MQ-C (CD quality), or MQ-D (DSD). Oops... two of those are absolutely not high-res by any stretch of the imagination (Analog and CD) and one is controversial (DSD). Of the four master sources, only one is unquestionably high-res - MQ-P.

How many records have MQ-P sources? Relatively very few. But since Pono is pushing Omifone as their provider of high-res music, and Ominifone is mis-labeling nearly all of their tracks as high-res (when they clearly aren't), the vast majority of people will be getting CD-quality or worse audio and think it's high-res.

So all this is doomed to failure from the start. Even IF the masses had components capable of reproducing high-res tracks (almost nobody does) and IF the masses had ears and critical listening abilities to determine the differences between high-res and not (the vast majority cannot) then they'd still be out of luck since nearly all of the music marketed as high-res won't be.

I think this'll have the same overwhelming market success that DVD-A and SACD had.
RealAfrica and tubetwister like this.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
granroth is offline  
post #155 of 215 Old 08-13-2014, 05:58 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,083
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 755 Post(s)
Liked: 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by granroth View Post
I think this'll have the same overwhelming market success that DVD-A and SACD had.
I don't think at all this is the case. The market for music servers and DACs is booming. People want to have content that feeds higher sampling rates/bit depths to these boxes. Everything I see points to growth of the hardware and software here. And there is no format war. And no copy protection. Both of which were deadly factors in demise of DVD-A and SACD.

Here is the other important factor. Trend has already started where music is going directly to iTunes/Amazon in compressed only format. No CD. I run into one title this way per week. And naturally so because this is the state of business:



The CD has that 31% share and digital distortion which is 99.99% is lossy compressed, is 64%. I suspect this year's number shows even more decline in CD's share, fueling the reduction of titles on CD. I mean think about it. If you are a new pop artist, do you really want to bother having CDs made instead of submitting your digital files to the services?

Our only hope for uncompressed music longer term is through this "high-resolution" download sites. It matters not whether you think you can hear the difference in high-res or not. You better be on your knees praying that these guys don't go away. Because if they do, you will be stuck with 256 kbps MP3/AAC.

I think the people who are pouring cold water over these formats are doing a huge disservice to audiophiles. Their negative spin will reduce the potential market share and clout we need to have all of our favorite music be available in uncompressed formats. They have their heads in the sand thinking CD will continue as a format.

Our future as audiophiles is being sacrificed for the sake of some 10 year old argument against SACD/DVD-A they are still having long after its time has come and gone.

BTW, I am writing this to the general membership and not just you . I hope everyone reading this starts looking at these services and see if they can support them. Remember, you get your music right away without having wait for the CD. There is nothing to rip. And sites like bandcamp.com are super supportive of the talent that created the music for you and offer pretty low cost music. I was looking for a track from Daughter and it was not on CD but was available as 44/16 flac file. Boy was I happy to find it that way.
RealAfrica likes this.

Amir
Founder,
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

"Insist on Quality Engineering"

amirm is offline  
post #156 of 215 Old 08-13-2014, 06:01 PM
Advanced Member
 
RayDunzl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 900
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 294 Post(s)
Liked: 291
And can I buy a used hi-res album for $0.01 plus S&H?
hawkster27 likes this.

I'll be back later...



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
> digits >
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
>
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
>
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
>
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
and
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
>
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
RayDunzl is online now  
post #157 of 215 Old 08-13-2014, 06:09 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,083
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 755 Post(s)
Liked: 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by m. zillch View Post
Plus think of how limited their offerings are. Sorry I don't have any more recent data than this, but here:

"And by 2007, over 200 billion CDs had been sold. So how does that measure up to other formats?
  • 99.7% CD 16 bit 44.1 khz 3 million titles
  • 0.2% SACD DSD 1 bit High Resolution 6500 titles (mostly classical/jazz)
  • 0.06% DVD-Audio Up To 24 bit 192 Khz 1800 titles (mostly classical/jazz)
  • 0.03% Hi-Res Downloads 24 bit 88/96 Khz 1000? (mostly classical/jazz)
So, 99.7% of the digital music commonly available is 16 bit 44 khz CD quality audio (or compressed versions of the same). If your goal is to listen to music, rather than equipment, there’s essentially only one native format right now as nothing else has really caught on."

http://nwavguy.blogspot.com/2011/07/...-so-1980s.html

Of course things may change once people realize the fantastic, night and day difference they are missing out on, which drives the market to produce more hi-res stuff.
This is the kind of negative propaganda that needs to stop. 2007 stats? And the percentages being of the number of titles? Really? In 2007 music giants had already gone bust so there was no high-res market. HD Tracks didn't start until 2008. So the guy gives stats as of 2007? Who would in 2013 when he wrote his blog would see fit to quote 2007 numbers? And who now thinks it is proper to show that 7 years later when the highest grown has occurred in digital distribution?

