Mnyb wrote:
Would a more natural signal that just touches 0dB for one sample be
a problem to?
Yes.
Is this really limited to asrc ? could not any digital filter used have
this problem .
It is a problem in any situation where you have to interpolate between
two samples, so most DSP
Chaps,
Think about it, even the DAC2 does not accommodate arbitrarily large
peaks! The HA thread indicates some are up to 11db and a BM guy pops up
saying you can get more headroom by not maxing the volume.
That right there should tell us that we shouldn't assume a DAC just
deals with it.
I
heisenberg wrote:
An interesting thing happened to me yesterday. I've purchased Les
Nubians Princesses Nubiennes CD and ripped it to AIFF and then sat
down to listen in amazement. Why in amazement? Because I've previously
had that CD ripped in 320 kbps mp3 format and was listening to it for
darrenyeats wrote:
Chaps,
Think about it, even the DAC2 does not accommodate -arbitrarily large-
peaks. The HA thread indicates some are up to 11db and a BM guy pops up
saying you can get more than 3.5db headroom by not maxing the volume.
That right there tells us not to assume anything.
Julf wrote:
Wish I had time to draw the picture
Found a very good discussion on the topic: 'Gearsluz - Tips and
techniques: Intersample peaks'
(http://www.gearslutz.com/board/showwiki.php?title=Tips-and-Techniques:Intersample-peaks)
A relevant quote: Ceilings of .3 or .1 etc dBFS are
probedb wrote:
So you compared a lossy rip of a CD which maybe from a different
release/master with a new lossless CD rip and you expected them to sound
the same? Was this a proper ABX test? I'm guessing not.
The comparison is completely invalid as a test of lossy vs lossless. The
only
My opinion piece on digital cables (but much applies to analogue as
well). This one could make some folks unhappy!
TGIF!
Enjoy the weekend, everyone!
http://archimago.blogspot.ca/2013/05/musings-audiophile-digital-cables.html
Archimago wrote:
I would still argue (ultra-kamikaze-like) that if one could tell a
difference between FLAC vs. WAV vs. AIFF vs. APE vs. WV vs. ALAC, then
there's *something wrong with their hardware*! To actually hear a
difference (not just bias of some sort) should not be like some badge
netchord wrote:
well, SC is converting ALAC to FLAC using faad/sox, so i guess the
difference I'm hearing is actually between FLAC and AIFF, both of which
are converted natively by the TP.
and would it surprise you to learn i hear a difference between wired and
wireless to the TP, and
Archimago wrote:
My opinion piece on digital cables (but much applies to analogue as
well). This one could make some folks unhappy!
TGIF!
Enjoy the weekend, everyone!
http://archimago.blogspot.ca/2013/05/musings-audiophile-digital-cables.html
Good piece!
Your experiment in using one
darrell wrote:
Good piece!
Your experiment in using one half of an analogue interconnect as a
coaxial digital cable is particularly interesting to me, as I use one
half of a 3 or 4 metre analogue interconnect to connect my Touch to my
DAC, because it's the only cable I own which is long
Archimago wrote:
Dunno about that right-left issue, but I think if you investigate the
directional flow issue, you would see that there is only *one* correct
direction. Connecting backwards and you're sure to be hearing curtains
between you and the music. Just ask the guys running that cable
netchord wrote:
well, SC is converting ALAC to FLAC using faad/sox, so i guess the
difference I'm hearing is actually between FLAC and AIFF, both of which
are converted natively by the TP.
and would it surprise you to learn i hear a difference between wired and
wireless to the TP, and
darrell wrote:
Hmmm... I think I understand that on the surface of it, the left-right
issue might be caused by the lack of an electrical connection between
the two components, but on the other hand, wouldn't special audiophile
quantum tunnelling effects ensure that the music still got
The first full digitally produced album
Never mind there was no digital playback then
I have to think despite the genius of Steven Wilson that this is the
first truly recoverable album.
life, banned, look it up
banned
Archimago wrote:
...It's fun just putting stuff out there in a more empirical
fashion...
At the risk of repeating myself, it's great that you feel this way. Our
society (and the internet which is simply a reflection of society) is
far too polluted by conspiracy theorists and mystics (and dare
netchord wrote:
well, SC is converting ALAC to FLAC using faad/sox, so i guess the
difference I'm hearing is actually between FLAC and AIFF, both of which
are converted natively by the TP.
and would it surprise you to learn i hear a difference between wired and
wireless to the TP, and
netchord wrote:
and would it surprise you to learn i hear a difference between wired and
wireless to the TP, and prefer the former? what ever bias might be
involved, i assure you it's an inconvenient one- running ethernet to my
system was a pain in the ass.
Very surprised. More evidence
Figured for $5 I'd try the 24/96 version. Haven't had time to listen on
my main system, but I converted a copy to CD and listened in the car
today. The recording was certainly full-range and dynamic, but have to
say I used the next-track button on the CD player much more heavily
than normal.
19 matches
Mail list logo
