subject:"\[SlimDevices\: Audiophiles\] 24\/192kHz capability for Transporter"


Mnyb wrote: 
 in fact all the reasoning you cited (cant find that post ) is clearly
 the usual spiel from someone who actually don't understand the sample
 theorem and is influnced by audiophile beliefs .

Yes - the next thing he will be claiming is that you get a clearer and
shinier sound by using USB cables with silver instead of copper wires.
A lot of old-school audiophiles don't understand digital technology, but
still apply their analog-age beliefs to digital.

 The usual audiophile myths is that time resolving is limited to 1/44.1
 for CD this is not true ,just look at the reconstructed analogue signal
 it looks continues to me and will be identical to to the original
 -bandwidth limited- signal.

I still hurt from the bad beating I got on Computer Audiophool when I
tried to explain that, even using waveform plots...



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: 
 Yes - the next thing he will be claiming is that you get a clearer and
 shinier sound by using USB cables with silver instead of copper wires.
 A lot of old-school audiophiles don't understand digital technology, but
 still apply their analog-age beliefs to digital.
 
 
 
 I still hurt from the bad beating I got on Computer Audiophool when I
 tried to explain that, even using waveform plots...

:)

And this used to be a nice hobby and past time , something really bad
happened a couple of decades ago .

Most things that people read about audio these days comes from these
kinds of cult sources , so it is a good idea to piont out whenever this
happens and at least try to separate the issue from the person ( they
migth not know better ) but that is hard .

What did you call them  confused audiophool instead of computer
audiophile :) it is hard to not ridicule .
But they are not open to real arguments as any pseudoscience like
homeopathy etc .
If they do some simple blind tests and listen to sane arguments they
would understand that they are indeed wrong on most occasions ,but no do
they .
All kinds of audiophile arguments follow the same lines as any
pseudoscience like  there are things that you can't measure  and  it
is not possible to understand everything  and  I just know that it is
working but cant explain why  blatantly ignorant about that it was
debunked properly decades ago... So today the audio hobby is a
pseudoscience just like alternative medicine .

A proof of that is the absolute sounds effort to spread the myth that
blind testing does not work ! this is typical of pseudosciences that any
kind of proper testing would ruin the result , the spirits won't come if
you try to photograph them etc :)

Kudos to such person as the late Peter Walker of QUAD , that in the
ELS63 manual states that no special speakers cables are needed .

Now most speaker brands cowardly provides biwire terminals even thou
they know better, to not offend their costumer base and thier silly
cabling practices .

As I have pointed out in these forums before I once did belong to the
cult faction to some degree , The tipping piont was probably cable
lifters and very expensive power cords , then I saw that emperor was
indeed very naked .

Why not some mpingo discs or some of Peter belts products :) anyone want
some green rings to have on the edge of thier CD's still got some around
( I thrown away most of them ).



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: 
 And this used to be a nice hobby and past time, something really bad
 happened a couple of decades ago.

You might be right. The National Science Foundation stated that
pseudoscientific beliefs in the U.S. became more widespread during the
1990s, peaked near 2001, and declined slightly since with
pseudoscientific beliefs remaining common

But I am sure the other side would maintain that This used to be a
nice hobby and past time, but then a bunch of arrogant objectivist
engineer types started to aggressively question what people were
hearing :-/



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


Good times and we're all in agreement :)

But.

The one-liner scientific argument (Nyquist) doesn't carry through to the
end (the analog outputs of Your DAC). While Nyquist is a very nice
result, its theoretical and for practical purposes, non-constructive. So
an implementation is forced to take another route on which there lies
traps that are not so simple anymore. So there are issues which aren't
simply true-false in the math kind of sense (like Nyquist), and so there
can be room for discussion.

The problem I suppose, is that as soon as we are talking real-life
devices, the implementation matters.



bhaagensen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7418
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


bhaagensen wrote: 
 Good times and we're all in agreement :)
 
 But.
 
 The one-liner scientific argument (Nyquist) doesn't carry through to the
 end (the analog outputs of Your DAC). While Nyquist is a very nice
 result, its theoretical and for practical purposes, non-constructive. So
 an implementation is forced to take another route on which there lies
 traps that are not so simple anymore. So there are issues which aren't
 simply true-false in the math kind of sense (like Nyquist), and so there
 can be room for discussion.
 
 The problem I suppose, is that as soon as we are talking real-life
 devices, the implementation matters.

Of course in reality things are recorded in hirez and when the stuff is
in the system and mastered it could then mathematically be reduced
these algorithms are damn near perfect implementations these days .
And then of-course the DAC oversamples to a very high rate to use some
real world affordable and cheap filters et all .
But the dat carier could be near perfcet these days .

So given modern studios the CD's or downloads is a mathematical exercise
so imo it is close to the theory

A good home experiment is to take some of your hirez downloads ( i do
have hundreds of them ) and use SoX in some of it's good best settings
,not some weird audiophile aproved  apodizing emulation (shallow
fillters do attenuate the treble to early if you are young you will hear
this ).
And have a listen , in practice I do this now and then I must admit that
I have yet to find a definitive difference and for kicks try both
24/44.1 and 16/44.1 of you precius 24/192 master.
And do not be surprised if the cd version on a hybrid disc or similar
does not sound anything like this ;) In best case these hirez files are
cut from much better masters ,but it is a complex issue better to
approve the thing with the popular hirez moniker to improve sales .

Remastered is usually a label of the exact opposite process making old
stuff sound modern and abuse them the way new stuff are done, so
audiophile would not buy remastered a better label is something like
24/192 studio master and yes these can be much better version but not
for the reasons you might think .

But all this is surpased by the real world soundquality of most
recordings , hence we are all discussing the wrong problem we get back
to this topic when recording quality in general is up to it :) or even
up to lowly CD spec ?

Some audiophile labels and classical labels may cut it sometimes ,but
they are exceptions sometimes we must have real music too



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: 
 
 So given modern studios the CD's or downloads is a mathematical exercise
 so imo it is close to the theory
 
Maybe, but you can't argue that by referring to (only) Nyquist - the
main point of my first post.

