JohnSwenson;497768 Wrote:
As I've stated before I can hear the difference over headphones on the
Touch. I've done simple blind tests and can tell the difference. I'd be
willing to participate in an official blind test of this, so do you
have a testing protocol that you would consider proper?
cliveb;497908 Wrote:
Proper blind tests require that neither the listener nor the tester
knows which is being played, and that levels are perfectly matched.
In the case of FLAC v. WAV, level matching is a given, so the only
thing that remains is to ensure nobody involved knows what is
cliveb;497908 Wrote:
P
4. Get SqueezeCenter to build a random playlist from the two files.
6. Now compare your results with the actual playlist.
Please, could you Help me in build this kind of playlist (I'm not used
to playlist) and how to ceck the order it was played?
thanks.
Marco
--
Hello.
I'm about to rip my whole collection of CD (more than 1000 units, I
don't know exactly how many discs I own...) I just want to do it once,
and do it right. It will be enough hard that way...
So I started investigating. I find these blogs, in French :
* http://blog.apiguide.net/#podium
*
HI,
Sound to me we all are missing the point:
As Phil proved to me, DIFFERENCE ARE AUDIBLE (and you could also
measure it) even between two playback of the same file, not depending by
the file or streaming format! Is hard to realize, but is true.
If we agree on this, we must accept that
marcoc1712;497945 Wrote:
HI,
As Phil proved to me, DIFFERENCE ARE AUDIBLE (and you could also
measure it) even between two playback of the same file, not depending by
the file or streaming format! Is hard to realize, but is true.
Marco.
In reading this thread, it doesn't seem to me that
If two rippers produce two files with the same checksum, the files are
identical. That really is all that needs to be said on this subject...?
EAC and DBPoweramp and CDParanoia all rip accurately if setup correctly
and used with undamaged discs. The rips do not sound any
different...because they
garym;497950 Wrote:
In reading this thread, it doesn't seem to me that Phil has said (or
proved) that the differences are AUDIBLE. Phil, your comments?
p.s. I don't have these skills, but it would be nice if someone could
create a plugin that worked similar to the ABX component in
Phil Leigh;494619 Wrote:
...
If you want to prove this, make two identical WAV (or flac)
recordings and compare them. They will be different.
...
This was very explanatory to me, and after this we agree:
1. Until SPFID output they ARE the same (in Bit).
2. Differences are likely caused
Phil Leigh;497958 Wrote:
Gary - I definitely did not say that the playback and recording of the
same file twice (with non-locked clocks) would give an audible
difference. It does give a measurable difference which is predicted
because of clock drift of a few parts per million. The same would
Please,
have a listen to the diff files I posted, DIFF are definitely Audible,
then make your own using the same WAV or FLAC file, they will be of the
same order.
We tried.
Marco
--
marcoc1712
SB+, Klimo Merlino + Kent Gold,
marcoc1712;497962 Wrote:
have a listen to the diff files I posted, DIFF are definitely Audible,
then make your own using the same WAV or FLAC file, they will be of the
same order.
The diffs are only audible because of the clock drift. We don't have
the same clock drift issue with our
Phil Leigh;494619 Wrote:
...
If you want to prove this, make two identical WAV (or flac)
recordings and compare them. They will be different.
If I repeat your test setup I get similar results to you - but they
aren't helpful or meaningful.
Try comparing one WAV recording to another
marcoc1712;497967 Wrote:
This is very simple, could anyone try to do what Phil advice (as I did)
AND let we know if they are audible or not?
Not interested in continue in such a discussion if we could not fix
some shared point.
Marco
Marco - this is the point: if you remove the
andynormancx;497965 Wrote:
The diffs are only audible because of the clock drift. We don't have the
same clock drift issue with our ears/brains so the measured difference
when the clocks aren't synced do _not_ prove that there is an audible
difference.
I'm with you, but do they prove for
Themis;497647 Wrote:
I even read the other day that Amarra is (considered by its own
communication dept) as a High End Software...
So, yes, if even software becomes High End, then everything else can
be the same ! :D
WOW!!!
The Amarra software, along with it's $995.00 price tag, takes
marcoc1712;497971 Wrote:
I'm with you, but do they prove for sure there is NO audible difference?
THIS IS THE POINT! I'm not stating something is proving that FLAC AND
WAV are different, but only that you could not say FOR SURE is not
possible!
