New Book About High-Res Audio - Page 2 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 37Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #31 of 81 Old 10-16-2015, 10:03 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
JackB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 4,022
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1589 Post(s)
Liked: 382
I bought a 4K flat panel about six months ago amidst claims by the experts that from a typical viewing distance you can't tell the difference between 2K and 4K. I'm here to say the experts are dead wrong to my eyes. I can certainly see it.

Jack
JackB is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 81 Old 10-16-2015, 10:23 AM
FMW
AVS Forum Special Member
 
FMW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,480
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1655 Post(s)
Liked: 1712
Quote:
Originally Posted by JackB View Post
I bought a 4K flat panel about six months ago amidst claims by the experts that from a typical viewing distance you can't tell the difference between 2K and 4K. I'm here to say the experts are dead wrong to my eyes. I can certainly see it.
Do you have 2K screen next to it to make the comparison?
FMW is offline  
post #33 of 81 Old 10-16-2015, 10:47 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
JackB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 4,022
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1589 Post(s)
Liked: 382
Quote:
Originally Posted by FMW View Post
Do you have 2K screen next to it to make the comparison?
Every time I walk into Costco I see it; side by side.

Jack
JackB is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #34 of 81 Old 10-16-2015, 10:50 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Sean Spamilton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 1,351
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 448 Post(s)
Liked: 555
Quote:
Originally Posted by JackB View Post
Every time I walk into Costco I see it; side by side.
Yes but when you view it side by side in Costco you are probably within 4 feet of the screens I'd bet
Sean Spamilton is offline  
post #35 of 81 Old 10-16-2015, 10:52 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Ratman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Collingswood, N.J.
Posts: 19,738
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2533 Post(s)
Liked: 2350
How about hi-rez audio? What does 4K video have to do with this thread other than to derail?
Ratman is online now  
post #36 of 81 Old 10-16-2015, 11:15 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
jim19611961's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,829
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 451 Post(s)
Liked: 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ratman View Post
How about hi-rez audio? What does 4K video have to do with this thread other than to derail?
Good point.

The analogy, although understood, isn't a great one in that viewing distance is highly determinate in what res can be distinguished, whereas in audio, there is no mitigating variable comparable to viewing distance.

My Room
My Music
Rega - Apollo, Rega - DAC, Goldpoint Passive, Classe CA-100, Crown XLS 1002, miniDSP
Jenzen Next
jim19611961 is offline  
post #37 of 81 Old 10-16-2015, 11:32 AM
 
NorthSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Star of the Northern Hemisphere
Posts: 16,643
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7012 Post(s)
Liked: 3563
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. AIX View Post
However, if you haven't had an opportunity to listen to a well made REAL high-resolution audio recording, you might want to download a couple of my recordings and have a listen. They're free and might just demonstrate a level of musical fidelity that exceeds your expectations...certainly lots of my customers claim they've never heard better.

There are lots of people, manufacturers, organizations, and record labels trying to convince you to purchase older standard definition recordings again with a "Hi-Res Music" logo stuck to the front of the package or on the website. It's much more complicated than that. The book is both a resource and disc full of demonstrations to inform and educate audio and music enthusiasts.
They sound excellent Mark...they have more "resolution" than normal music recordings from CDs.

* Anyone else listened to them here?

And very true regarding what some people try to sell us as "hi-res" music; it is important to identify the good from the bad.

It's a gorgeous Autumn day here, very colorful leaves in the trees. I'm outside, listening to jazz ♫ music...on the radio (analog).
NorthSky is offline  
post #38 of 81 Old 10-16-2015, 12:13 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Ratman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Collingswood, N.J.
Posts: 19,738
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2533 Post(s)
Liked: 2350
Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthSky View Post
...they have more "resolution" than normal music recordings from CDs.
I guess if the care is taken to record/engineer music in a hi-rez format... is probably may have more "resolution". Isn't that the point?