Instead of being a proponent of fidelity so many of you are here to argue against it. "or compression version of the same" in parentheses? It wasn't worth considering that those compressed versions is what is going to win over per my previous post?

We need a transition to digital distribution for equal or better fidelity than CD. We need to all be behind this mission. If you are not, then you are not an audiophile. The masses that don't care about fidelity are getting their content in digital format. You want us to stand there empty handed?
RealAfrica likes this.

Amir
Founder,
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

"Insist on Quality Engineering"

amirm is offline  
post #158 of 215 Old 08-13-2014, 06:11 PM
Advanced Member
 
RayDunzl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 900
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 294 Post(s)
Liked: 291
I like discs.

That makes me an outcast now?

--

ps:

I bought seven titles today. Some new, some used. All on disc.

At least one of the new ones offer an instant download as a bonus. I guess they will save it for me on Cloud 9, anyway, I have no use for it.

--

pps:

I do like www.dimeadozen.org for ROIO

When download something that I really like a lot, guess what? I burn it to a disc.

I'll be back later...



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
> digits >
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
>
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
>
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
>
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
and
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
>
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Last edited by RayDunzl; 08-13-2014 at 06:22 PM.
RayDunzl is online now  
post #159 of 215 Old 08-13-2014, 06:30 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,083
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 755 Post(s)
Liked: 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by RayDunzl View Post
I like discs.
I do too but as I said, over time you won't be in a position to buy them. Every format that has taken off like compressed digital distribution has led to demise or niche status of the previous mass market. CD is that previous mass market.

Quote:
That makes me an outcast now?
No. My concern is with people who fight high resolution distribution without the ability to show one ounce of benefit to any of us.

Quote:
I bought seven titles today. Some new, some used. All on disc.
I bought almost as many in the last week and ran into one album that yet again was not available in CD but was in MP3.

Quote:
At least one of the new ones offer an instant download as a bonus. I guess they will save it for me on Cloud 9, anyway, I have no use for it.
Amazon offers these for free which I use with their player on my phone for music in the car. No longer do I have to rip and transfer files. Or bother to have lossy versions of the same.

Amir
Founder,
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

"Insist on Quality Engineering"

amirm is offline  
post #160 of 215 Old 08-13-2014, 07:40 PM
AVS Special Member
 
m. zillch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,009
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 135 Post(s)
Liked: 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by RayDunzl View Post
I like discs.

That makes me an outcast now?
I feel the same way. I think it has to do with being around when most of these mediums were first released. They seem like familiar old friends.

In A/V reproduction accuracy, there is no concept of "accounting for taste". We don't "pick" the level of bass any more than we get to pick the ending of a play. High fidelity is an unbiased, neutral, exact copy (or "reproduction") of the original source's tonal balance, timing, dynamics, etc..

m. zillch is offline  
post #161 of 215 Old 08-13-2014, 07:48 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,083
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 755 Post(s)
Liked: 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by RayDunzl View Post
And can I buy a used hi-res album for $0.01 plus S&H?
Who would want to have a CD that has been listened to? It is like getting a stamp that someone else has licked already.

One day you won't be able to buy the CD of a music you heard used or new. But shipping will be free for that MP3.

Amir
Founder,
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

"Insist on Quality Engineering"

amirm is offline  
post #162 of 215 Old 08-13-2014, 09:08 PM
Senior Member
 
HowardV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Los Angeles, California
Posts: 452
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 25 Post(s)
Liked: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by RayDunzl View Post
I like discs.

That makes me an outcast now?
I absolutely hate discs. Bought the Tom Petty "Damn the Torpedoes" Blu-Ray. Want to listen to one song? You better not mind waiting 5 minutes or more. Blu-Rays are slow to load in general. Then there is the mandatory FBI warning for a minute. Then every studio that was involved needs 30 seconds (each!) to display their banner. Then get to the menu system, figure out which button on your remote will pull up the right menu, go to the song you want, and now you can finally play your track.

I'd rather pull out the album, clean the record, and cue up the needle! Ok, not really. That's only two channel and the Blu-Ray is an awesome multi-channel recording.

Then I got the Bob Marley Blu-Ray (Legend). That one pulls up quickly (no FBI warning or Studio banners). The problem is the inconsistency. And more bands are coming out on Blu-Ray since you don't need a dedicated SACD or DVD-A player to get the high resolution audio.