Marco
Aha! Now we're in the realm of
I agree : if two rippers give two files with same checksum, then these
files are the same with a very high probability (never forget that hash
functions are mathematically many-to-one, and that collisions do
exist).
Anyway, the posts I mentioned never said the file were the same, just
that size
AlAz;497981 Wrote:
I agree : if two rippers give two files with same checksum, then these
files are the same with a very high probability (never forget that hash
functions are mathematically many-to-one, and that collisions do
exist).
Anyway, the posts I mentioned never said the file were
garym;497977 Wrote:
Aha! Now we're in the realm of hypothesis testing (and I agree that the
null hypothesis in all of our discussions (other than yours perhaps) is
that there is NO difference. And yes, many of us believe that the
evidence does not support rejecting the null of no AUDIBLE
Phil Leigh;497969 Wrote:
Ask yourself this: if you listen to the same song file twice does it
ever sound different? If the answer is yes then there is no point even
talking about listening for differences between wav and flac! We have no
fixed baseline.
If the answer is no, then we can
Phil Leigh;497986 Wrote:
It is most unlikely/highly improbable that many people would achieve
the same INCORRECT checksum.
If we consider that there are only 100 different errors possible, then
the probability that 5 people can get the same error is 0,0001% (1
per million), if I'm not
ALAz wrote: AccurateRip ensure you that (many) other people obtained the same
result
when ripping the same disc. So it does not seem obvious to me that this
means that que file obtained is the *right* file (if the expression the
right file has a sense).
Think through this a minute. You
Marco, to answer your primary question (and not scientifically, just my
personal opinion): For your benefit, I play several files (jazz and
rock, quiet and loud) through my system in both WAV and FLAC versions
and hear no difference or get any different feeling. This is true
through my
Phil Leigh;497986 Wrote:
If many people, using different software, drives and discs (all are
important) achieve the same checksum, you have to say that the science
of statistics is on their side.
I admit it. I said it. But it's only a matter of probability. It's not
THE TRUTH, it is
AlAz;497997 Wrote:
I admit it. I said it. But it's only a matter of probability. It's not
THE TRUTH, it is statistically the truth. And moreover, it's not
necessarirly one's truth ;) ! I mean, if someone prefers a sound that
everyone else doesn't like, who am I to tell him he's wrong ?
Hi all,
I had the transporter connected to a Mark Levinson 336 directly, with
no pre-amp in between. Before the transporter I used a wadia 850 with
digital volume control, that's why I have no pre-map. This experience
forces me to get one. Fortunately the repair of the speakers wasn't that
marcoc1712;497971 Wrote:
I'm with you, but do they prove for sure there is NO audible
difference?
THIS IS THE POINT! I'm not stating something is proving that FLAC AND
WAV are different, but only that you could not say FOR SURE is not
possible!
Outside of maths it is very hard to prove
garym;497996 Wrote:
Marco, to answer your primary question (and not scientifically, just my
personal opinion): For your benefit, I play several files (jazz and
rock, quiet and loud) through my system in both WAV and FLAC versions
and hear no difference or get any different feeling. This is
marcoc1712;498012 Wrote:
Thanks Gary,
If null hypothesis could be proved, we all probably were looking for
berries just outside Eden...
Ah yes! Happy Holidays to you. /gary
--
garym
garym's Profile:
garym;498000 Wrote:
We're not talking about opinions here with AccurateRip. We're talking
about comparing whether the zeros and ones of digital data are identical
across lots of different rips. The odds of even one or two other users
getting the identical data from their rips as I get from
Wow, trolling subject indeed... That convinced me to take the time to
give a try. Sooner or later, I will spend the time to rip the same CD
with the same hardware and different software. I will compare checksums
(AccurateRIP and others, like SHA1). And I will try the sound on my
system. It
AlAz;498022 Wrote:
If some of you agree to do the same thing...
thousands of people have done the same thing. and we call it
AccurateRip and numerous scientific listening tests. So you should sleep
just fine. Google is your friend
--
garym
andynormancx;498007 Wrote:
Outside of maths it is very hard to prove anything with 100%
confidence.
You keep going back to your comparison of WAV/FLAC with clock drift,
you need to completely ignore those results, they were completely
flawed. All they show is your test approach was
No. I meant : rip with EAC/dbPowerAmp (useless if already done), re-rip
with another software (like RipStation for example). And just hear.
