Shh. My wife may read this. I have to admit they are a wee bit expensive, but I do love them.The cost though!
Can get a month's streaming with thousands of albums for a single SACD.
Null Test? Is this where two seemingly identical signals are compared by inverting one? The Inverted and non-Inverted should cancel each other out, and the result should be ...technically... no sound. Where ever you hear any sound, the signals are different. The more sound you hear, the more different the signals are.Hmm...
OK, non-persuadeds can do the "null test"
Let's see if you or anyone else can hear the "difference" in bitrates/resolutions
The answer is actually rather simple. If you are going to be doing calculations you need to have more bits available in the intermediate stages than in the final result. Otherwise you get truncation errors. So the arguement for 20 or 24 bit resolution is obvious. Digital processing is basically binary addition and subtraction with samples taken at different times.You have to ask the question: why do recording studios work with DXD (384KHz or 352.8KHz) 24 bit format. It’s not for fun, they can hear a sonic advantage using these higher bit rates over CD quality 44.1KHz 16bit when mastering their recordings.
That is true, but would not have been any effort in a visible red laser ..as used in the DVD. . A DVD stores 4.7GB as compared to the original CD which was 0.65GB. (Later CDs would push this up to 0.800).Though more of a side note, I calculated that all other things being generally the same 24b/96k file is 3.27 times larger than a 16b/44.1k file.
A 24b/192k file is 6.53 times larger than a 16b/44.1k file.
For what it might be worth.
To the OP, are you really suggesting that people should spend 54 minutes of their lives that they will never get back by watching that awful video?Bitter Truth...
- That will hurt, Sorry
Hi Nick.. your question is misplaced. The 44kilosamples is exactly that. The instantaneous sound field is sampled 44,000, times per second and the values recorded.. The assumption that the square wave will only exist as the superposition of Fundamental or First Harmonic and then third Harmonic, is what would be called a sufficient but not necessary or indeed a unique condition/ solution. All the other samples will be contributing and if computed will create a bandwidth limited facsimile of the square wave.. Indeed if just displayed in the time domain,will look square wave likeTo the OP, are you really suggesting that people should spend 54 minutes of their lives that they will never get back by watching that awful video?
To those sensible people who couldn't be bothered, here's the summary:
At 19 minutes, the author says 44.1kHz gives you 20kHz bandwidth, and that's all you can hear.
At 29 minutes, he says 16 bits gives you 96dB dynamic range, and "that should be enough"
That's what he's got. It took him 54 minutes to say nothing new.
So if 20kHz is all we need, how come I can hear the difference between a 7kHz sine wave and square wave? The additional harmonics for the latter are inaudible. Please answer me that. If you don't believe me try it for yourself.
What I'm saying is that while CD is pretty good at reproducing audio within a 20x96 envelope, we've all been mistaken for a long time in thinking that's all that's needed for transparency.
Sure, I can't hear a 20kHz sine wave any more, but that doesn't mean it's enough, and that sort of reasoning has held back HiFi for some time IMHO.
Please don’t start a DSD vs. PCM discussion, it could get as acrimonious as a cable debate!As Larkone says there is hi-res and then there is hi-res.
I have a SACD of Stravinsky Rite of Spring - Leonard Bernstein & NYP. It was recorded on two track in 1959 and so the s.q. is nowhere near as good as a more recent recording I have on CD, despite being 3x the price
Another example is the type of hi-res file of the same recording. I quote another post I put on here;-
A/B comparison between DSD and FLAC via 8 metre Supra USB
Bach Cello Suite transcribed to violin by Rachel Podger
First thing to state was when downloading DSD in 256 I quit the download once it hit 11Gb. 11+Gb for one album!!! So I went down a level to 128 but even that took up almost 4 times as much storage as a 192kHz flac, which itself is a very big file.
This is a high quality recording of solo violin, so no bass. I was expecting both to sound exactly the same but they weren’t. The DSD was a more grounded, solid sound - slightly less shrill and fatiguing."