Mnyb wrote: 
 
 And have a listen , in practice I do this now and then I must admit that
 I have yet to find a definitive difference and for kicks try both
 24/44.1 and 16/44.1 of you precius 24/192 master.
 

Definitive is a strong word, but how about maybe...?

Mnyb wrote: 
 
 Remastered is usually [a label of the exact opposite...]
 

Usually, but not always, and by who's count - oh my head hurts :)

Mnyb wrote: 
 
 But all this is surpased by the real world soundquality of most
 recordings , hence we are all discussing the wrong problem we get back
 to this topic when recording quality in general is up to it :) or even
 up to lowly CD spec ?
 

That begs the question - suppose there *is* a difference - then how
good does a recording have to be in order for it to be up to it...?



bhaagensen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7418
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


bhaagensen wrote: 
 Maybe, but you can't argue that by referring to (only) Nyquist - the
 main point of my first post.
 
 
 
 Definitive is a strong word, but how about maybe...?
 
 
 
 Usually, but not always, and by who's count - oh my head hurts :)
 
 
 
 That begs the question - suppose there *is* a difference - then how
 good does a recording have to be in order for it to be up to it...?

He he all good questions especially the last one :) the recording can be
up to it but then again your mere human hearing may not
Are we done with the ibit obsession yet , now I'm having coffee and will
sit in my not so perfect listening room with some but not near enough
acoustic treatment and some DRC but again could be better and I'm to
close to the back wall trying to remedy that by using absorbent...
And who knows how the chosen recording is done..



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: 
 
 
 Well, funny enough, I downloaded a bunch of 24-bit hi-res downloads
 Bowers  Wilkins Society of Sound site after a bunch of audiophiles
 described them in superlative terms and wrote about how much better they
 were than the normal 16-bit material. I guess you are not surprised to
 hear that I discovered that several of them were actually 16 bit
 material that happened to be delivered as 24-bit FLAC files...



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


bhaagensen wrote: 
 Maybe, but you can't argue that by referring to (only) Nyquist - the
 main point of my first post.

I think you can. Remember Nyquist (or, more formally, the
NyquistShannon sampling theorem) states that If a function x(t)
contains no frequencies higher than B hertz, it is completely determined
by giving its ordinates at a series of points spaced 1/(2B) seconds
apart.

Completely determined means completely reconstructible, but I might
be missing your point.



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


:) enjoy your coffee mnyb! I am listening to some recently released
stuff i havent bought yet on Spotify in shrug Mp3...



bhaagensen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7418
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: 
 I think you can. Remember Nyquist (or, more formally, the
 NyquistShannon sampling theorem) states that If a function x(t)
 contains no frequencies higher than B hertz, it is completely determined
 by giving its ordinates at a series of points spaced 1/(2B) seconds
 apart.
 
 Completely determined means completely reconstructible, but I might
 be missing your point.

I do agree ( coffe + whether report is enjoyed ) but in reality no clock
does 1/(2B) perfectly so the actual nyqkvist frequency may fluctuate
slightly so in practical implementation you leave a little slush margin
.

But that the extent of my knowledge I can't do z transforms :-/ an
eternity ago I could do Laplace ( in university ).
I do understand some simple things like  completely determined  .
And actually the limited bit resolution 11/14/16/24 and whatnot of a
digital,system actually means that the residues above fs does not need
to be complete damped but say a finite xx dB is enough but this usually
is a whole lot of dB 100dB or much greater (140dB) in most filters I've
seen in the layman software I ever used .
There may be no thing as a perfectly bandwith limited signal so some
extremely small aliasing residues may be there ,but hey this is not
radio astronomy or cat scanners or anything sensitive just good old
audio :)



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


Julf wrote: 
 Well, funny enough, I downloaded a bunch of 24-bit hi-res downloads
 Bowers  Wilkins Society of Sound site after a bunch of audiophiles
 described them in superlative terms and wrote about how much better they
 were than the normal 16-bit material. I guess you are not surprised to
 hear that I discovered that several of them were actually 16 bit
 material that happened to be delivered as 24-bit FLAC files...

I think I have one that is upsampled from 44.1 to 48  for better
compatibility with computers  or some such nonsense I emailed them
about it , but they may have a piont suppose an old win XP system and a
punter not using asio or kernel streaming etc and other workarounds to
avoid the kmixer , the algorithms used by the OS to do this may be tuned
more to use less resources than perfect audio quality .

Not to mention some soundboards my old sound blaster from my old pc has
clear aliasing artefacts :P feed it signals close to 20k and cheerful
noises will be heard .

And then we have a squeezebox that bypasses all that :) sad that the
Beaty and simplicity of this is not apriciated by more audiophiles .

Get squeezebox unpack conect install LMS scan enjoy



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: 
 in reality no clock does 1/(2B) perfectly so the actual nyqkvist
 frequency may fluctuate slightly so in practical implementation you
 leave a little slush margin.

Sure - engineering is applying the science in real world situations. But
that doesn't make the science invalid or irrelevant in any way. The
NyquistShannon sampling theorem still applies 100%.



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: 
 Sure - engineering is applying the science in real world situations. But
 that doesn't make the science invalid or irrelevant in any way. The
 NyquistShannon sampling theorem still applies 100%.

Yes i agree 100% and that extends to all laws of physics there is no
special laws of electricity for audio they are the same as in any
electrical engineering or physics .
If that where the case many things claimed by cult hifi would greatly
interest people at CERN etc , the Nobel prize will be a given.
For example hearing differences between different spade lugs for speaker
cables ? Or wall plates for electricity .

There is no special quantum dimension for audio where things can't be
determined or measured or understood a transistor does not know that the
electrical current passing by is music .

