|
DVD-Audiobahn New DVD-Audio music releases and talk about the latest players. |
|
|
|
DVD-Audiobahn New DVD-Audio music releases and talk about the latest players. |
|
In Reply to: Re: Basic Questions About DVD-A Authoring posted by Neil Wilkes on May 16, 2006 at 09:48:26:
Neil:The *alleged* "point" basically comes back to the whole 'validity of upsampling' issue. Basically, some of us think/have thought that if you can take RBCD files and rip them bitperfect to PC, them UPSAMPLE them using complex algorithms with steep filters and even dithering, you may have a way to *capture* a *well* upsampled RBCD files and play them back as hi-res discs. This permits one to skip traditional hardware/realtime upsampling techniques, which have their own set of *alleged* cost and performance limitations. (Did I get that right guys?)
(Notice I say *alleged* alot? You be the judge why on that one...)
The process **need not be done in real time** so it can take 4 or 6 or 8 times longer than realtime playback. Who cares? We're on a Mission from God here. (I have upsampled 16/44.1 RBDC files to 24/192 and it takes 30 minutes to do a 5 minute track on a 2.5GhZ machine) And guess what!?! The file becomes 6.53061224489 times bigger, and it sounds, well uh, it should sound, er... I think it sounds...
Oh hell I can't tell the bloody difference! HONESTLY!
Then, one would take the *precious* newly upsampled track and author it either to DVD-V (up to 24/96) or DVD-A (up to 24/192). Then one could *allegedly* enjoy all the benefits of VERY expensive realtime hardware upsamplers... without buying a very expensive realtime hardware upsampler!
Yes, the point you make about resolution is largely accepted. If I take a 800x600 digital photo and "resize" it to 1600x1200, the picture is NOT going to have the same resolution as a photo TAKEN at 1600x1200. What some claim to achieve is changing sonics by "moving audible artifacts of the low-pass filter higher into the ultra-sonic region, thereby providing a better/nicer/smoother/whatever sound". Ok. Sounds possible. Does it work?
Personally, since I have been listening to more and more hi-res material I have been spending ZERO time trying to improve RBCD's. The ones that sound good (about half of them) sound good no matter what you do to them (sample rate and bit depth wise). The bad ones still sound bad and just take up more room on the hard drive. With 24/96 and 24/192 material - even material re-recorded from analog master tapes - there is simply no contest. There IS more information there, and it is particularily noticable in the high-frequency region. Symbals sound like analog kinda real symbals again - not this hissy spitty digital things. Chimes seem to decay FOREVER as their oscillations diminish into an almost non-existnant noise floor. (PC sound cards are coming out with 24/192 D/A converters with 120db S/N ratios.)
So in a word, the reason why we think about authoring DVD-A's of upsampled redbook material? Because a)we're nuts and b)we can.
Myself, I'm gonna spend more time collecting hi-res software and less time worrying about going from 99.8% to 99.9% perfect RBCD playback.
I hope you're right. I hope DVD-A picks up and takes off! :o) Happy Days will be Here Again!
YOU GUYS! STOP ****ING AROUND WITH RBCD AND SUPPORT HI-REZ OR YOU'RE GONNA BE STUCK WITH... RBCD? MP3? Heck at this rate we'll be lucky if music is stored in a lossless format in 5 years down the road. Then the guys in the Vinyl Asylum WILL get the last laugh, as vinyl will be the ONLY hi-rez format available! Those jokes are so possible that they are NOT even FUNNY!
I'm done now. Back to my padded room.
Cheers,
Presto
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- My understanding of "the point" is... - Presto 13:15:03 05/16/06 (1)
- Re: My understanding of "the point" is... - Neil Wilkes 02:41:58 05/17/06 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