Obviously, if checksums are equals (RipStation doesn't seem to handle
AccurateRip, so MD5 or SHAxxx must be used), same sound is to be
expected. I cannot
I'm not sure I understand your point. But 2+2=4, and this is true
regardless of your perception.
--
garym
garym's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=17325
View this thread:
marcoc1712;498034 Wrote:
4. In Analog Playback (only the DA is involde here, so no possibility
to lock any other clock) difference are bigger and you can eard at them,
even with the same source file with no transcoding at all.
I've tested this, Phil too and both agree ARE audible, very
garym;498045 Wrote:
I'm not sure I understand your point. But 2+2=4, and this is true
regardless of your perception.
And you're right. But I'm wondering why a guy claims he hears
differences between ripping software. Either he's crazy, or he has a
strange combination brain/ears - or there's
AlAz;498051 Wrote:
And you're right. But I'm wondering why a guy claims he hears
differences between ripping software. Either he's crazy, or he has a
strange combination brain/ears - or there's something else. I'll try to
figure out.
I vote for the crazy option. and as you said,you can find
If you google around enough on this, you will find that knowledgeable
people tend to recommend overwhelmingly either EAC or dbPowerAmp
software for ripping. I use dbpoweramp myself. So figure out a good
naming/organization scheme (your other thread), start ripping, make sure
your tags are exactly
IMHO, those guys are victims of self-suggestion. They can not decently
judge them stupid to spend that money in such things... So they claim
they hear the difference. It's also a way to be above the average
people... Perhaps it this illness that hit this guy, don't know...
Anyway, I heard once
AlAz;498059 Wrote:
Anyway, I heard once the effect of a demagnitizer for discs. The effect
was real - small, but real.
Okay, I'll bite: vinyl, CDs, or HDDs?
--
aubuti
aubuti's Profile:
garym;498055 Wrote:
If you google around enough on this, you will find that knowledgeable
people tend to recommend overwhelmingly either EAC or dbPowerAmp
software for ripping. I use dbpoweramp myself. So figure out a good
naming/organization scheme (your other thread), start ripping, make
aubuti;498061 Wrote:
Okay, I'll bite: vinyl, CDs, or HDDs?
HDD of course. The point is to put a really big speaker for hours just
above a HDD, and you'll see, it will sound better ;)
No, it was a CD demagnetiser. Sound was a little bit crisp and clear.
Of course, some auditors were in
Is it only me that is amazed that every mind-bending discovery - that
goes beyond the current known boundaries of physics - always produces a
BETTER sound...
I didn't know that polycarbonate aluminium or gold were known for their
magnetic qualities...
--
Phil Leigh
You want to see the
Let me figure out:
You state that the errors (all the errors) take place ONLY becouse whe
inserted the AD stage of the recorder in the chain (I suppose you don't
think could be the codec, the disk or else), without this, no errors at
all.
This will explain for sure why ADM could dedect
Arf. I heard a difference. But I cannot swear you can't hear a
difference when you are trying to hear some. May be it was
auto-suggestion... Cannot say. It was approximatively 10 years ago...
--
AlAz
AlAz's Profile:
we are not far from Beltism here... :D
--
Themis
SB3 - North Star dac 192 - Cyrus 8xp - Sonus Faber Grand Piano Domus
Themis's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14700
View this thread:
Phil Leigh;497213 Wrote:
...
Did you have any attenuation between TP and Power amp?.
If you went through a pre-amp you should have been OK unless you had
the volume up very high.
If you are running into a poweramp with no attenuation, that is a
non-supported setup as a bug in the volume
I'm afraid you don't really understand what you are talking about which
makes your argument null and void.
If the sound card had really, really fast sampling rate then you
wouldn't have to worry about syncing the clocks. If the sampling rate
was fast enough then ADM would see two play backs of
garym;497996 Wrote:
Marco, to answer your primary question (and not scientifically, just my
personal opinion): For your benefit, I play several files (jazz and
rock, quiet and loud) through my system in both WAV and FLAC versions
and hear no difference or get any different feeling. This is
I can say, as a software specialist, that I find this frightening. :(
I understand now, how people designing cables may feel of some
extravagances in their domain...
