Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] 24/192kHz capability for Transporter
Eric Seaberg wrote: Very few studios are tracking at 96k let alone 192k! The amount of required storage space is HUGE. Some of the best engineers in the business have said 96k isn't worth it, but the jump to 192k is getting close. STILL, no one is going to buy it. Look at how the DVD-A and SACD have survived? Heck, the DAT was supposed to kill the cassette back in '86! You're trying to sell GREAT sounding stuff to a consumer that's more than happy with a 128kbps MP3. Maybe higher quality audio on Blu-Ray will get some things going again. And after 3 years, this sounds just as funny as 640K ought to be enough for anybody. :) michael123's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=23745 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=69882 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] 24/192kHz capability for Transporter
michael123 wrote: And after 3 years, this sounds just as funny as 640K ought to be enough for anybody. :) Not really. Software keeps getting increasingly big and bloated (and RAM price keeps dropping), but human hearing hasn't changed much in the last couple of thousands of years - and if it has changed, it has probably changed for the worse because of all the noise exposure. Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=69882 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] 24/192kHz capability for Transporter
Julf wrote: Not really. Software keeps getting increasingly big and bloated (and RAM price keeps dropping), but human hearing hasn't changed much in the last couple of thousands of years - and if it has changed, it has probably changed for the worse because of all the noise exposure. Yes the limit is biological/biomechanical , any improvement are likely to come from improved studio equipment, no equipment i know of have come close the limit implied by 24bit for example 144dB sn ratio . So the format is also transparent to all audio equipment used ,it is better than stuff we use to record and playback with of-course in the frequency domain we can do better (or rather more ) ,but that just a waste as here the biological limits of our hearing sets in Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=69882 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] 24/192kHz capability for Transporter
Mnyb wrote: Yes the limit is biological/biomechanical , any improvement are likely to come from improved studio equipment, no equipment i know of have come close the limit implied by 24bit for example 144dB sn ratio . So the format is also transparent to all audio equipment used ,it is better than stuff we use to record and playback with of-course in the frequency domain we can do better (or rather more ) ,but that just a waste as here the biological limits of our hearing sets in You make a good point. Put another way, in math, adding about 2 plus 2.0001 does not give you 4.0001. The correct answer is about 4. In audio, there are so many about 2s in the chain that it always amuses me that some people can spend so much time polishing the tiny number to the right of the decimal but be perfectly accepting of so many abouts. That's probably human nature -- it just feels good to think that -something- is within your control. mlsstl's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=9598 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=69882 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
