 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
In Reply to: Why not ? posted by Frank on January 29, 2003 at 01:37:35:
Musicode broadcast tracking.But Frank, I want to ask you, and this isn't some kind of jibe: Do you really feel that the watermarking is completely transparent?
And if not, moreso than "DSD artifacts"?
Those aren't rhetorical questions.
Follow Ups:
No it's not completely transparant.
Listen to a studio master on a studio system and compare it with the system using at home there is also a sonic difference.
As soon as you put elecronics in the music's path transparancy suffers. How much the signal suffers from the watermark I just can't tell. My guess is that it's minor.Personally I have heard some 'DSD artifacts' at various demo's. Transients rich sounds didn't sound 'correct' to me.
I never have recognized the effects of watermarking on a DVD Audio disc. But I do believe that I can recognize it in a direct comparison with the original sound. Why bother if I can't recognize it in practise? So far for me it's less of a problem than the dsd problems I did hear.I don't like the watermarking concept but at least it's optional.
Nobody forces independed audiophile labels to use it if they don't want to.DSD noise isn't optional and it doesn't go away and I fear a lot of recordings suffer already from it before anyone realizes that dsd could be a big mistake to be used for new recordings.
24bit 192kHz multitrack recorders are a better option.
If people like the sound of dsd the conversion to dsd can be done in the player and a filter can be used with different noise shaping characteristics to tailor the sound.
Frank
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