--
Themis
SB3 - North Star dac 192 - Cyrus 8xp - Sonus Faber Grand Piano Domus
Didn't know about Beltism. Read some pages about... Yes, not far at all,
indeed. Especially if you follow the links I gave in my first post.
--
AlAz
AlAz's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=26092
Themis;498096 Wrote:
I can say, as a software specialist, that I find this frightening. :(
I understand now, how people designing cables may feel about some
extravagances in their domain...
Or at least the CD-Rom it comes on should be one of those 24K Gold MFSL
disks to show where at least
Could someone explain to a poor Brit the meaning of the Hip Wader? We
use them primarily for fishing...
--
Phil Leigh
You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it
ain't what you'd call minimal...
SB Touch Beta (wired) - TACT 2.2X (Linear PSU) + Good Vibrations S/W -
MF
Phil Leigh;498113 Wrote:
Could someone explain to a poor Brit the meaning of the Hip Wader? We
use them primarily for fishing...
Sewer workers wear them, as do farmers with piles of cowdung.
--
snarlydwarf
A question for the network experts here:
I am using a Squeezebox Receiver as one of the best ways to get audio
data from the computer to my external Digital-to-Analog converter. The
Squeezebox Receiver uses the Realtek RTL8201CP chip for wired ethernet
connection, and this supports enhanced
snarlydwarf;498114 Wrote:
Sewer workers wear them, as do farmers with piles of cowdung.
Thanks Snarly - that smells right to me...
--
Phil Leigh
You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it
ain't what you'd call minimal...
SB Touch Beta (wired) - TACT 2.2X (Linear
Phil Leigh;498113 Wrote:
Could someone explain to a poor Brit the meaning of the Hip Wader? We
use them primarily for fishing...
snarlydwarf;498114 Wrote:
Sewer workers wear them, as do farmers with piles of cowdung.
Phil,
Brit though you may be, I'm fairly certain that you attended a
Please don't cross-post... it's confusing to those who answer. Pick the
most appropriate forum to post to, and post once. I believe most who
follow these forums regularly do so by looking at new posts so even if
there may be a better fit in terms of which forum you posts to, pick
the one that
ralphpnj;498131 Wrote:
Phil,
Brit though you may be, I'm fairly certain that you attended a
university at some point and so you'll surely understand the concept of
bluffing one's way through a test or paper by piling on the nonsense (or
as we say here in the US, piling on the BS, i.e.
Bertel;498125 Wrote:
A question for the network experts here:
I am using a Squeezebox Receiver as one of the best ways to get audio
data from the computer to my external Digital-to-Analog converter. The
Squeezebox Receiver uses the Realtek RTL8201CP chip for wired ethernet
connection, and
Hi All,
ok,in this little pool only me and maybe 2 others could eard any
difference between FLAC and WAVE, all the others could not and experts
insure Us is impossible for many obvious and good reason.
So, I've to conclude is probably in my Brain (...but what is out of
it?) and my next question
AlAz;498164 Wrote:
I've just tust try to rip a disc I ripped yesterday with EAC. This time,
I used RipStation Micro. The result supried me quite a lot. EAC gave me
a 14,6 MB FLAC file, RipStation gave me a 15,4 MB FLAC file !!!
So I decided to rip to FLAC (I think I can remember I have
AlAz;498164 Wrote:
What conclusion ? Why the WAV are different ? There are no metadata in
WAV files...
Wave files have a header that describes the data contained in the file,
such as if it is mono/stereo, sampling rate, sample size, etc. It
doesn't contain tag information.
I believe that
garym;498166 Wrote:
Keep in mind that to compre checksum, CRC, etc. you must compare audio
CRC only [...] See this thread re using Audio CRC only.
http://forum.dbpoweramp.com/showthread.php?t=19704
OK. Thanks for the info. I will sleep less stupid, tonight...
maggior;498168 Wrote:
[...]
Here is what I found about WAV, for further help :
http://wiki.etree.org/index.php?page=FlacFingerprint
Why whole-file wav md5s can be a hindrance: wav files aren't perfectly
standardized. Different applications can create different wav files with
the same music data. Further, flac doesn't
Thanks, I have some 24bit/96kHz music, but I can not really hear any
difference between songs where I have both versions. So I wonder if
really 24bit/96kHz arrives at the Transporter.
Flac nativ is set - so it should be ok?.