This reminds me of the radium craze in beginning of the century, you
could by water bottles coated in uranium ore or similar to vitalise the
drinking water and of course radium cigarettes and soap :)



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: 
 
 quantum 
 

But I guess this is the point. There is some wiggly room in the
interface where science meets the real world. And I know, in the
sciences its usually controlled and abstracted using some kind of
error-model, but such error models can't be denied of being extremely
complicated if you dive into them, and in fact, not always that well
understood. And I guess in a way, its in this little space of
uncertanity that the audiophile story-tellers thrive. They can come up
with anything to fill the error-term and for the scientifically minded,
its very hard to provide rigid arguments against. We are basically
saying, look it holds 100% from here to the end of the universe - 1, and
then they quickly jump onto the last 1.



bhaagensen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7418
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

bhaagensen wrote:
But I guess this is the point. There is some wiggly room in the
interface where science meets the real world. And I know, in the
sciences its usually controlled and abstracted using some kind of
error-model, but such error models can't be denied of being extremely
complicated if you dive into them, and in fact, not always that well
understood. And I guess in a way, its in this little space of
uncertanity that the audiophile story-tellers thrive. They can come up
with anything to fill the error-term and for the scientifically minded,
its very hard to provide rigid arguments against. We are basically
saying, look it holds 100% from here to the end of the universe - 1, and
then they quickly jump onto the last 1.

In science, the burden of proof rests on those making a claim, not on
the critic. Pseudoscientific arguments may neglect this principle and
demand that skeptics demonstrate beyond a reasonable doubt that a claim
(e.g. an assertion regarding the efficacy of a novel therapeutic
technique) is false. It is essentially impossible to prove a universal
negative, so this tactic incorrectly places the burden of proof on the
skeptic rather than the claimant.

(from 'wikipedia: pseudoscience'
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoscience#Over-reliance_on_confirmation_rather_than_refutation)).

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


Neh :) Of course, a claim - wether positive or negative - presented
without argument is not worth a penny. But this just resolves into what
constitutes an argument. Here traditions vary depending on the science,
and I'm sure some audiophile story-tellers are in fact able to present
sequences of words that can be counted for as arguments*. This, in
principle is fine. Moreover the [generally accepted] philosphical basis
for science is [as you touch upon] that one can hypothesise anything
provided it is falisifiable (and you don't actually have to be able to
do this yourself to post the hypothesis). Now a hypothesis such as
24/192 is audibly different from 16/44 does occur to me as valid in
this sense - but I'm sure it can be debated. To then support any claims
on this matter obvioiusly requires arguments, and this brings be back to
what I've already said. 

So in the context of science, it boils down to what a valid hypothesis
is and what a valid argument is. This brings us far beyond the rigidity
of math and Nyquists theorem and I guess quickly becomes philosophy. Not
that I'm capable of such a discourse, but surely its not difficult to
see why the train gets off tracked at your average hifi internet
forum... This stuff will never get resolved there - and for good reasons
- IMO.

* Not counting the recently presented sawtooth argument, there are
other arguments in favour of high-res that are more solid.



bhaagensen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7418
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


bhaagensen wrote: 
 But I guess this is the point. There is some wiggly room in the
 interface where science meets the real world. And I know, in the
 sciences its usually controlled and abstracted using some kind of
 error-model, but such error models can't be denied of being extremely
 complicated if you dive into them, and in fact, not always that well
 understood. And I guess in a way, its in this little space of
 uncertanity that the audiophile story-tellers thrive. They can come up
 with anything to fill the error-term and for the scientifically minded,
 its very hard to provide rigid arguments against. We are basically
 saying, look it holds 100% from here to the end of the universe - 1, and
 then they quickly jump onto the last 1.

we don't need the quantum in audio (yet) maybe down in the -400 dB range
:) macroscopic evidence about our hearing sets limits already not in the
quantum, sane equipment already have performance beyond our hearing
abilities so normal macroscopic signal theory will do fine .

is it agreed that humans can hear 0.1% distorsion if they are sensitive
in best case in the midrange ? and 120dB range in best case still
macroscopic levels .

All that is needed is the decades old listening test where the bloody
obvius is confirmed that all low noise low distortion and flat frequency
response equipment sound the same when operated -within it's spec's-  *
the wiggle room is in speakers who always has a house sound and can't
ever be transparent and they interact with your room too ,and relatively
economical power amps that are driven out of spec with many of todays
hard to drive speakers .
Also equipment miss-match , if they where standards for signal levels
and gain and impedance and if some one cared about that . you can get
tons of hiss and noise with to much gain for example anyone can hear
that

Yea there must be a plancksound the smallest possible sound 6.626068 ×
10^-34 dB :) and planckdistorsion 6.626068 × 10^-34 thd  :D but it
probably drowns in the brownian motion of the air molecules , I suggest
a zero kelvin listening environment .

* The real non sequitur , the cult manufacturers knows this and provides
distorting non flat equipment with very complicted transfer functions
that ofcourse sound different .
The perfect circular argument, with luck the design is so bad that it
reacts on perfectly normal cable choices too so that you can hear
difference in cabling :P



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

2012-11-19 Thread lupin..the..3rd


Phil Leigh wrote: 
 In terms of AUDIO, 44.1khz sampling is all that is needed to capture the
 information. (refer Shannon et al - Information Theory). The key
 assumption being that the Nyquist frequency of  44.1 divided by 2 is
 adequate. If we only want frequencies up to a max of 22.050Khz then it
 is.
 

cliveb wrote: 
 The only information that 24/192 holds which is not present in 24/96 are
 frequencies above 48kHz.
 Perhaps that might be of significance to bats - I personally don't care,
 since my hearing maxes out around the 16kHz mark.

This looks like an old thread, however it turned up on a recent google
search, as I was looking for the possibility of 24/192 playback from my
Transporter.   I thought I'd add some information here and clear up some
misconceptions.

Nyquist has really no place in any audiophile discussion.  As you've
stated Phil, the highest frequency that can be produced by a 44.1 khz
sample rate, is 22.050 khz.  No humans can hear above 22 khz anyhow, so
isn't this good enough?  Short answer is No.  Here's why.  If you plot
out a 22 khz frequency at a 44.1 khz sample rate, result is not a wave -
it's a sawtooth.  No matter what frequency we're talking about, a
sawtooth is a very poor approximation of a wave, and it sounds it.  It
is generally agreed that to have a decent digital approximation of an
analog wave, you need 8 points, not 2.  44.1 khz divided by 8 equals
5.5125 khz.  So with a 44.1 khz sample rate, anything above 5.5 khz is
noticeably diminished in its accuracy.

