JezA;403865 Wrote: > opaqueice: > > Of the recordings you list, at least the two Murray Perahia cds, the > Pink Floyd cd and the Steely Dan Gaucho are 20 - 30 year old > recordings mastered on analogue tape. They are most certainly neither > hi-res 24/96 or DSD recordings, so how you can draw any conclusions > about 24/96 or DSD from listening to them is beyond me.
The whole -point- of this test was that audiophiles claim to be able to hear these differences.... but when asked to do so blind, they fail. The way you do such a test is play the music that the subjects request, for as long as they want, and let them switch back and forth. You don't dictate to them what music they can hear the difference on. A few of those recordings date back 30 years, some are very recent. -Not one person- - out of hundreds - could tell the difference on -any- of them, despite being able to choose precisely the music and passages they felt most confident on. So your objection that some of those recordings did not, in your personal opinion, benefit from the SACD format is.... totally irrelevant. Pure polemics in fact. > > Nobody seriously interested in a good sound would set speakers up the > way they are shown in the photograph of the experiment; they are far > too close to the wall and the wood-panelled cavitites behind them, and > such a tall speaker with such a small footprint directly on the floor > will be very unstable. I assure you, these guys are seriously interested in good sound, and have been for many, many, many years. There's no reason to suppose that's where the speakers were situated during the tests. There's no reason to suppose they're "unstable". There's no reason to suppose they weren't moved to wherever the listeners wanted. And this was only one of at least four sets of speakers they ran these tests on. > A far simpler experiment is to take a genuine 24/whatever recording and > play it through a system, then down-sample it and play it through > exactly the same system. What they did should have made it much -easier- to hear differences than that, because of the added noise from the A->D->A. And yet, not one listener could. > Or compare the layers of a dual-layer SACD that has a known hi-res > master. And how precisely are they supposed to know that? > It is very easy to do. > So was this. > But why choose between nails and blankets when you can have the hi-res > master? This test all but proved that the SACD standard is not audibly different than redbook. Are you trying to argue that even though that is true, 24/96 is? -- opaqueice ------------------------------------------------------------------------ opaqueice's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=60973 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