I rip everything to my file server and then put the disc away. I even got an old PS3 to rip SACD's. So much more convenient. Instant access to every track. Play random or shuffle. Create playlists quickly. I really wonder why anyone still prefers the disc.
amirm and RealAfrica like this.

Oppo BDP-105 Blu-Ray
Spectron Premiere MKII 7 Channel Class D Amp (500w x 7)
2 Anthony Gallo Reference SA Amps
5 Anthony Gallo Reference 3.5 Speakers
Sunfire Super JR Subwoofer
Sony Z2 Series laptop as dedicated HTPC
HowardV is offline  
post #163 of 215 Old 08-13-2014, 09:11 PM
Senior Member
 
HowardV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Los Angeles, California
Posts: 452
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 25 Post(s)
Liked: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
Who would want to have a CD that has been listened to? It is like getting a stamp that someone else has licked already.

One day you won't be able to buy the CD of a music you heard used or new. But shipping will be free for that MP3.
You just gave me an idea! I can start selling my music files. Over and over and over and over again! WooHoo....I'll be rich!

Oppo BDP-105 Blu-Ray
Spectron Premiere MKII 7 Channel Class D Amp (500w x 7)
2 Anthony Gallo Reference SA Amps
5 Anthony Gallo Reference 3.5 Speakers
Sunfire Super JR Subwoofer
Sony Z2 Series laptop as dedicated HTPC
HowardV is offline  
post #164 of 215 Old 08-14-2014, 09:29 AM
Member
 
RealAfrica's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 24
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 11
You say:
3. Very few consumer systems are capable of reproducing frequencies above 20 kHz and a dynamic range greater than 93 dB, so trying to compare a real high-res recording with a CD-quality version of the same material on such a system is pointless. There will be no acoustic difference between the two files (other than perhaps some distortion if the level of the 24/96 content exceeds 93 dB), so there is no possibility of a perceptible difference between them.

I disagree. I say there is possibility of a perceptible difference between them. What my ears tell me, on systems with a 24bit/96kHz soundcard, but with speakers limited in frequency response to only 22kHz, is that real 24bit/96kHz material sounds better than redbook of the same source mastering.

Try listening to some of the Stockfisch albums released as CD, SACD and Vinyl from the very same live to disc / live to DSD workstation recordings with the CD produced from the DSD. Please use such material for your tests.
RealAfrica is offline  
post #165 of 215 Old 08-14-2014, 09:47 AM
Member
 
RealAfrica's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 24
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by HowardV View Post
Optical has limited bandwidth. HDMI can introduce jitter. An asynchronous USB connection is usually considered optimal.
You are forgetting analogue connections. My 2 PCs both have all analogue outs from the 24bit/192 or 96kHz soundcards to the receiver/amp..
RealAfrica is offline  
post #166 of 215 Old 08-14-2014, 04:57 PM
Member
 
jimmyjames8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 65
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 10
what he said

Quote:
Originally Posted by RealAfrica View Post
You say:
3. Very few consumer systems are capable of reproducing frequencies above 20 kHz and a dynamic range greater than 93 dB, so trying to compare a real high-res recording with a CD-quality version of the same material on such a system is pointless. There will be no acoustic difference between the two files (other than perhaps some distortion if the level of the 24/96 content exceeds 93 dB), so there is no possibility of a perceptible difference between them.

I disagree. I say there is possibility of a perceptible difference between them. What my ears tell me, on systems with a 24bit/96kHz soundcard, but with speakers limited in frequency response to only 22kHz, is that real 24bit/96kHz material sounds better than redbook of the same source mastering.

Try listening to some of the Stockfisch albums released as CD, SACD and Vinyl from the very same live to disc / live to DSD workstation recordings with the CD produced from the DSD. Please use such material for your tests.
As I have come to find out, based on specifications of my eqpt. And according to theories and or conclusions by the OP, I should not be able to hear a difference between, cd, dvda, sacd, etc. My experience has been that 24/96, 24/192 and sacd sound clearly superior to 16/44 on my( non HRA)system. Also, since this experiment i have done some research on high end components and very few preamps, amps and speakers have published specs in excess of 22khz. So based on all if this why does AIX and HDtracks, etc. Even bother? Are we all schmucks?
jimmyjames8 is offline  
post #167 of 215 Old 08-14-2014, 05:25 PM
Newbie
 
kelpf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 4
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
RE: AVS/AIX HRA Test

Scott:

Thanks for your troubles to promote an unbiased hi/regular def comparison. This is to present the system for qualification: Much of my system is handmade. I believe the limitations are in the amplification chain: Jeff Rowland Synergy preamp, and Bryston 7B ST power amps (used for the ribbons only). Being feedback transistor amps, they have a high frequency pole truncating the bandwidth around 150 kHz. The tube amp rolls off sooner and is more distorted, but still pleasant at times. The speakers, stereo only, are now quad-amplified as the sub-sub is flat to 5Hz, following a design of Nelson Pass. As far as dynamic range on the quiet end, the audio room has been paneled recently and almost completely with many 4x8 foot panels of Eco-Core. As the peaks vary around 120 dB, but actually is rarely played there, I just do not know how quiet it is on the quiet end to get the 93 dB desired, having never measured it. At the low end it is off my sound meter, 126 dB, so it is estimated in Richter units from unrelated personal encounters at epicenters. A description of the system was presented here (before the acoustic room Tx.

http://blog.audiogon.com/2012/10/05/...r-2012-kellyp/

The D/A converter is an RME Babyface which resamples everything to 192 kHz so that is convenient now in real time. Recently I reduced the USB power problems with a USB power from Teddy Pardo, along with recabling all AC power to the equipment, including wall outlets, etc. A power regenerator from PS audio helped out the preamp greatly. There is not much left of the original Marchand Crossover as it has been highly modified. Jung regulators are being made for the line stages and MM amplifier.

I’ll listen to your files tonight and PM the findings. I think I’ll just sit back and see which files are more enjoyable. Who knows?

Kelly
kelpf is offline  
post #168 of 215 Old 08-14-2014, 05:40 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,083
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 755 Post(s)
Liked: 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmyjames8 View Post
As I have come to find out, based on specifications of my eqpt. And according to theories and or conclusions by the OP, I should not be able to hear a difference between, cd, dvda, sacd, etc. My experience has been that 24/96, 24/192 and sacd sound clearly superior to 16/44 on my( non HRA)system. Also, since this experiment i have done some research on high end components and very few preamps, amps and speakers have published specs in excess of 22khz. So based on all if this why does AIX and HDtracks, etc. Even bother? Are we all schmucks?
I think you are misreading the published specs. Here is an example Yamaha AVR:

(20Hz to 20kHz)MAIN IN, MAIN = 0+/-0.2dB CD etc, MAIN = 0+/-0.5dB

That is not saying that the amplifier can't go beyond 20 Khz. It says that within that range, its response does not change by more than -.5 db.

Here is a Yamaha AVR's pre-amp frequency response:



As you see, it goes to 200 Khz. Likewise here is its power amp frequency response:



The amplifier is definitely not limited to 20 Khz.

Speakers are typically quantified to 20-30 Khz. Their response/resonances can get wild at the high end.

Answering your question, why not get the original copy instead of the filtered one? You can always filter the files to 16/44.1 if you wanted. But if all you got was 16/44.1, you can't go back to the higher resolution file.

Speaking of resolution, frequency response is one axis. Bit depth, i.e. 16 vs 24, is another. While low-end systems probably struggle to produce clean 16 bit outputs, it doesn't cost much to get response that approaches 24 bits.

Amir
Founder,
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

"Insist on Quality Engineering"

amirm is offline  
post #169 of 215 Old 08-14-2014, 06:05 PM
Senior Member
 
granroth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Gilbert, AZ
Posts: 396
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Liked: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
Our only hope for uncompressed music longer term is through this "high-resolution" download sites. It matters not whether you think you can hear the difference in high-res or not. You better be on your knees praying that these guys don't go away. Because if they do, you will be stuck with 256 kbps MP3/AAC.

I think the people who are pouring cold water over these formats are doing a huge disservice to audiophiles. Their negative spin will reduce the potential market share and clout we need to have all of our favorite music be available in uncompressed formats. They have their heads in the sand thinking CD will continue as a format.

Our future as audiophiles is being sacrificed for the sake of some 10 year old argument against SACD/DVD-A they are still having long after its time has come and gone.

BTW, I am writing this to the general membership and not just you . I hope everyone reading this starts looking at these services and see if they can support them. Remember, you get your music right away without having wait for the CD. There is nothing to rip. And sites like bandcamp.com are super supportive of the talent that created the music for you and offer pretty low cost music. I was looking for a track from Daughter and it was not on CD but was available as 44/16 flac file. Boy was I happy to find it that way.
I hope you are right, I really do. I just don't see it. The future will indeed be fully digital and download-only, but it's going to take a substantial reason for people to switch over to and PAY MORE FOR uncompressed high-res tracks.

So what's going to happen? High-res is all the buzz now so a lot of people are looking forward to it. They haven't heard it before but keep hearing how wonderful it is and how much better it sounds than "regular" music. It's like the Pono Kickstarter video where Neil Young had all those celebrities talking about how they never heard music sound that great outside of a studio. Wow, so awesome.