IMHO... know what you are buying before you purchase/download what is advertised as "hi-rez". And obviously, have the equipment to play it back to take advantage. Does one really need to purchase a book? (sorry)

Anyone available to come over and rake the colorful leaves on the ground in my yard on this beautiful Autumn day? And the next few weeks?

Last edited by Ratman; 10-16-2015 at 12:21 PM.
Ratman is online now  
post #39 of 81 Old 10-16-2015, 12:42 PM
 
NorthSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Star of the Northern Hemisphere
Posts: 16,643
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7012 Post(s)
Liked: 3563
Mark is a sound recordist perfectionist, so yes his music recordings should translate to his experience, sound setups, audio recording gear and mics and cables used, and into our gear and loudspeakers @ home...in both stereo and multichannel music listening. And his book encompasses all the settings (I'm sure it does) that us we can do in our own listening rooms to better the musical experience, the overall acoustic sound. ...I'm sure there is more to learn from reading it than not.
NorthSky is offline  
post #40 of 81 Old 10-16-2015, 02:17 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Ratman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Collingswood, N.J.
Posts: 19,738
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2533 Post(s)
Liked: 2350
When you're done reading the book... pass it along.
Ratman is online now  
post #41 of 81 Old 10-16-2015, 02:31 PM
 
NorthSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Star of the Northern Hemisphere
Posts: 16,643
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7012 Post(s)
Liked: 3563
If I purchase the book I'll do my best in passing along the best passages. ...Meanwhile I'm enjoying the sun outside and the classical music playing on the radio. ...Mozart music....piano. ...And Chorale music...and the angels sing...
NorthSky is offline  
post #42 of 81 Old 10-16-2015, 03:06 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Ratman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Collingswood, N.J.
Posts: 19,738
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2533 Post(s)
Liked: 2350
What do you mean "IF"? "Mark is a sound recordist perfectionist, so yes his music recordings should translate to his experience,...." etc.
The tome appears to be a "must have" based on your accolades.

Hopefully your radio is tuned to an HDRadio channel to take advantage of the wonderful quality of streaming MP3.
Ratman is online now  
post #43 of 81 Old 10-17-2015, 12:54 AM
Advanced Member
 
morbidcorpse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 528
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 304 Post(s)
Liked: 283
Quote:
Originally Posted by FMW View Post
Audiophiles tend to accept the notion that inaudible characteristics of sound reproduction can become more inaudible or audible. Inaudible is inaudible but some don't hear that.
I demand everyone stop what they're doing and recognize how awesome and hysterical this comment is
Jady Jenkins likes this.

morbidcorpse is offline  
post #44 of 81 Old 10-17-2015, 06:30 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: UK
Posts: 237
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 132 Post(s)
Liked: 67
After watching the video interview with Scott, Mark seems to put more emphasis on bit depth and dynamic range and I agree with everything on this topic. Also the improper and often ineffective implementation of HD audio by many manufacturers/services that claim to support it, and the importance of at least providing the fidelity you are advertising, again I agree here. What was said about the Pono music service was particularly informative and interesting but not at all surprising, thank you for that Mark.

We agree that a higher sampling rate makes sense throughout the mastering process for various reasons. We agree (I think) on the implications of the sampling theorem. What you said at around 55:00 into the video about differences in hearing I agree with, but the exception is hearing or perceiving anything above about 20KHz which is impossible for humans. The Nyquist Shannon sampling theorem isn't a property or artifact of our particular digital encoding process, it wasn't intended to facilitate digital audio recordings, its a fundamental axiom of universal information theory. Which means it also applies to the brain's encoding of audio back to electrical signals (whatever they may be, irrelevant that they're not digital), so encoding that information is indeed a waste of bits. Which itself, I admit, is not a terribly relevant point since we are not constrained by storage capacity anymore, if everyone agreed on 96/24 that would be just swell, just aslong as we don't start a sampling rate or bit depth war (as an extension of 'loudness wars') amongst these profit-minded companies that inflates files to ridiculous sizes.
@Mark : The part I wish to question is where you suggested that people could hear/perceive sounds above 20KHz, (at 12:45 in the video interview). Could you elaborate? What is your evidence for this?

