Comments on: Is high-resolution audio (like SACD) audibly better than than CD? http://www.itwriting.com/blog Tech writing blog Sun, 12 Feb 2012 21:04:12 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Robert Wortman http://www.itwriting.com/blog/articles/is-high-resolution-audio-like-sacd-audibly-better-than-than-cd/comment-page-1#comment-1062058 Robert Wortman Sun, 05 Feb 2012 05:53:31 +0000 http://www.itwriting.com/blog/?page_id=1443#comment-1062058 Seems plausible to me. I have a small collection of hi-rez recordings and I think they sound better. When I downsample them to CD I am not that sure I can hear the difference. I think I can, but I would not bet on it in a blind test. Most differences probably are in the mastering. One reknowned writer carries CD-R's recorded from his megabuck turntable that are purported to sound massively better than the commercially released CD's. This is supposed to prove the superiority of the vinyl LP. Most people don't seem to see the lack of logic in that. Seems plausible to me. I have a small collection of hi-rez recordings and I think they sound better. When I downsample them to CD I am not that sure I can hear the difference. I think I can, but I would not bet on it in a blind test. Most differences probably are in the mastering. One reknowned writer carries CD-R’s recorded from his megabuck turntable that are purported to sound massively better than the commercially released CD’s. This is supposed to prove the superiority of the vinyl LP. Most people don’t seem to see the lack of logic in that.

]]> By: tim http://www.itwriting.com/blog/articles/is-high-resolution-audio-like-sacd-audibly-better-than-than-cd/comment-page-1#comment-853494 tim Fri, 28 Oct 2011 06:16:56 +0000 http://www.itwriting.com/blog/?page_id=1443#comment-853494 An interesting point, though most people assume that because differences in things like loudspeakers (and, I would have thought, microphones) are easy to hear, the ABX isn't worth doing. But I'd like to see more of these kinds of tests. An interesting point, though most people assume that because differences in things like loudspeakers (and, I would have thought, microphones) are easy to hear, the ABX isn’t worth doing. But I’d like to see more of these kinds of tests.

]]> By: Steve G http://www.itwriting.com/blog/articles/is-high-resolution-audio-like-sacd-audibly-better-than-than-cd/comment-page-1#comment-853063 Steve G Fri, 28 Oct 2011 00:51:14 +0000 http://www.itwriting.com/blog/?page_id=1443#comment-853063 There seems to be something missing from the ABX testing of most stuff which is that it isn't real ABX testing. There's no control for the aptitude of the subjects. What I mean is: they need to test each subject to see which things they CAN discern in the test environment before doing the test. So then you could say "of the 500 subjects who could reliably tell a U-87 from a 414 100% of the time, none of them could tell when 44.1/16 conversion was inserted into the same chain". Without that, it seems meaningless. Not everyone can hear stuff in a test environment. If you get the result that also nobody in the world can tell the difference between microphones, etc., then either everything in the world is fake or there is a problem with the test. It seems like a lot of times people think they are supporting "the scientific method" but really they aren't using. Real scientific method would be to look at lots and lots of situations and then analyze the data... There seems to be something missing from the ABX testing of most stuff which is that it isn’t real ABX testing. There’s no control for the aptitude of the subjects. What I mean is: they need to test each subject to see which things they CAN discern in the test environment before doing the test. So then you could say “of the 500 subjects who could reliably tell a U-87 from a 414 100% of the time, none of them could tell when 44.1/16 conversion was inserted into the same chain”. Without that, it seems meaningless. Not everyone can hear stuff in a test environment. If you get the result that also nobody in the world can tell the difference between microphones, etc., then either everything in the world is fake or there is a problem with the test. It seems like a lot of times people think they are supporting “the scientific method” but really they aren’t using. Real scientific method would be to look at lots and lots of situations and then analyze the data…