So then their favorite albums finally become available in a high-res uncompressed format and they learn that they'll have to buy it AGAIN and at twice the cost of normal MP3s. Well, it'll sound so much better than their mp3s, though... right? Oops -- it doesn't. To almost everybody listening to those tracks, they will be indistinguishable from the MP3s or AACs that they previously bought -- which already sound as good as CD to them.

Is that person going to upgrade their system to handle high-res? Or even buy another track at twice the price? I doubt it. The value proposition simply isn't there.

The deck is stacked against them. The album they bought almost surely won't be true high-res in the first place (probably MQ-A) so they're not even hearing what is possible... and it would do no good if they did get true high-res, because very few systems can properly reproduce it... and even if their system accidentally can handle it, most people wouldn't be able to hear the difference anyway since multiple studies done over the years have shown that most people can't even tell the difference between low rate and high rate MP3s much less uncompressed much less high-res!

The only way I see uncompressed tracks becoming the norm is if the major players (iTunes and Amazon, mostly) replace their catalogs with uncompressed versions at the same price. I don't ever see high-res becoming anything more than a niche market.

Again, I wish that wasn't the case. I rip all of my CDs into FLAC (and Apple Lossless for awhile) and have wished for the ability to download any song in FLAC for years. Alas.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
granroth is offline  
post #170 of 215 Old 08-14-2014, 06:57 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,083
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 755 Post(s)
Liked: 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by granroth View Post
I hope you are right, I really do. I just don't see it. The future will indeed be fully digital and download-only, but it's going to take a substantial reason for people to switch over to and PAY MORE FOR uncompressed high-res tracks.
I easily pay more for CD vs MP3 on amazon. And if CD went away, I would do the same with the high-res downloads.

Quote:
So what's going to happen? High-res is all the buzz now so a lot of people are looking forward to it. They haven't heard it before but keep hearing how wonderful it is and how much better it sounds than "regular" music.
Oh, I see a ton of actual purchases and interest in high-resolution audio. Not here much because we have pushed out just about anyone who would care one way or the other. But go to WBF Forum and you will see a ton of discussion and reviews on high-res titles they buy. There is a sticky on all the sites offering high-res downloads. And lots and lots of posts/threads on various titles. Bruce Brown is there with his own subforum. He does a lot of mastering for high-res content so provides pretty deep knowledge of what is what.

Quote:
It's like the Pono Kickstarter video where Neil Young had all those celebrities talking about how they never heard music sound that great outside of a studio. Wow, so awesome.
Agree that is a bunch of nonsense.

Quote:
So then their favorite albums finally become available in a high-res uncompressed format and they learn that they'll have to buy it AGAIN and at twice the cost of normal MP3s. Well, it'll sound so much better than their mp3s, though... right? Oops -- it doesn't. To almost everybody listening to those tracks, they will be indistinguishable from the MP3s or AACs that they previously bought -- which already sound as good as CD to them.
If you mean mass market, sure. But not people with good ears and critical listening abilities. Here is me passing the test of 320 kbps MP3 which is higher fidelity than the 256 offered by stores:

foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.3.2
2014/07/19 19:45:33

File A: C:\Users\Amir\Music\Arnys Filter Test\keys jangling 16 44.wav
File B: C:\Users\Amir\Music\Arnys Filter Test\keys jangling 16 44_01.mp3

19:45:33 : Test started.
19:46:21 : 01/01 50.0%
19:46:35 : 02/02 25.0%
19:46:49 : 02/03 50.0%
19:47:03 : 03/04 31.3%
19:47:13 : 04/05 18.8%
19:47:27 : 05/06 10.9%
19:47:38 : 06/07 6.3%
19:47:46 : 07/08 3.5%
19:48:01 : 08/09 2.0%
19:48:19 : 09/10 1.1%
19:48:31 : 10/11 0.6%
19:48:45 : 11/12 0.3%
19:48:58 : 12/13 0.2%
19:49:11 : 13/14 0.1%
19:49:28 : 14/15 0.0%
19:49:52 : 15/16 0.0%
19:49:56 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 15/16 (0.0%)


And Scott/Mark file:

foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.3.2
2014/07/31 15:18:41

File A: C:\Users\Amir\Music\AIX AVS Test files\On_The_Street_Where_You_Live_A2.mp3
File B: C:\Users\Amir\Music\AIX AVS Test files\On_The_Street_Where_You_Live_A2.wav