In general, I do not trust my ears or what anyone else's ears tell them, hearing is loaded with cognitive biases, controlling for all of them with proper testing is neigh on impossible, singling out the minority of studies that have done it correctly is not a good use of one's time. For example I cannot tell the difference between 320Kbps .mp3 vs CD vs 96/24 flac (for most audio tracks). However I can logically reason with my knowledge of maths and audio theory and human hearing that there is difference between mp3 and CD that some people should be able to hear even if I can't. Similarly I can reason that there is a difference between 48KHz sampling rate and 96KHz, the latter encodes twice the bandwith, but I cannot reason that any human should be able to hear it. If the error is with my knowledge or reasoning, I am listening, please enlighten me (anyone). I am loathe to trust any evidence that takes the form of listening tests asking subjects to say what sounds 'better', no matter how well controlled, no matter how good the methodology looks on paper, hearing is loaded with bias, the testing is loaded with bias given the profit margins acheivable in the high-end audio industry. A listening test that asks 'do these sound different?' is marginally better.
Bigus, CruelInventions and boifido like this.

Last edited by Ormy; 10-17-2015 at 06:42 AM.
Ormy is offline  
post #45 of 81 Old 10-17-2015, 12:29 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Ethan Winer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: New Milford, CT, USA
Posts: 6,162
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 270 Post(s)
Liked: 409
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by jim19611961 View Post
The analogy, although understood, isn't a great one in that viewing distance is highly determinate in what res can be distinguished, whereas in audio, there is no mitigating variable comparable to viewing distance.
I think that loudness of the audio is similar if not exactly equivalent to viewing distance. The louder an audio source is played, the better we can hear the low level detail. It's not exactly the same as sitting closer and seeing individual pixels in video, but maybe it's in the ballpark?

Anyway, I downloaded AIX demos #4 , 6, 7, 9, 10, and 12 and spent some time listening to them. I also converted these files to 16 bits at 44.1 KHz but couldn't hear any difference. I was 67 last week, so maybe younger ears could hear the lack of content above 20 KHz after conversion. Some of the tracks were trimmed tightly, but in a few I was able to observe the level of acoustic background noise from the venue.

At the beginning of Track #6 The Latin Jazz Trio the residual noise is around -66 dB, and on Track #10 Pro Arte Trio the noise is around -56 dB. The music still sounds very clean! The recordings are all excellent, satisfying, full sounding, well balanced, and all of that. But a noise floor of -66 is equal to about 11 bits of resolution, and -56 is closer to 9 bits.

--Ethan
Ethan Winer is offline  
post #46 of 81 Old 10-17-2015, 12:38 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Ethan Winer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: New Milford, CT, USA
Posts: 6,162
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 270 Post(s)
Liked: 409
I should have expanded a bit on my post above. The background noise of venues is one reason I never bother recording at more than 16 bits. If you set your record levels so the loudest parts peak around -18 dB, that still uses 13 bits and has background "hiss" quieter than most venues. Plus, most musicians play louder and with more enthusiasm when the audience arrives, compared to how they played during dress rehearsal when you set the levels. So you end up using 14 or even 15 bits, which is quieter still. Even in a pro studio environment, the ambient noise level is a lot louder than the background noise of 16 bits. At least for acoustic music that's not screaming loud rock and roll using amps cranked up to 11.

--Ethan
Ethan Winer is offline  
post #47 of 81 Old 10-17-2015, 12:55 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
jim19611961's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,829
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 451 Post(s)
Liked: 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ethan Winer View Post
I think that loudness of the audio is similar if not exactly equivalent to viewing distance.
Yes, but its irrelevant when doing A/B comparisons with the levels matched.