]]> By: yvan volders http://www.itwriting.com/blog/articles/is-high-resolution-audio-like-sacd-audibly-better-than-than-cd/comment-page-1#comment-310371 yvan volders Wed, 17 Nov 2010 19:52:40 +0000 http://www.itwriting.com/blog/?page_id=1443#comment-310371 Technically, DVD-A (this is NOT a DVD movie with a music layer on it) should be far superiour. Only it is DEAD. The biggest mistake in my opinion was the choice of the name : DVD-A Most of the people (also technicians and engineers) were not aware what DVD-A was in fact...The standard supports up to 24bit/192 kHz in stereo and 24 bit/96 kHz in surround 5.1. (SACD : only 1 bit datastream / 2.822.400 Hz) Technically, DVD-A (this is NOT a DVD movie with a music layer on it) should be far superiour. Only it is DEAD. The biggest mistake in my opinion was the choice of the name : DVD-A Most of the people (also technicians and engineers) were not aware what DVD-A was in fact…The standard supports up to 24bit/192 kHz in stereo and 24 bit/96 kHz in surround 5.1. (SACD : only 1 bit datastream / 2.822.400 Hz)

]]> By: David http://www.itwriting.com/blog/articles/is-high-resolution-audio-like-sacd-audibly-better-than-than-cd/comment-page-1#comment-285432 David Fri, 22 Oct 2010 19:49:10 +0000 http://www.itwriting.com/blog/?page_id=1443#comment-285432 I'm not convinced that a double blind test where you are asked to identify between A and B is necessarily definitive. I may not be able to tell consciously which is which in a 'laboratory', but perhaps in the right surroundings and ambience and listening to the right music, I might only find the hairs on the back of my neck standing on end with the higher resolution format. Or maybe my ears may simply be less 'tired' with the 24/96 allowing me to listen for longer, louder. It's impossible to measure and prove it though. My guess is that 44 kHz is uncomfortably close to the limit for the desired 20 kHz response, so that there may be strange effects going on right at that top end. And even if our adult ears can't hear those effects as such, they may be able to hear them when the high frequency components present in the two stereo channels 'beat' together in the air before reaching our ears. So if I had to bet on it, I would guess that there is some value in stretching to 24/96, but that it may never be demonstrated objectively. I’m not convinced that a double blind test where you are asked to identify between A and B is necessarily definitive. I may not be able to tell consciously which is which in a ‘laboratory’, but perhaps in the right surroundings and ambience and listening to the right music, I might only find the hairs on the back of my neck standing on end with the higher resolution format. Or maybe my ears may simply be less ‘tired’ with the 24/96 allowing me to listen for longer, louder. It’s impossible to measure and prove it though.

My guess is that 44 kHz is uncomfortably close to the limit for the desired 20 kHz response, so that there may be strange effects going on right at that top end. And even if our adult ears can’t hear those effects as such, they may be able to hear them when the high frequency components present in the two stereo channels ‘beat’ together in the air before reaching our ears. So if I had to bet on it, I would guess that there is some value in stretching to 24/96, but that it may never be demonstrated objectively.

]]> By: Barry Diament http://www.itwriting.com/blog/articles/is-high-resolution-audio-like-sacd-audibly-better-than-than-cd/comment-page-1#comment-244098 Barry Diament Thu, 09 Sep 2010 13:27:04 +0000 http://www.itwriting.com/blog/?page_id=1443#comment-244098 Hi Tim, You and your readers might be interested to know the Soundkeeper Recordings <a href="http://www.soundkeeperrecordings.com/format.htm" rel="nofollow">Format Comparison</a> page now includes 192k samples (in addition to 96k and 44.1k) from our latest release <a href="http://www.soundkeeperrecordings.com/equinox.htm" rel="nofollow">Equinox</a>. Best regards, Barry www.soundkeeperrecordings.com www.barrydiamentaudio.com Hi Tim,

You and your readers might be interested to know the Soundkeeper Recordings Format Comparison page now includes 192k samples (in addition to 96k and 44.1k) from our latest release Equinox.

Best regards,
Barry
http://www.soundkeeperrecordings.com
http://www.barrydiamentaudio.com

]]> By: PawelWoo http://www.itwriting.com/blog/articles/is-high-resolution-audio-like-sacd-audibly-better-than-than-cd/comment-page-1#comment-234006 PawelWoo Fri, 27 Aug 2010 12:35:48 +0000 http://www.itwriting.com/blog/?page_id=1443#comment-234006 Additional problem with SACD is no possibility to RIP to the disc. After many checks I have now really good system to listen from by server database (based on Ayre QB-9). For me it's better (more "analog" and detailed) than SACD content from rather good SACD player. Unfortunately, I don't know the procedure, to rip convert SACD to 24/96 PCM, so in this case I cannot compare SACD and CD source. Additional problem with SACD is no possibility to RIP to the disc. After many checks I have now really good system to listen from by server database (based on Ayre QB-9). For me it’s better (more “analog” and detailed) than SACD content from rather good SACD player. Unfortunately, I don’t know the procedure, to rip convert SACD to 24/96 PCM, so in this case I cannot compare SACD and CD source.