15:18:41 : Test started.
15:19:18 : 01/01 50.0%
15:19:30 : 01/02 75.0%
15:19:44 : 01/03 87.5%
15:20:35 : 02/04 68.8%
15:20:46 : 02/05 81.3%
15:21:39 : 03/06 65.6%
15:21:47 : 04/07 50.0%
15:21:54 : 04/08 63.7%
15:22:06 : 05/09 50.0%
15:22:19 : 06/10 37.7%
15:22:31 : 07/11 27.4%
15:22:44 : 08/12 19.4%
15:22:51 : 09/13 13.3%
15:22:58 : 10/14 9.0%
15:23:06 : 11/15 5.9%
15:23:14 : 12/16 3.8%
15:23:23 : 13/17 2.5%
15:23:33 : 14/18 1.5%
15:23:42 : 15/19 1.0%
15:23:54 : 16/20 0.6%
15:24:06 : 17/21 0.4%
15:24:15 : 18/22 0.2%
15:24:23 : 19/23 0.1%
15:24:34 : 20/24 0.1%
15:24:43 : 21/25 0.0%
15:24:52 : 22/26 0.0%
15:24:57 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 22/26 (0.0%)


Quote:
Is that person going to upgrade their system to handle high-res? Or even buy another track at twice the price? I doubt it. The value proposition simply isn't there.
If you bought a quality system, there is nothing to upgrade. I did all of the above using my laptop and headphone out.

Quote:
The deck is stacked against them. The album they bought almost surely won't be true high-res in the first place (probably MQ-A) so they're not even hearing what is possible... and it would do no good if they did get true high-res, because very few systems can properly reproduce it... and even if their system accidentally can handle it, most people wouldn't be able to hear the difference anyway since multiple studies done over the years have shown that most people can't even tell the difference between low rate and high rate MP3s much less uncompressed much less high-res!
This is a very pessimistic view of the world. The glass half full version is that the high-res file is not as much subject of loudness wars by the talent since they don't care about the high-res download.

Quote:
The only way I see uncompressed tracks becoming the norm is if the major players (iTunes and Amazon, mostly) replace their catalogs with uncompressed versions at the same price. I don't ever see high-res becoming anything more than a niche market.
The majors are not likely to go there. Their revenue will not increase beyond roundoff error to cater to you and I. And we don't need the market be bigger than niche. We only need to see the catalog keep expanding as it is now. And for us to buy enough music from the service to remain profitable and grow.

Quote:
Again, I wish that wasn't the case. I rip all of my CDs into FLAC (and Apple Lossless for awhile) and have wished for the ability to download any song in FLAC for years. Alas.
Appreciate you are one of the good guys . I have been part of the digital music landscape since it began. I hope you believe me when I say it is a remarkable development that services like HD Tracks exist and keep growing. And to see the proliferation of music servers and high quality DACs. All of that is creating a meaningful market. It is not nearly enough today. But we still have the CD. By the time CD starts to collapse, I am hoping the HD catalog will encompass enough music to keep us satisfied.

As I have said, it is essential that we don't keep putting down these efforts. No one is harmed whatsoever if these services thrive. But many of us are harmed if we keep putting a negative spins on it. We are fortunately that we have started to shut down all these claims of "impossibility" when it comes to passing ABX tests. The rest I think will be easier from here on.

Amir
Founder,
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

"Insist on Quality Engineering"

amirm is offline  
post #171 of 215 Old 08-14-2014, 07:59 PM
Newbie
 
kelpf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 4
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
OK. They are close but there are some places in each, isn’t that true with music anyway. Levels were up to 90 dB, so I doubt I got that 93 dB dynamic range thing going. I don’t use audiophile buzz words. It’s either there or it’s not.

“Just My Imagination” – both sounded so close, it is not really a definitive type of music or instrument to tell. I liked ver A2 personally, but B2 had more bite and pressure on the ears. Kind of irritating, also my least favorite song. Great soundstage though. A2 is tube-like, B2 is wide bandwidth, solid state. Sometimes tubes are better (if they’re not high speed and you don’t mind the distortion).

“Mosaic”. Great tune. Percussions give this one away, very clean the Ver B2 in the chimes and tiny cymbal harmonics, refreshing. Chimes so natural. Ver A2 sounded like I was listening to music, the harmonics are harsh, edgy; B2 sounds like the instruments, much smoother, less fatiguing, I felt myself enjoying it more. Otherwise the guitar is exactly the same to me on either one. On any of them I didn’t notice any difference in the dynamics.