My Room
My Music
Rega - Apollo, Rega - DAC, Goldpoint Passive, Classe CA-100, Crown XLS 1002, miniDSP
Jenzen Next

Last edited by jim19611961; 10-17-2015 at 02:39 PM.
jim19611961 is offline  
post #48 of 81 Old 10-17-2015, 12:58 PM
 
NorthSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Star of the Northern Hemisphere
Posts: 16,643
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7012 Post(s)
Liked: 3563
Hi Ethan,

I am younger than you but not by much.

* Regarding the high frequencies...from say 15kHz to 100kHz. ...I cannot hear anything in that range...birds, wind, etc.

But! I think I can hear the negative impact of them, in the digital domain, when the distortion of the sub harmonics spilled down to the 500Hz-12kHz region of the human hearing range.
The better the hi-res quality music recordings the cleaner that frequency range is registered by my ears. ...Even if it was recorded @ 704kHz resolution (or 768kHz).

I think my ears can hear the smoothness of the music playing and also the high distortion of the sub harmonics from 20kHz to 100kHz.
It all depends...on truly how well and the recording machines and microphones used in the music recording sessions.
I also believe that it is measurable and can be shown graphically.

But like I said; I am younger than you...but by not very much. ...And my ears experience don't necessarily reflect my years experience.
Also, I am not a professional acoustician...but I do have some experience in the professional showbizz...sound and light.

The point here is that that above digital 20kHz is still registered by the human ear as a digital sub harmonic distortion spilling down in the audio frequency range of the human audio spectrum (20Hz-20kHz). Just to what extent...it all depends on who is @ the recording process control, the recording gear used, and the recording techniques employed.

I am simply sharing my opinion, which is scientifically debatable. ...It's the mics, and the mixes.
NorthSky is offline  
post #49 of 81 Old 10-17-2015, 01:04 PM
 
NorthSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Star of the Northern Hemisphere
Posts: 16,643
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7012 Post(s)
Liked: 3563
Regarding the bits (bit depth); I believe 20 bits is all we need...not less not more.

And the frequency range (sampling rate); 88.2kHz (nothing less nothing more).

Last edited by NorthSky; 10-17-2015 at 01:07 PM.
NorthSky is offline  
post #50 of 81 Old 10-17-2015, 01:50 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Ratman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Collingswood, N.J.
Posts: 19,738
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2533 Post(s)
Liked: 2350
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ethan Winer View Post
I should have expanded a bit on my post above.
Just one bit? Is that enough?


Sorry... couldn't resist.
Michael Sargent likes this.
Ratman is online now  
post #51 of 81 Old 10-17-2015, 07:55 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
DonH50's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Monument CO
Posts: 12,503
Mentioned: 73 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3362 Post(s)
Liked: 3520
Yup, so long as you oversample and filter...

"After silence, that which best expresses the inexpressible, is music" - Aldous Huxley
DonH50 is offline  
post #52 of 81 Old 10-17-2015, 08:57 PM
 
NorthSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Star of the Northern Hemisphere
Posts: 16,643
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7012 Post(s)
Liked: 3563
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ethan Winer View Post
Anyway, I downloaded AIX demos #4 , 6, 7, 9, 10, and 12 and spent some time listening to them. I also converted these files to 16 bits at 44.1 KHz but couldn't hear any difference. I was 67 last week, so maybe younger ears could hear the lack of content above 20 KHz after conversion. Some of the tracks were trimmed tightly, but in a few I was able to observe the level of acoustic background noise from the venue.

At the beginning of Track #6 The Latin Jazz Trio the residual noise is around -66 dB, and on Track #10 Pro Arte Trio the noise is around -56 dB. The music still sounds very clean! The recordings are all excellent, satisfying, full sounding, well balanced, and all of that. But a noise floor of -66 is equal to about 11 bits of resolution, and -56 is closer to 9 bits.

