Don Pearce wrote:

On Tue, 04 Mar 2008 09:54:56 +0000, Roger Thorpe
wrote:


Don Pearce wrote:


As far as I can see the sample clips are all MP3 - how do you get to
them in hi-res format? The page I am on is this:

http://www.linnrecords.com/recording...ymphonies.aspx

d

When I look at the page there's a lavender coloured panel with the
different sample rates and the pushbuttons marked "buy now" towards the top.
Roger Thorpe


Yes, I have that - but I don't want to buy, just listen to a sample in
Hi Res. How do I do that?

d

Go to
http://www.linnrecords.com/linn-down...testfiles.aspx
The test files are very short!

Roger

On Tue, 04 Mar 2008 10:01:39 +0000, Roger Thorpe
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:

On Tue, 04 Mar 2008 09:54:56 +0000, Roger Thorpe
wrote:


Don Pearce wrote:


As far as I can see the sample clips are all MP3 - how do you get to
them in hi-res format? The page I am on is this:

http://www.linnrecords.com/recording...ymphonies.aspx

d

When I look at the page there's a lavender coloured panel with the
different sample rates and the pushbuttons marked "buy now" towards the top.
Roger Thorpe


Yes, I have that - but I don't want to buy, just listen to a sample in
Hi Res. How do I do that?

d

Go to
http://www.linnrecords.com/linn-down...testfiles.aspx
The test files are very short!

Roger

No - absolutely no audible difference between the 16/44.1 and the
24/88.

d
--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Don Pearce wrote:


No - absolutely no audible difference between the 16/44.1 and the
24/88.

d

You might be right, I can convince myself that I can hear a difference,
but until I get round to doing a proper blind test I won't know. That
10 second sample's a bit too short though.
I think that I can hear a difference in the high strings - but that's
exactly where I expect the difference to be. I did compare the SACD of
Dark Side of the Moon with the CD layer, and found that the cymbals
swoosh in a more realistic way, but again that is what I had expected,
and I knew which layer I was hearing.
Perhaps I'm not using a good enough mains cable......
Roger Thorpe

On Tue, 04 Mar 2008 10:26:52 +0000, Roger Thorpe
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:


No - absolutely no audible difference between the 16/44.1 and the
24/88.

d

You might be right, I can convince myself that I can hear a difference,
but until I get round to doing a proper blind test I won't know. That
10 second sample's a bit too short though.
I think that I can hear a difference in the high strings - but that's
exactly where I expect the difference to be. I did compare the SACD of
Dark Side of the Moon with the CD layer, and found that the cymbals
swoosh in a more realistic way, but again that is what I had expected,
and I knew which layer I was hearing.
Perhaps I'm not using a good enough mains cable......
Roger Thorpe

There is no reason why any sound in the audible range (and that
includes the high strings) would sound any different under 24/88 than
16/44.1 They will both be reproduced identically provided they haven't
been manipulated in some way.

As for DSOTM, I haven't heard the SACD version, but anecdotally I
believe it is remastered, if not actually remixed from the CD version,
so it would be no surprise that it would sound different.

Go for the mains cable though - definitely better, particularly if you
choose the plug colour to suit the music...

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Don Pearce wrote:


There is no reason why any sound in the audible range (and that
includes the high strings) would sound any different under 24/88 than
16/44.1 They will both be reproduced identically provided they haven't
been manipulated in some way.

You say that but...
To my mech eng mind 44.1 kHz doesn't seem enough to sample a 20kHz
signal properly. Now I haven't read it up completely, but my
understanding is that the brick wall filter reconstructs the original
signal from the sum and difference that I would expect to result from a
sampling rate close to double the signal (is that right?). I'm not
confident that there is such an ideal filter, and systems such as legato
link seem to have none. I haven't managed to find out how upsampling
DACs do the interpolation yet, but they might seem to be a Good Thing.
Of course this is all a bit abstract really since I don't think that my
hearing goes much beyond 16kHz.
At the very worst I can console myself that I did need a new CD machine
(the old one became too choosy about it's discs) so I haven't wasted all
my money on self delusion!
Roger

(Don Pearce) writes:

There is no reason why any sound in the audible range (and that
includes the high strings) would sound any different under 24/88 than
16/44.1 They will both be reproduced identically provided they haven't
been manipulated in some way.

This may be stupid thinking but here goes anyway:

Even if there is significant energy in the part of the
signal beyond our range of hearing we still wouldn't hear
any of it. Unless, the voice coil of the tweeters are
heated up by that energy and change their properties.

--
Martin Schöön "Problems worthy of attack
show their worth by hitting back."
Piet Hein

On Tue, 04 Mar 2008 20:11:41 +0100, (Martin
Schöön) wrote:

(Don Pearce) writes:

There is no reason why any sound in the audible range (and that
includes the high strings) would sound any different under 24/88 than
16/44.1 They will both be reproduced identically provided they haven't
been manipulated in some way.

This may be stupid thinking but here goes anyway:

Even if there is significant energy in the part of the
signal beyond our range of hearing we still wouldn't hear
any of it. Unless, the voice coil of the tweeters are
heated up by that energy and change their properties.

I think we can safely discount that for any normal music source.

d
--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

(Don Pearce) writes:

On Tue, 04 Mar 2008 20:11:41 +0100, (Martin
Schöön) wrote:

(Don Pearce) writes:

There is no reason why any sound in the audible range (and that
includes the high strings) would sound any different under 24/88 than
16/44.1 They will both be reproduced identically provided they haven't
been manipulated in some way.

This may be stupid thinking but here goes anyway:

Even if there is significant energy in the part of the
signal beyond our range of hearing we still wouldn't hear
any of it. Unless, the voice coil of the tweeters are
heated up by that energy and change their properties.

I think we can safely discount that for any normal music source.

Define "normal".
:-)

On a more serious note: What about all those class-D amplifiers?

--
Martin Schöön "Problems worthy of attack
show their worth by hitting back."
Piet Hein

Roger Thorpe wrote:

I think that I can hear a difference in the high strings - but that's
exactly where I expect the difference to be. I did compare the SACD of
Dark Side of the Moon with the CD layer, and found that the cymbals
swoosh in a more realistic way, but again that is what I had expected,
and I knew which layer I was hearing.

If you take the analogue SACD output from DSotM and digitize it in 16/44.1,
then write it to a CD, it sounds just like the SACD layer, not the CD layer.

--
Eiron.