So Clive, you see now how I'm going to disagree with your statement. 
You're correct in that we don't care about a 48 khz frequency, as no
human can hear it.  However the benefits of 192 khz sample rate has
nothing to do with the 48 khz theoretical limit.  As I described above,
44.1 khz sample rate is highly accurate to only 5.5 khz.  However 96 khz
sample rate is highly accurate to 12 khz, and 192 khz sample rate is
highly accurate to 24 khz.  Therefore, frequencies that are in the
audible range are considerably more accurate at these higher sampling
rates, with 192 khz delivering highly accurate (8+ sample per wave)
reproduction throughout the entire range of human hearing.

As for the argument that there is no discernible difference between 96
khz and 192 khz, that's clearly false as I've just described, however
there is a very real reason for why some would make this assertion.  Our
high frequency hearing diminishes with age.  And lets face it,
audiophiles are generally not known for being young sprightly spring
chickens!  While a teenager can hear an 18 khz tone, it's common for a
50 year old adult hear only up to 12 khz or so - hence the reason that
even a discerning ear may not have the ability to distinguish between a
96 khz and a 192 khz recording.

Cheers



lupin..the..3rd's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=56447
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

2012-11-19 Thread bhaagensen


Lupin, you don't understand Nyquist!

There are other objections, but yours is just plain wrong.



bhaagensen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7418
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

2012-11-19 Thread ralphpnj


lupin..the..3rd wrote: 
 This looks like an old thread, however it turned up on a recent google
 search, as I was looking for the possibility of 24/192 playback from my
 Transporter.   I thought I'd add some information here and clear up some
 misconceptions.
 
 Nyquist has really no place in any audiophile discussion.  As you've
 stated Phil, the highest frequency that can be produced by a 44.1 khz
 sample rate, is 22.050 khz.  Although I disagree with your assertion
 that it is adequate.  No humans can hear above 22 khz anyhow, so isn't
 this good enough?  Short answer is No.  Here's why.  If you plot out a
 22 khz frequency at a 44.1 khz sample rate, the result is not a very
 nice looking wave, in fact, there are no curves to it at all! - it's a
 sawtooth.  No matter what frequency we're talking about, a sawtooth is a
 very poor approximation of a wave, and it sounds it.  It is generally
 agreed that to have a decent digital approximation of an analog wave,
 you need 8 points, not 2.  44.1 khz divided by 8 equals 5.5125 khz.  So
 with a 44.1 khz sample rate, anything above 5.5 khz is noticeably
 diminished in its accuracy.
 
 So Clive, you see now how I'm going to disagree with your statement. 
 You're correct in that we don't care about a 48 khz frequency, as no
 human can hear it.  However the benefits of 192 khz sample rate has
 nothing to do with the 48 khz theoretical limit.  As I described above,
 44.1 khz sample rate is highly accurate to only 5.5 khz.  However 96 khz
 sample rate is highly accurate to 12 khz, and 192 khz sample rate is
 highly accurate to 24 khz.  Therefore, frequencies that are in the
 audible range are considerably more accurate at these higher sampling
 rates, with 192 khz delivering highly accurate (8+ sample per wave)
 reproduction throughout the entire range of human hearing.
 
 As for the argument that there is no discernible difference between 96
 khz and 192 khz, that's clearly false as I've just described, however
 there is a very real reason for why some would make this assertion.  Our
 high frequency hearing diminishes with age.  And lets face it,
 audiophiles are generally not known for being young spring chickens! 
 While a teenager can hear an 18 khz tone, it's common for a 50 year old
 adult to hear only up to 12 khz or so - hence the reason that even a
 discerning ear may not have the ability to distinguish between a 96 khz
 and a 192 khz recording.
 
 Cheers

Why stop at only 8 points? How about 8K points? Of course with 8K
(8,000) points one would need a sampling rate of 192,000khz for a 24khz
frequency but man would it sound smooth!

All kidding aside, please post any links which show conclusive proof of
why an 8X sampling rate is required and not the 2X sampling rate which
is presently being used, otherwise we can all just make things up to
suit our needs, as I did above.



ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
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

2012-11-19 Thread Mnyb


ralphpnj wrote: 
 Why stop at only 8 points? How about 8K points? Of course with 8K
 (8,000) points one would need a sampling rate of 192,000khz for a 24khz
 frequency but man would it sound smooth!
 
 All kidding aside, please post any links which show conclusive proof of
 why an 8X sampling rate is required and not the 2X sampling rate which
 is presently being used, otherwise we can all just make things up to
 suit our needs, as I did above.

+1

That guy is clearly wrong he do not understand Nyquist :) in fact all
the reasoning you cited (cant find that post ) is clearly the usual
spiel from someone who actually don't understand the sample theorem and
is influnced by audiophile beliefs .

They usually miss that the signal is reconstructed by the fillter and
that it is bandwidth limited ,they usually don't get that sampling can
catch everything about a signal 1/2 the Nyquist frequency including the
temporal information yes the time domain is intact there is no loss of
timing accuracy.
The usual audiophile myths is that time resolving is limited to 1/44.1
for CD this is not true ,just look at the reconstructed analogue signal
it looks continues to me and will be identical to to the original
-bandwidth limited- signal .

So yet again you can only benfit from higher fs in the source material
if can hear above 22.05 kHZ (if no gremlins are involved ) and a
bandwith limit is functionally the same regardless if it is done
digitally or by analogue means .

Don't confuse with practical solutions there are all kinds of good
reason to have dacs and adc oversampling to very high rates and dito to
actually record stuff in 24/192 in the studio but consumer playback is
another thing .



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

2009-10-26 Thread Eric Seaberg


cmarin;473353 Wrote: 
  And IMHO high res files are the wave of the future. 

It seems the OP has left this thread, but I had to respond to this. 

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.


-- 
Eric Seaberg

Eric Seaberg - San Diego
A.E.S., S.M.P.T.E., S.P.A.R.S.
e...@seaberg.com

Eric Seaberg's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7896
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

2009-10-23 Thread tv69


I like Ethan's writeup.  The comb filtering effect he describes is
interesting and I want to learn more about that.  Skimming through the
article I didn't see any mention of sampling frequencies and bit depth. 
I wonder if he feels he hears any difference between 24/96 and 24/192?