--Ethan
Happy belated Birthday Ethan! :cake: (with 68-bit).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ratman View Post
Just one bit? Is that enough?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_Stream_Digital - :1bit:

Quote:
Originally Posted by DonH50 View Post
Yup, so long as you oversample and filter...
http://www.digitalpreservation.gov/f...dd000230.shtml - :2.8224mhz: & :finiteimpulseresponse:

Last edited by NorthSky; 10-17-2015 at 09:05 PM.
NorthSky is offline  
post #53 of 81 Old 10-18-2015, 02:58 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
PrimeTime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Lower California
Posts: 3,279
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 811 Post(s)
Liked: 510
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ormy View Post
For example I cannot tell the difference between 320Kbps .mp3 vs CD vs 96/24 flac (for most audio tracks).
I can't either. And if you can't hear it, it doesn't matter.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ethan Winer View Post
I think that loudness of the audio is similar if not exactly equivalent to viewing distance. The louder an audio source is played, the better we can hear the low level detail.
--Ethan
Research by Bell Labs, B&K and others determined that the optimum level for critical listening for most humans (i.e., their study groups) is around 82-85 dBc. That's also the level where B&K developed their so-called "House Curve" which was adopted by Toole et al decades later.

Adding ~20 dB to that for headroom would still bring the noise floor of optimally-mastered CD playback in around ~15 dBc, which is below the ambient level of most playback environments.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DonH50 View Post
Yup, so long as you oversample and filter...
I had both types of CD players -- analog brickwall and digital -- and could not detect a difference.

Oversampling CD players were oversold mostly because the oversampling digital filters are simpler (read: less expensive) than their brickwall counterparts.

Last edited by PrimeTime; 10-18-2015 at 04:33 PM.
PrimeTime is offline  
post #54 of 81 Old 10-18-2015, 04:02 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
jim19611961's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,829
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 451 Post(s)
Liked: 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by PrimeTime View Post

Research by Bell Labs, B&K and others determined that the optimum level for critical listening for most humans (i.e., their study groups) is around 82-85 dBc. That's also the level where B&K devloped their so-called "House Curve" which was adopted by Toole et all decades later.


That brings up another issue. That being the best curve is somewhat dependent on the level. 10db louder or softer than this would be perceived differently. Facts bear this out.

My Room
My Music
Rega - Apollo, Rega - DAC, Goldpoint Passive, Classe CA-100, Crown XLS 1002, miniDSP
Jenzen Next
jim19611961 is offline  
post #55 of 81 Old 10-18-2015, 10:14 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Worf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 2,392
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 886 Post(s)
Liked: 614
That's for critical listening though. For general listening in non optimal environments, louder has always been perceived as better (before distortions like clipping).

That's why if people are showing off their hardware, they'll crank it louder than the "reference" and why we had the loudness wars on CDs where the music was over compressed (in dynamic range) to make it louder.

But I presume their house curve is ideal for a quiet environment where you want to hear the details and get the full dynamic range punch. But that suits their evaluations, which doesn't necessarily suit how people like to listen. (You would think an anechoic chamber would be an ideal way to listen to music, but it feels so unnatural that even if you got everything perfect, people would say the music feels dead - it turns out that people like reflections and other effects because that's how we naturally hear most audio).

Anyhow, personally, even though I have a hard time determining he difference between mp3-320kbps (especially using a high end encoder like LAME that's tweaked to be near identical) and FLAC encoded at 24/96, it doesn't mean I don't want he 24/96 - if nothing more than being a good base. After all, if I want to go from mp3 to something else, the quality can only go down. If I start from FLAC, I can make mp3s and when the next best thing comes around, I start from the FLAC again. Of course, I only want 24/96 when it really exists - 24/96 that was created from a CD is a waste of time, money and bandwidth. For that I'd stick with the CD as that would be best quality - it's possible that the conversion to 24/96 may decrease the quality.
Worf is offline  
post #56 of 81 Old 10-19-2015, 08:15 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
PrimeTime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Lower California
Posts: 3,279
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 811 Post(s)
Liked: 510
The simple fact is that there is more information on a CD than humans can process. And we should be grateful that people like jj were not only aware of this but were able to design more efficient coding techniques that now, with streaming, have opened up new realms of programming to explore and enjoy.