Is there maybe a log to enable to see if sox is used?
christian
--
Schindler;498189 Wrote:
Thanks, I have some 24bit/96kHz music, but I can not really hear any
difference between songs where I have both versions. So I wonder if
really 24bit/96kHz arrives at the Transporter.
Flac nativ is set - so it should be ok?.
Is there maybe a log to enable to see
marcoc1712;498142 Wrote:
I've got ca. 3500 CD Ripped and stored in FLAC till now, they take 1 TB
+ backup (1 TB), maybe I'll get a 2TB HD for Kristmas, make a new copy
in WAV and Keep Flac files for Back Up.
You don't need to convert the library to WAV. Just ask SqueezeServer
software to
Themis;498194 Wrote:
You don't need to convert the library to WAV. Just ask SqueezeServer
software to transmit them to your Squeezebox as WAV. ;)
Themis, I think you meant stream as PCM ...
--
Phil Leigh
You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it
ain't what you'd
Phil Leigh;498199 Wrote:
Themis, I think you meant stream as PCM ...
Yes, sorry. :) Worked too much today.
--
Themis
SB3 - North Star dac 192 - Cyrus 8xp - Sonus Faber Grand Piano Domus
Themis's Profile:
Themis;498203 Wrote:
Yes, sorry. :) Worked too much today.
Time for rest now. Relax, have some food and a nice glass of wine
perhaps?
--
Phil Leigh
You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it
ain't what you'd call minimal...
SB Touch Beta (wired) - TACT 2.2X (Linear
Just a note about cdparanoia: I've seen it produce wave files with
different md5sums when the rip is not clean (i.e. cdparanoia had to do
some correction, even just jitter correction). This is why RubyRipper
and Max rip at least twice and compare. Whether this mismatch is
-audible- is another
You can also try the following: Now Playing, right arrow, other
Information, Bitrate.
Their should be written something much bigger than 1.000 kb/s with
24/96. If it is below 1.000 and you read Converted to it is resampled.
--
Aurumer
christian,using 24/96 khz Flac files here i can clearly tell there is a
BIG difference in sound quality from CD Red Book standard files.
what's the rest of your system?.
dennis
Schindler;498189 Wrote:
Thanks, I have some 24bit/96kHz music, but I can not really hear any
difference
...for the links. A lot of useful information!
As far as I could try it by myself (and as far as I can trust my ears)
I think that downsampling is the evil. If a piece of music is produced
(and optimized) for 24bit/96kHz it can contain much mor dynamic. So
maybe it won't be sufficient to only
metaflac --show-md5sum RipStation.flac :
f048664893c438aacfb5e96124a7a4eb
metaflac --show-md5sum EAC.flac : 2043cee4d9a45f2cb741d454026b353f
metaflac --show-md5sum dbPowerAmp.flac :
2043cee4d9a45f2cb741d454026b353f
So EAC dbPowerAmp extracted the same audio content, right ? Does that
mean
I know that both EAC and dbPowerAmp will configure the offset of the
drive. Does ripstation have that capability? If not, that may be the
issue.
--
maggior
Rich
-
Setup: 2 SB3s, 4 Booms, 1 duet, 1 receiver. SuSE 11.0 Server running
SqueezeCenter 7.3.3, MusicIP, and SqueezeSlave.
maggior;498229 Wrote:
I know that both EAC and dbPowerAmp will configure the offset of the
drive. Does ripstation have that capability? If not, that may be the
issue.
How did you make the FLACs? If the ripping tool made the flacs,
perhaps it has to do with options passed. Different
AlAz;498232 Wrote:
Don't know if RipStation can configure offset, I will search.
I didn't modify default settings for FLAC conversion in any software,
but I thought the audio fingerprint was compression-independant (since,
as you said, whatever compression level chosen, data will be
AlAz;498232 Wrote:
Don't know if RipStation can configure offset, I will search.
I didn't modify default settings for FLAC conversion in any software,
but I thought the audio fingerprint was compression-independant (since,
as you said, whatever compression level chosen, data will be
Phil Leigh;498236 Wrote:
OK lets recap:
1) Pretty much everyone on these forums agrees that EAC and DBPoweramp
have proven themselves over the last 5 years to be good solutions
Conclusion: stop messing around with Ripstation.
Enjoy your music.
On these forums and others, including
As everyone says, the tried tested apps mentioned are the way to go.