I looked back at my post and the first statement has science always
been correct and able to explain yet undiscovered phenomenon is not
trying to say that current science is wrong.  The statement is made only
in this context discussing sampling frequency and bit depth, because it
can be measured.  A file recorded at 24/192 holds more information that
24/96.  The analogy to digital photos I guess can be made where higher
resolution means more information is contained in the same image.  Can
the difference be identified?  Maybe not by just anyone.

So all I am asking is whether the science and measurements are looking
at the whole picture.  Is there something happening at the quantum level
for example, yet to be described by science.  And the only reason I ask
this is because other people like Ethan Winer, who have been in the
recording/mastering industry for many years, have stated they do hear a
difference.

I'm not talking about cables... don't want to go there. :)
I should have been more clear because I am aware that cable proponents
use the same argument.

On a side note SHM-CD and Blu-Spec CDs are common these days.  Many
claim that they sound better that the original CDs yet they contain the
same masterings.  The only thing different is the materials used to make
the CD.

People have ripped the SHM-CD and the regular CD (using EAC for
example) and found the rips to be identical, yet to some they sound
different.  Some of those people say that playback from the hard drive
as a computer file gives a different listening experience, better than
listening direct from CD, and the 2 ripped files sound identical.

???

No idea what's going on there, I haven't been subjected to it and I'm
not claiming it is true or false.  Just pointing it out.  Another one of
those discussions I suppose, with 2 camps equally defending what they
believe to be true or sensible.

TV


-- 
tv69

tv69's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=32022
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


Your digital photography analogy doesn't work. The Information that
can be captured in an image is much, much greater and inherently more
complex than ANY audio requirement. Light and sound are very different
beasts!

In terms of AUDIO, 44.1khz sampling is all that is needed to capture
the information. (refer Shannon et al - Information Theory). The key
assumption being that the Nyquist frequency of  44.1 divided by 2 is
adequate. If we only want frequencies up to a max of 22.050Khz then it
is.

It's not about information - it's about processing artefacts
(ringing, aliasing etc) in the information recovery process. This is
where higher sampling really can help because it makes it easier to deal
with those artefacts. But it's not about more information... 

I do think that high res files are a good thing, but not because they
have more information or restore missing information, rather because
they can be mastered and reproduced with less problems and
compromises...

As for anyone who can hear a difference between 2 bit-for-bit identical
files on a computer...  Guess we are lucky that computers and
the Internet work at all really.

By the way, I have lots of shm cd's and most of them sound better than
their non-shm equivalents. One thing I have noticed but haven't had time
to drill into yet is that the equivalent FLAC files tend to be somewhat
(5% ish) larger... This implies a difference in the mastering. I don't
believe that the disk coating is having any effect at all (it might on a
conventional CD player, but not when ripping on a rom drive...)


-- 
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 Triplethreat(Audiocom full mods) - Linn 5103 - Aktiv 5.1 system (6x
LK140's, ESPEK/TRIKAN/KATAN/SEIZMIK 10.5), Townsend Supertweeters, Blue
Jeans Digital,Kimber Speaker  Chord Interconnect cables
Kitchen Boom, Outdoors: SB Radio

Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85
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

2009-10-23 Thread cliveb


tv69;476340 Wrote: 
 A file recorded at 24/192 holds more information that 24/96.
The only information that 24/192 holds which is not present in 24/96
are frequencies above 48kHz.
Perhaps that might be of significance to bats - I personally don't
care, since my hearing maxes out around the 16kHz mark.

tv69;476340 Wrote: 
 Is there something happening at the quantum level for example, yet to be
 described by science.
Quantum Mechanics raised, thus the audiophile-specific version of
Godwin's Law applies :-)


-- 
cliveb

Transporter - ATC SCM100A

cliveb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=348
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


Phil Leigh;476362 Wrote: 
 
 By the way, I have lots of shm cd's and most of them sound better than
 their non-shm equivalents. One thing I have noticed but haven't had time
 to drill into yet is that the equivalent FLAC files tend to be somewhat
 (5% ish) larger... This implies a difference in the mastering. I don't
 believe that the disk coating is having any effect at all (it might on a
 conventional CD player, but not when ripping on a rom drive...)
I've examined this, as I have some shm myself. Your assumption is
right: shm discs use the best sounding mastering existing. Sometimes,
this mastering is hard (if not impossible) to find on normal CDs.
On certain disks, however, where the mastering can be identical to the
latest release(for instance: on Supertramp Even in the quietest
moments) the FLAC extracted is identical. So no difference at all. ;)


-- 
Themis

SB3 - North Star dac 192 - Denon 3808 - Sonus Faber Grand Piano Domus

Themis's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14700
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


Themis;476383 Wrote: 
 I've examined this, as I have some shm myself. Your assumption is right:
 shm discs use the best sounding mastering existing. Sometimes, this
 mastering is hard (if not impossible) to find on normal CDs.
 On certain disks, however, where the mastering can be identical to the
 latest release(for instance: on Supertramp Even in the quietest
 moments) the FLAC extracted is identical. So no difference at all. ;)

Hmm - the SHM CD's tend to use a master that is unique to the Japanese
market and Japanese issues in general. However as you say in some cases
the masters are identical. I must do more research into this.

One thing of note: In my experience, the differences we are talking
about here are bigger than differences between DAC's and amps - not
subtle ones.


-- 
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 Triplethreat(Audiocom full mods) - Linn 5103 - Aktiv 5.1 system (6x
LK140's, ESPEK/TRIKAN/KATAN/SEIZMIK 10.5), Townsend Supertweeters, Blue
Jeans Digital,Kimber Speaker  Chord Interconnect cables
Kitchen Boom, Outdoors: SB Radio

Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85
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


Phil Leigh;476394 Wrote: 
 
 One thing of note: In my experience, the differences we are talking
 about here are bigger than differences between DAC's and amps - not
 subtle ones.
Yes, you're right. Big differences, thus not media/dac differences,
rather mastering differences.
SHM use very good masters, indeed.


-- 
Themis

SB3 - North Star dac 192 - Denon 3808 - Sonus Faber Grand Piano Domus

Themis's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14700
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


Themis;476395 Wrote: 
 Yes, you're right. Big differences, thus not media/dac differences,
 rather mastering differences.
 SHM use very good masters, indeed.