“On the Street Where You Live”. Here is a song you can really concentrate on his voice. You can just visualize a lot as he is so close to the mic, on my system his mouth is 18 inches tall and you can stare right into it. ver A2 has such great voice harmonics, ver B2 is softer. The horns have less bite, but A2 is not irritating like the instruments in the first “imagination” song. There is a strange noise at the very end, some kind of recording noise which sounds completely different on each, interesting, but doesn’t mean anything, it is just there. This is one of those songs that really needs to come out as I could start to, but not really, feel what he was trying to convey. So both versions are still sonically obscure in the emotional respect, you can tell there is something there that some difference in the recording chain might reveal. I like to play vocals that create and inspire such a grip and convey so much intention that my guests become uneasy and are very moved.

Then I had my GF have a listen as she accompanies me to audio shows around the country. She picked up just about the same things, but a little faster than me. I think girls have better hearing anyway. So we then kept putting tunes on for a few hours. It was fun. Keep going.
kelpf is offline  
post #172 of 215 Old 08-14-2014, 08:00 PM
Newbie
 
kelpf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 4
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
BTW in my first post I meant MC not MM, just duh there.
kelpf is offline  
post #173 of 215 Old 08-14-2014, 08:14 PM
Senior Member
 
hawkster27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 207
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmyjames8 View Post
As I have come to find out, based on specifications of my eqpt. And according to theories and or conclusions by the OP, I should not be able to hear a difference between, cd, dvda, sacd, etc. My experience has been that 24/96, 24/192 and sacd sound clearly superior to 16/44 on my( non HRA)system. Also, since this experiment i have done some research on high end components and very few preamps, amps and speakers have published specs in excess of 22khz. So based on all if this why does AIX and HDtracks, etc. Even bother? Are we all schmucks?
I don't understand. Can you clarify this post?

according to theories and or conclusions by the OP > I don't think the OP has presented any theories or conclusions yet.

My experience has been that 24/96, 24/192 and sacd sound clearly superior to 16/44 on my( non HRA)system. So based on all if this why does AIX and HDtracks, etc. Even bother? > I guess for folks like you that hear clearly superior sound. (Personally, I don't.)

( non HRA)system > I'm not familiar with this acronym.
hawkster27 is offline  
post #174 of 215 Old 08-14-2014, 08:41 PM
Senior Member
 
hawkster27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 207
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by granroth View Post
The only way I see uncompressed tracks becoming the norm is if the major players (iTunes and Amazon, mostly) replace their catalogs with uncompressed versions at the same price. I don't ever see high-res becoming anything more than a niche market.

Again, I wish that wasn't the case. I rip all of my CDs into FLAC (and Apple Lossless for awhile) and have wished for the ability to download any song in FLAC for years. Alas.
Amen to that, brother. About a year ago I sent an email to HD Tracks to say that I thought their business model was flawed. Charging double for what a CD of the same material would cost? Even though your overhead is much less? That worked 30 years ago for CDs vs LPs, but after 99-cent MP3s that aint' gonna happen again. There was no response from HD Tracks, of course.

BTW, kudos to Scott, et. al. for this experiment. I only identified one of the three tracks correctly as the HD version. ( I was sure those other two tracks were more open, more ambient, more realistic, more blah, blah, blah.) So, buh-bye to HD Tracks, Pono, and all of their ilk. If I can't hear the difference, there's no reason to pay for the difference.
hawkster27 is offline  
post #175 of 215 Old 08-15-2014, 02:19 PM
AVS Special Member
 
m. zillch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,009
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 135 Post(s)
Liked: 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkster27 View Post
I only identified one of the three tracks correctly as the HD version. ( I was sure those other two tracks were more open, more ambient, more realistic, more blah, blah, blah.) So, buh-bye to HD Tracks, Pono, and all of their ilk. If I can't hear the difference, there's no reason to pay for the difference.
Well maybe you just need to:

-buy more expensive gear
-invest in extensive room treatments to increase your environmental resolution
-go through professional, expert listener training sessions
-buy the right tracks where it actually makes a difference
-verify that the difference isn't due to a small level difference or a timing error [I hear that happens]
-verify that the difference isn't due to the use of a different master or mastering process compared to the non Hi-res version you need to also buy to keep around as a reference...

and then it will be worth it!

I mean come on, you don't want to admit you can't tell the difference between a $25 steak and a $50 steak when others claim they can, do you? I mean that's like twice the difference, for Pete's sake, and as we all know more expensive things are always, by definition, discernibly better, right?
RichB likes this.