It's all about your personal preference in terms of look feel,
options, etc. but the end result is going to be great from any of those
apps (correctly configured, of course...)
I've used EAC successfully in Windoze for quite
Phil Leigh;498193 Wrote:
Do you have any other SB's running at the same time as the Transporter?
I've noticed that if I play 24/96 material on Transporter only, it is
not downsampled. If my Transporter and Duet or Boom are playing in sync,
they all appear to me to be downsampled (bitrate
Yes, this is right. The bitrate in synced mode depends on the abilities
of the weaked part, e.g. the not Transporter units.
You can only listen to 24/96 if TP plays alone and unsynced.
--
Aurumer
Aurumer's Profile:
Squeezed_Rotel;498263 Wrote:
I've noticed that if I play 24/96 material on Transporter only, it is
not downsampled. If my Transporter and Duet or Boom are playing in sync,
they all appear to me to be downsampled (bitrate wise). I made this
observation when I have clicked on more info during
My system is:
Sanders Soundsystems gear...
ESL 10b speaker
ESL amp (ESL pannels)
Magtech amp (bass)
Behringer DCX2496 DAC/Digital Crossover
Here some pictures, speaker placement it slight different now..
http://picasaweb.google.ch/SchindlerKonolfingen/Speaker?feat=directlink
Both CD and 24/96
Phil Leigh;498236 Wrote:
[...] 3) The probability of two solutions both coming up with the same
WRONG MD5 is so close to zero it is hard to measure
Conclusion: stop messing around with Ripstation.
Enjoy your music.
You know, I'm pleased when I understand things. Oh, I cannot understand
Schindler;498309 Wrote:
My system is:
Both CD and 24/96 sound great, but no big difference.
Don´t let you fool by some posts in some forums, sadly including this
that there is a HUGE difference and out of the sudden your system sounds
double as beautiful cause of 24bit.
If done correctly
If so PM me.
--
John_Dumke
John_Dumke's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=9709
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=72949
___
I thank you all for all the informative posts. I'm leaning on a
pre-order. For those who have beta tested the Touch, would a linear
power supply that fits into the SB3 fit the connector on the Touch?
Thanks
--
zzvelik
zzvelik;498339 Wrote:
I thank you all for all the informative posts. I'm leaning on a
pre-order. For those who have beta tested the Touch, would a linear
power supply that fits into the SB3 fit the connector on the Touch?
Thanks
After market PS offer no improvement or advantages unless
AlAz;498311 Wrote:
Don't cry ! I'm not irredeemable. If I'm wrong I'll apologize. I like to
spend a little time sneaking here and there. And, my mind made, I choose
my way. I don't like to follow blindly other's ways ;). No offense, I
take care of each and every advice.
Anyway, thanks for
Schindler;498309 Wrote:
My system is:
Sanders Soundsystems gear...
ESL 10b speaker
ESL amp (ESL pannels)
Magtech amp (bass)
Behringer DCX2496 DAC/Digital Crossover
Here some pictures, speaker placement it slight different now..
I don´t want to argue to much about sound, cause i did no intensive
testing to back anything up.
I once played intensively with a 24/96 file when my Transporter was
new. Back then i used Naoki Shibatas SSRC cause it was the only easy to
use free resampler. Today with a resampler like sox around
I agree that the SServer + MySqueeze system is a good UI. Actually the
best I have used. I like the options it has and it is very intuitive.
I've yet to find another that allows me to control and configure all of
my SDs in one place and remote in and fix or set up new stations for my
Mom who
You don't lose dynamic through downsampling, the 24 bit range is being
preserved. The only thing you lose is that you get clipped frequencies
above 24kHz. Those are inaudible, whether they add to the tone and
clipping them adds distortion is the only question regarding
downsampling.
--
pippin
AlAz;498311 Wrote:
You know, I'm pleased when I understand things. Oh, I cannot understand
everything, but I really think I can understand many things on this
peculiar subject. It's not pride, nor ego. Just satisfaction to say for
myself OK, that's clear.
My present thoughts are that
maggior;498348 Wrote:
Between this thread and your tagging thread, I think you have a lot of
info to process. It might be helpful to do some casual reading on the
internet about these topics and let yourself absorb the info. Nobody
grasps all aspects of this stuff in a single day!
Oh, I'm
100 matches
Mail list logo