It's a pity they are so hard to get hold of... (in the UK)


-- 
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 Triplethreat(Audiocom full mods) - Linn 5103 - Aktiv 5.1 system (6x
LK140's, ESPEK/TRIKAN/KATAN/SEIZMIK 10.5), Townsend Supertweeters, Blue
Jeans Digital,Kimber Speaker  Chord Interconnect cables
Kitchen Boom, Outdoors: SB Radio

Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85
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


Phil Leigh;476412 Wrote: 
 It's a pity they are so hard to get hold of... (in the UK)
I buy mine on ebay. ;)
for instance:
http://stores.shop.ebay.com.my/tokyodreamdisc-store__W0QQ_armrsZ1


-- 
Themis

SB3 - North Star dac 192 - Denon 3808 - Sonus Faber Grand Piano Domus

Themis's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14700
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


Themis;476421 Wrote: 
 I buy mine on ebay. ;)
 for instance:
 http://stores.shop.ebay.com.my/tokyodreamdisc-store__W0QQ_armrsZ1
 There are cheaper places, these days price seems going up, though...

Thanks - very helpful (and costly 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 PSU) + Good Vibrations S/W -
MF Triplethreat(Audiocom full mods) - Linn 5103 - Aktiv 5.1 system (6x
LK140's, ESPEK/TRIKAN/KATAN/SEIZMIK 10.5), Townsend Supertweeters, Blue
Jeans Digital,Kimber Speaker  Chord Interconnect cables
Kitchen Boom, Outdoors: SB Radio

Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85
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


Phil Leigh;476444 Wrote: 
 Thanks - very helpful (and costly to me...)
You're welcome. Prices have almost doubled since last year. Perhaps it
has to do with $$ exchange rate... I don't know..


-- 
Themis

SB3 - North Star dac 192 - Denon 3808 - Sonus Faber Grand Piano Domus

Themis's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14700
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

2009-10-22 Thread Themis


Yes, well, sometimes I wonder what am I listening to :
http://www.ethanwiner.com/believe.html


-- 
Themis

SB3 - North Star dac 192 - Denon 3808 - Sonus Faber Grand Piano Domus

Themis's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14700
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

2009-10-20 Thread atrocity


pfarrell;473359 Wrote: 
 There is nothing close to a 50kHz signal
 on any vinyl record

You're forgetting about CD-4 quadraphonic and its
way-up-there-somewhere-or-other carrier.

I suppose mega-crazy sampling rates would be useful for archiving
those, though I don't know of any demodulators that would decode the
quad from a line-level input.


-- 
atrocity

atrocity's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=16009
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

2009-10-20 Thread tv69


ralphpnj;473497 Wrote: 
 My previous post was more a swipe at Computer Audiophile than at you. I
 apologize if I offended you since that was not my intent.
 
 Since you are very new to this forum and this particular section of the
 forum perhaps you should be informed that many of the loudest voices in
 this section are those of what I would call show me audiophiles, in
 that while they are not firmly in the double blind test camp, they are
 still in, for lack of better term, the scientific audiophile camp. In
 other words, while many of them will not dismiss some audiophilia's
 wilder claims out of hand, they will look for the scientific reason the
 claim should or should not be believed.
 
 So in the case of 24bit/192kHz high resolution files the scientific
 evidence points to the this level of resolution as being excessive. The
 argument is further complicated by the facts that 1) there is so little
 material of this high resolution available and 2) the ability to
 properly play back this hirez material is also very limited.
 
 I suppose one could go even further and point out that most digital
 recordings made in the past 25 to 30 years were not even recorded with
 such a high sampling rate. As for the analog recordings converted to
 digital I would also guess these were also not converted to such a high
 sampling rate. Sure the analog masters could be used to create new high
 resolution digital masters but as one can see by the new Beatles
 remasters no one feels that there is any need to make 24bit/96kHz
 resolution files available let alone 24bit/192kHz files. But one can
 always dream.


Has science always been correct and able to explain yet undiscovered
phenomenon?

Does nature filter out frequencies?  There is the belief that the
higher frequencies, even though inaudible, still interact with the
audible range and affect it.

Professional Mastering Engineers, experts in the business, are hearing
differences with files that are recorded at 24/192 compared to 24/96. 
That's not to say that 24/96 does not sound good.  That's also not to
say that all listeners will hear the differences.  One of the most
coveted pieces of equipment used by the recording industry is the Metric
Halo ULN-8 which does record 8 channels up to 24/192.  A record label
FIM (First Impression Music) has files available encoded in 32/352.8. 
They are experimenting.  Nothing wrong with that.

Tim DeParavicini had stated a few years ago in public that to match
analog master tapes, the sampling frequency of digital recording would
have to be in the range of 400kHz.  Some think he's a bit of a quack,
yet he is respected for his equipment designs and modifications to
professional tape playback systems.

TV


-- 
tv69

tv69's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=32022
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

2009-10-19 Thread browellm


cmarin;473482 Wrote: 
 
 For what it's worth, I find the Transporter to be an excellent server
 and use it to send its digital output to an outboard dac. My own model
 is a modwright transporter with a wonderful tube/analog output section.
 If it could handle 24/192 files, IMHO it would be an excellent
 alternative to other high resolution music server solutions that are
 being proposed. That is all. 
 

Please don't take offence, I'm not trying to trip you up, but you do
know that by using the digital out on the Transporter, you are bypassing
all the cool stuff that the Modwright is there to do, right?

FWIW, I'll hopefully be going down the Modwright path myself shortly. 
And I think 24/192 would be a nice to have future development.


-- 
browellm

Transporter  Kondo M7 Art Audio Quintet, Border Patrol PS  Living
Voice IBX/R2

browellm's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14260
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

2009-10-17 Thread cmarin


Mr. Farrel, 

The better musical experience reported by some listeners (including
professional critics) of higher resolution files in resolving systems
IMHO is well documented. 

My concern, and I believe the concern of most audiophiles, is simply to
have a more enjoyable musical listening experience; not to brag that
their experience is better than yours or to engage in endless arguments
about why a listener's subjective listening experience is fraudalent
because it doesn't fit a particular view of the universe.