]]> By: tim http://www.itwriting.com/blog/articles/is-high-resolution-audio-like-sacd-audibly-better-than-than-cd/comment-page-1#comment-233925 tim Fri, 27 Aug 2010 09:17:23 +0000 http://www.itwriting.com/blog/?page_id=1443#comment-233925 @Pawel <blockquote> I would have always thought (I’m not an engineer, just a moderate audiophile) that a higher sampling rate simply makes the digital sine soundwave less jagged, so the sound is more “analogue”. Amount of “detail” does not necessarily have anything to do with it. </blockquote> It doesn't work like that. There is nothing jagged in the wave; but it is frequency limited. However the additional frequencies that can be reproduced by high-res are inaudible by humans. Tim @Pawel

I would have always thought (I’m not an engineer, just a moderate audiophile) that a higher sampling rate simply makes the digital sine soundwave less jagged, so the sound is more “analogue”. Amount of “detail” does not necessarily have anything to do with it.

It doesn’t work like that. There is nothing jagged in the wave; but it is frequency limited. However the additional frequencies that can be reproduced by high-res are inaudible by humans.

Tim

]]> By: Pawel S. http://www.itwriting.com/blog/articles/is-high-resolution-audio-like-sacd-audibly-better-than-than-cd/comment-page-1#comment-233914 Pawel S. Fri, 27 Aug 2010 08:59:23 +0000 http://www.itwriting.com/blog/?page_id=1443#comment-233914 Just found this, so I'm joining the discussion late in the game. 1. If you hear "details" in the SACD that you have not heard on the CD, put the CD back in the player and see if you hear those details now. Maybe you just didn't notice and were listening more carefully to the SACD... :-) 2. I have a reasonably good, but not top of the line system (no SACD though). Some time ago I was given (a sort of indefinite loan from a good friend) a pair of Tara Labs Air RSC 1 interconnects. Without delving too deeply into a discussion on cables, the amount of additional detail, depth and "air" I heard on the same CDs was breathtaking. Really. I would have always thought (I'm not an engineer, just a moderate audiophile) that a higher sampling rate simply makes the digital sine soundwave less jagged, so the sound is more "analogue". Amount of "detail" does not necessarily have anything to do with it. Just found this, so I’m joining the discussion late in the game.

1. If you hear “details” in the SACD that you have not heard on the CD, put the CD back in the player and see if you hear those details now.
Maybe you just didn’t notice and were listening more carefully to the SACD… :-)

2. I have a reasonably good, but not top of the line system (no SACD though). Some time ago I was given (a sort of indefinite loan from a good friend) a pair of Tara Labs Air RSC 1 interconnects.
Without delving too deeply into a discussion on cables, the amount of additional detail, depth and “air” I heard on the same CDs was breathtaking. Really.

I would have always thought (I’m not an engineer, just a moderate audiophile) that a higher sampling rate simply makes the digital sine soundwave less jagged, so the sound is more “analogue”. Amount of “detail” does not necessarily have anything to do with it.

]]> By: tim http://www.itwriting.com/blog/articles/is-high-resolution-audio-like-sacd-audibly-better-than-than-cd/comment-page-1#comment-192777 tim Wed, 12 May 2010 11:44:24 +0000 http://www.itwriting.com/blog/?page_id=1443#comment-192777 Ant Thanks for the comments. I know that there are many SACDs that sound great, but that doesn't answer the question of whether this is to do with hi-res itself, or just that the recording was better mastered or from better sources, or some other factor. This can't be resolved without rigorous listening tests in controlled conditions, of which there are few. Tim Ant

Thanks for the comments. I know that there are many SACDs that sound great, but that doesn’t answer the question of whether this is to do with hi-res itself, or just that the recording was better mastered or from better sources, or some other factor. This can’t be resolved without rigorous listening tests in controlled conditions, of which there are few.

Tim

]]>