I've said it before, but it bears repeating: The most significant bottleneck to faithful music storage and replay was/is the vinyl LP disc. This archaic, century-old technology of storing data is indeed amazing that it works as well as it does -- in the same sense as the dog walking on its hind legs is amazing for what it is doing.

The more modern electromechanical system of magnetic tape recording eliminated many of the physical challenges of the LP, and so was used during the vinyl era as the mastering source for LPs. We are, again, fortunate to finally be able to get closer to the source with digital versions right from the master tapes without the unnecessary middleman of the LP.
PrimeTime is offline  
post #57 of 81 Old 10-19-2015, 12:53 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Ethan Winer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: New Milford, CT, USA
Posts: 6,162
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 270 Post(s)
Liked: 409
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthSky View Post
I think I can hear the negative impact of [ultrasonics], in the digital domain, when the distortion of the sub harmonics spilled down to the 500Hz-12kHz region of the human hearing range.
As far as I know there's no such thing as sub-harmonics, but digital aliasing can certainly "fold" content past 20 KHz back down into the audible range. IM distortion does this too. If you have content at 25 KHz and 26 KHz, and distort the signal, IMD will create new content at 51 KHz (inaudible) and 1 KHz (very audible). Thankfully, with competent modern gear, both aliasing and IMD are so soft that they won't be heard.

Quote:
I think my ears can hear the smoothness of the music playing and also the high distortion of the sub harmonics from 20kHz to 100kHz.
The only way you'll know for sure is with a proper blind test.

--Ethan
Ethan Winer is offline  
post #58 of 81 Old 10-19-2015, 01:07 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
jim19611961's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,829
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 451 Post(s)
Liked: 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by PrimeTime View Post
The simple fact is that there is more information on a CD than humans can process. And we should be grateful that people like jj were not only aware of this but were able to design more efficient coding techniques that now, with streaming, have opened up new realms of programming to explore and enjoy.

I've said it before, but it bears repeating: The most significant bottleneck to faithful music storage and replay was/is the vinyl LP disc. This archaic, century-old technology of storing data is indeed amazing that it works as well as it does -- in the same sense as the dog walking on its hind legs is amazing for what it is doing.

The more modern electromechanical system of magnetic tape recording eliminated many of the physical challenges of the LP, and so was used during the vinyl era as the mastering source for LPs. We are, again, fortunate to finally be able to get closer to the source with digital versions right from the master tapes without the unnecessary middleman of the LP.
In terms of resolution, I completely agree. In terms of mastering quality, there are still a lot of titles out there where the best version is vinyl.
Jady Jenkins likes this.

My Room
My Music
Rega - Apollo, Rega - DAC, Goldpoint Passive, Classe CA-100, Crown XLS 1002, miniDSP
Jenzen Next
jim19611961 is offline  
post #59 of 81 Old 10-19-2015, 02:35 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: UK
Posts: 237
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 132 Post(s)
Liked: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ethan Winer View Post
If you have content at 25 KHz and 26 KHz, and distort the signal, IMD will create new content at 51 KHz (inaudible) and 1 KHz (very audible).
I always thought this was a good reason to limit sampling rate to 44.1KHz or at the most 48KHz?

Last edited by Ormy; 10-19-2015 at 02:40 PM.
Ormy is offline  
post #60 of 81 Old 10-19-2015, 05:25 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
DonH50's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Monument CO
Posts: 12,503
Mentioned: 73 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3362 Post(s)
Liked: 3520
If the input includes a 1 kHz IMD tone (even if generated by the ADC's analog front end or sampler) the ADC cannot distinguish it from any other signal. Sampling rate doesn't really matter at that point. Sampling at 103 kS/s will prevent aliasing of the 51 kHz IMD tone (to 3 kHz) but, assuming it is generated before the ADC, the antialias filter should suppress that tone anyway.

"After silence, that which best expresses the inexpressible, is music" - Aldous Huxley
DonH50 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Audio Theory, Setup, and Chat

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