The added musical enjoyment could be a placebo effect, but it is real.
And to me, that is all that matters.


-- 
cmarin

cmarin's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=19133
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

2009-10-17 Thread NewBuyer


cmarin;473375 Wrote: 
 ...I believe the concern of most audiophiles, is simply to have a more
 enjoyable musical listening experience; not to brag that their
 experience is better than yours or to engage in endless arguments about
 why a listener's subjective listening experience is fraudalent because
 it doesn't fit a particular view of the universe...

Unfortunately, many audiophiles can be described, as exactly what
you've just said they're not!  :)


-- 
NewBuyer

NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862
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

2009-10-17 Thread Mnyb


Differentiate between recording and playback when discussing this.

For playback imho 24/96 should be everything a human being ever needs
.

To record at 24/192 for further processing is good practice. It's often
forgotten in the audiophile debate that A to D recording is much harder
(brick wall filters et al ) than the playback D to A process .

Actually just enjoy the music these new hirez standards is well chosen
as they are better than any existing hardware thus the delivery format
will never be the bottle neck anymore .

Actually given the typical output levels of DAC's there is no true 24
bit dacs the last bits are drowned in the noise .
I think supra conducting materials and cryogenic-ally coled equipment
is needed . I read somewhere that the voltage from a passive resistor
just due to random noise from the atoms and electrons moving around is
higher than the last bits !


-- 
Mnyb



No it can NOT be controlled with iTunes

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

2009-10-17 Thread ralphpnj


cmarin;473353 Wrote: 
 If you're interested in learning more about the quality of high
 resolution files please go to www.computeraudiophile.com. You will also
 find discussions/links on the relative quality of music files at
 different resolutions from 16/44.1kHz to 24/96 and higher, as well as
 how to setup players to optimally playback high res files.

Quick question:

Since it appears that you are familiar with and have actually
read/followed the musings of the Computer Audiophile, what the hack are
doing asking questions on this forum about the lowly mid-fi SqueezeBox
products? Doesn't iTunes and the Airport Express do it all?


-- 
ralphpnj

Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels - Snatch - The Transporter -
Transporter 2

'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/)

ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
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

2009-10-17 Thread cmarin


ralphpnj;473473 Wrote: 
 Quick question:
 
 Since it appears that you are familiar with and have actually
 read/followed the musings of the Computer Audiophile, what the hack are
 doing asking questions on this forum about the lowly mid-fi SqueezeBox
 products? Doesn't iTunes and the Airport Express do it all?

Actually the only question I posed was whether anyone knew if Logitech
had plans to upgrade the Transporter to handle 24/192 files. I figured
this was the appropriate forum to ask the question. Perhaps I made a
mistake.

For what it's worth, I find the Transporter to be an excellent server
and use it to send its digital output to an outboard dac. My own model
is a modwright transporter with a wonderful tube/analog output section.
If it could handle 24/192 files, IMHO it would be an excellent
alternative to other high resolution music server solutions that are
being proposed. That is all. 

The argument, and one which I do not wish to engage in, is whether you
believe that the ability of a serve to output 24/192 digital files, or
anything higher than 24/96, is relevant or not to the music listening
experience. You seem to suggest that there are clearly better forums for
that. However, I did not raise that question. Someone else did.


-- 
cmarin

cmarin's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=19133
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

2009-10-17 Thread ralphpnj


cmarin;473482 Wrote: 
 Actually the only question I posed was whether anyone knew if Logitech
 had plans to upgrade the Transporter to handle 24/192 files. I figured
 this was the appropriate forum to ask the question. Perhaps I made a
 mistake.
 
 For what it's worth, I find the Transporter to be an excellent server
 and use it to send its digital output to an outboard dac. My own model
 is a modwright transporter with a wonderful tube/analog output section.
 If it could handle 24/192 files, IMHO it would be an excellent
 alternative to other high resolution music server solutions that are
 being proposed. That is all. 
 
 The argument, and one which I do not wish to engage in, is whether you
 believe that the ability of a serve to output 24/192 digital files, or
 anything higher than 24/96, is relevant or not to the music listening
 experience. You seem to suggest that there are clearly better forums for
 that. However, I did not raise that question. Someone else did.

My previous post was more a swipe at Computer Audiophile than at you. I
apologize if I offended you since that was not my intent.

Since you are very new to this forum and this particular section of the
forum perhaps you should be informed that many of the loudest voices in
this section are those of what I would call show me audiophiles, in
that while they are not firmly in the double blind test camp, they are
still in, for lack of better term, the scientific audiophile camp. In
other words, while many of them will not dismiss some audiophilia's
wilder claims out of hand, they will look for the scientific reason the
claim should or should not be believed.

So in the case of 24bit/192kHz high resolution files the scientific
evidence points to the this level of resolution as being excessive. The
argument is further complicated by the facts that 1) there is so little
material of this high resolution available and 2) the ability to
properly play back this hirez material is also very limited.

I suppose one could go even further and point out that most digital
recordings made in the past 25 to 30 years were not even recorded with
such a high sampling rate. As for the analog recordings converted to
digital I would also guess these were also not converted to such a high
sampling rate. Sure the analog masters could be used to create new high
resolution digital masters but as one can see by the new Beatles
remasters no one feels that there is any need to make 24bit/96kHz
resolution files available let alone 24bit/192kHz files. But one can
always dream.


-- 
ralphpnj

Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels - Snatch - The Transporter -
Transporter 2

'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/)

ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
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

2009-10-17 Thread Pat Farrell

cmarin wrote:
 For what it's worth, I find the Transporter to be an excellent server
 and use it to send its digital output to an outboard dac. My own model
 is a modwright transporter with a wonderful tube/analog output section.
 If it could handle 24/192 files, IMHO it would be an excellent
 alternative to other high resolution music server solutions that are
 being proposed. That is all. 

Since it is not a server by any definition of the term, this posting
raises questions about your interests.

Other than specmanship, there is no evidence that 24/192 files have any
advantage over 24/96 files.

