In Reply to: RE: High Resolution - Fact or Fiction? posted by Inmate51 on April 9, 2014 at 11:03:05:
I've done these tests on a number of occasions, starting with 176/24 and downsampling to 44/16. Then I upsample back to 176/24 and compare the original and the processed file. That way, the entire real-time playback chain is identical throughout the comparison and the only difference in the complete record - playback chain is the two passes through the sample rate converter. I use the 64 bit SRC software in iZotope RX 2 Advanced.
I listen for tonal balance, musical transients and soundstage. There are a lot of controls available with the iZotope SRC and you can set them so that 44/16 sounds pretty good, but no setting will allow all of the original tonal balance, musical transients and soundstage to make it through the 44/16 "knothole", but the differences are subtle, and not a reason to avoid buying 44/16 recordings, unless they are not available in higher resolution.
I digitize cassette tapes at 88/24. I have found that these digital transfers sound better when played at 88/24 than after downsampling to 44/16. In a sense, 44/16 isn't as good as a good cassette tape.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: High Resolution - Fact or Fiction? - Tony Lauck 20:16:14 04/10/14 (2)
- RE: High Resolution - Fact or Fiction? - Inmate51 02:50:21 04/11/14 (1)
- RE: High Resolution - Fact or Fiction? - Tony Lauck 07:08:26 04/11/14 (0)