Last edited by m. zillch; 08-15-2014 at 11:03 PM.
m. zillch is offline  
post #176 of 215 Old 08-15-2014, 10:11 PM
Member
 
Kele's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Aloha
Posts: 28
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 11
My amp/pre-amp/source is Stereophile class C. My speakers - vintage JBL reworked. Comparing CD vs SACD or DVD-A is easily heard. While playing MJ's Thriller SACD, my wife came into the room and commented about how good it sounds and she seemingly never cares about such things. I have played Thriller via vinyl, tape, CD and now SACD - the only unsolicited sound quality type comment from wife was with the SACD. The base difference is especially noticeable in that with SACD the base is more defined, digital-base impact, therefore has a higher startle factor. At times it actually sounds like a real drum kit in the adjoining room. The highs are more vivid yet not in a grating way, and ambiance with SACD is also unquestionably better than CD. I've only just recently heard SACD at home. I've had my same stereo components for a long while and know it - especially the speakers. With SACD, my stereo sounds much more capable than I thought. The difference is about like a 320 bit MP3 vs CD. I have no graphs to prove it.
amirm likes this.
Kele is offline  
post #177 of 215 Old 08-15-2014, 11:00 PM
AVS Special Member
 
m. zillch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,009
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 135 Post(s)
Liked: 145
"My wife can even hear it from the other room" Did she say it sounded like a veil had been lifted?
m. zillch is offline  
post #178 of 215 Old 08-15-2014, 11:54 PM
Member
 
SXRDork's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 102
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 18
I'm an engineer and I believe in the truth of numbers and all that.

There are certain things I don't get about Nyquist, FRF's, Frequency response plots, and the rest that use 44.1kHz as adequate. One of them is the shape of a 20kHz waveform when sampled at 44.1kHz. I predict frequency response functions regularly as an aerospace engineer and I prefer to see at least 5 samples per resonant frequency just to see the waveform in some sort of recognizable shape. Nyquist seems to be the minimum required to mathematically sense frequency content, not correctly represent the waveform.

Can somebody school me on this? What am I missing?

SXRDork: SXRD is a technology. My name is Vann. Usernames are for life...
SXRDork is offline  
post #179 of 215 Old 08-16-2014, 12:36 AM
Member
 
antoniobiz1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 135
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Liked: 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
If you mean mass market, sure. But not people with good ears and critical listening abilities. Here is me passing the test of 320 kbps MP3 which is higher fidelity than the 256 offered by stores:
(...)
And Scott/Mark file:

foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.3.2
2014/07/31 15:18:41

File A: C:\Users\Amir\Music\AIX AVS Test files\On_The_Street_Where_You_Live_A2.mp3
File B: C:\Users\Amir\Music\AIX AVS Test files\On_The_Street_Where_You_Live_A2.wav

15:18:41 : Test started.
[U]15:19:18 : 01/01 50.0%
15:19:30 : 01/02 75.0%
15:19:44 : 01/03 87.5%
15:20:35 : 02/04 68.8%
15:20:46 : 02/05 81.3%

15:21:39 : 03/06 65.6%
15:21:47 : 04/07 50.0%
15:21:54 : 04/08 63.7%
15:22:06 : 05/09 50.0%
15:22:19 : 06/10 37.7%
15:22:31 : 07/11 27.4%
15:22:44 : 08/12 19.4%
15:22:51 : 09/13 13.3%
15:22:58 : 10/14 9.0%
15:23:06 : 11/15 5.9%
15:23:14 : 12/16 3.8%
15:23:23 : 13/17 2.5%
15:23:33 : 14/18 1.5%
15:23:42 : 15/19 1.0%
15:23:54 : 16/20 0.6%
15:24:06 : 17/21 0.4%
15:24:15 : 18/22 0.2%
15:24:23 : 19/23 0.1%
15:24:34 : 20/24 0.1%
15:24:43 : 21/25 0.0%
15:24:52 : 22/26 0.0%
15:24:57 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 22/26 (0.0%)


(Emphasis mine).
I can't believe you post these results and still claim a significant difference. You were wrong three out of five times during the first part of the test. Going by what you "trained ears" keep saying an mp3 should pierce your eardrums as soon as it starts to play. This is ridiculous.
tubetwister likes this.

Last edited by antoniobiz1; 08-16-2014 at 01:03 AM.
antoniobiz1 is online now  
post #180 of 215 Old 08-16-2014, 01:58 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,381
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 747 Post(s)
Liked: 1161
Quote:
Originally Posted by HowardV View Post
Optical has limited bandwidth. HDMI can introduce jitter. An asynchronous USB connection is usually considered optimal.
Yup, there might be a bogey man under every bed. Good for scaring small boys.

Optical can have a lot more bandwidth than many current implementations.

Everything can and does introduce at least microscopic amounts of jitter. For most of us, the key word is audible.

Asynch USB is a solution looking for a problem. It is often vastly overpriced given that it can generally be implemented with a minor firmware update.
arnyk is offline  
Reply Audio theory, Setup and Chat

Tags
frontpage

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off