Logitech makes no comments about future products, but if you are holding
your breath waiting for them to make a Transporter Two that meets your
requirements, I suggest that further posting here is not worth your effort.


-- 
Pat Farrell
http://www.pfarrell.com/

___
audiophiles mailing list
audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com
http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles

Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] 24/192kHz capability for Transporter

2009-10-17 Thread Phil Leigh


The reason some of us look for a scientific explanation is simply
because - the last time I looked - we are talking about a fundamentally
scientific subject. I see no alchemy or witchcraft here...


-- 
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 Triplethreat(Audiocom full mods) - Linn 5103 - Aktiv 5.1 system (6x
LK140's, ESPEK/TRIKAN/KATAN/SEIZMIK 10.5), Townsend Supertweeters, Blue
Jeans Digital,Kimber Speaker  Chord Interconnect cables
Kitchen Boom, Outdoors: SB Radio

Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85
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

2009-10-17 Thread Pat Farrell

cmarin wrote:
 The better musical experience reported by some listeners (including
 professional critics) of higher resolution files in resolving systems
 IMHO is well documented. 

Better musical experience has been reported using $2000 speaker cables.
I do not believe that there is any actual benefit to using such items,
except to the benefit of the pocketbooks of the retailers.

High-wide files are better than RedBook. But there is no evidence that
24/192 are actually better for listening by humans. And there is no
serious evidence that there is any signal that would benefit from the 96
kHz bandwidth of the 24/192 size over the 48kHz bandwidth that 24/96
provides.

There have been articles, specifically in Stereophile, that show using
spectrum analyzers that many commercially released recordings in DVD-A
and SACD have no addition signal over what is in the RedBook version.

If there is no signal at SACD/DVD-A rates, there is no point in dreaming
for higher specs.

Its the same as the search for signal to noise rations better than 100
dB. Sure its fun to argue that 120 dB is better than 110dB, but its a
difference that can never be heard in any listening environment.


-- 
Pat Farrell
http://www.pfarrell.com/

___
audiophiles mailing list
audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com
http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles

Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] 24/192kHz capability for Transporter

2009-10-17 Thread Mr_Sukebe


pfarrell;473507 Wrote: 
 ...And there is no serious evidence that there is any signal that would
 benefit from the 96 kHz bandwidth of the 24/192 size over the 48kHz
 bandwidth that 24/96 provides...
 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the frequency bandwidth defined by
the number of bits (in this case 24), with the 192khz defining the
sample rate?


-- 
Mr_Sukebe

SB3, Meridian 568.2, Bel Canto Evo2i, Impulse Ta'us, Coherent system,
audio-technica and Zanash cables, Stillpoints

Mr_Sukebe's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10609
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

2009-10-17 Thread Pat Farrell

Mr_Sukebe wrote:
 pfarrell;473507 Wrote: 
 ...And there is no serious evidence that there is any signal that would
 benefit from the 96 kHz bandwidth of the 24/192 size over the 48kHz
 bandwidth that 24/96 provides...

 
 Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the frequency bandwidth defined by
 the number of bits (in this case 24), with the 192khz defining the
 sample rate?

sample size is 24 bits in this discussion. sample rate is 192kHz. Per
Nyquist, with a 192kHz sample rate, the maximum sampled frequency is
192/2 or 96kHz

The frequency bandwidth then has a theoretical value of 0 Hz to 96kHz.

One might talk about the signal stream bandwidth, which contains 24 bits
times 192k samples of 24 bits each, times two for stereo or six for 5.1
But very few discussions care about this.

A stream of stereo 24/192 music would take about ten megabits per second
of bandwidth.


-- 
Pat Farrell
http://www.pfarrell.com/

___
audiophiles mailing list
audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com
http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles

[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] 24/192kHz capability for Transporter


I might have missed previous posts, but does any one know if Logitech
intends to upgrade the ability of the Transporter to handle higher
resolution (e.g., 24 bit/192kHz) files? I'm currently feeding my
modwright transporter's digital signal to a playback designs DAC and
would like to have the ability to play back files with resolutions
higher than the Transporter's current 24bit/96kHz limit. Thanks.


-- 
cmarin

cmarin's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=19133
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

2009-10-16 Thread bhaagensen


That's never going to happen. In others words, no. You may want to
consider the Touch if you are using an external dac anyway.


-- 
bhaagensen

bhaagensen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7418
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


Who is the manufacturer of the Touch? And does it provide 24/192kHz
capability?


-- 
cmarin

cmarin's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=19133
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

2009-10-16 Thread Mr_Sukebe


cmarin;473244 Wrote: 
 Who is the manufacturer of the Touch? And does it provide 24/192kHz
 capability?

The Touch is the upcoming new Squeezebox, and won't support 24/192
files.
The only streamer I'm aware of that will support such high res files
are the Linn DS kit.


-- 
Mr_Sukebe

SB3, Meridian 568.2, Bel Canto Evo2i, Impulse Ta'us, Coherent system,
audio-technica and Zanash cables, Stillpoints

Mr_Sukebe's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10609
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

2009-10-16 Thread bhaagensen


Just adding that the Touch will support up to 24/96


-- 
bhaagensen

bhaagensen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7418
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


I am familiar with the blue smoke music server that handles 24/192kHz
and provides on the fly upsampling conversion as well; and of course you
also have computer based severs. Too bad about the limitation on the
transporter. I guess the economics are not sufficient to compell
logitech to upgrade the Transporter. Sad because it's a great piece.


-- 
cmarin

cmarin's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=19133
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

2009-10-16 Thread Pat Farrell

cmarin wrote:
 I am familiar with the blue smoke music server that handles 24/192kHz
 and provides on the fly upsampling conversion as well; and of course you
 also have computer based severs. Too bad about the limitation on the
 transporter. I guess the economics are not sufficient to compell
 logitech to upgrade the Transporter. Sad because it's a great piece.

Where are you finding real 24/192kHz material? Do you know if it
actually has signal over 48kHz?

I am assuming that you claim to actually have a system that can tell the
difference between lowly 24/96 and your dream of 24/192

-- 
Pat Farrell
http://www.pfarrell.com/

___
audiophiles mailing list
audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com
http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles

Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] 24/192kHz capability for Transporter