|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
75.214.16.218
In Reply to: RE: Boston Audio Society Strikes Again! posted by Charles Hansen on September 11, 2007 at 09:44:35
And lacking in diligence, in being able to find these claims and anecdotes.....
"Claims both published and anecdotal are regularly made for audibly superior sound quality for two-channel audio encoded with longer word lengths and/or at higher sampling rates than the 16-bit/44.1-kHz CD standard."
Funny, I've been claiming the contrary..... I've almost never preferred 24/96 or SACD playback over 16/44 CD.....
And what I've read recently, and discovered first-hand, a lot of people have even been wondering if anything beyond 320 kbps MP3 is overkill..... I personally think not, but when it comes to resolution in digital audio playback, until "fatiguing high rez" is addressed and fixed, I wouldn't go beyond CD.
Follow Ups:
for pretty much confirming what I said about you being oblivious to opinions contrary to your own; previous observation (link) was re: CD technologies yet clearly (here) we witness just another manifestation of same.
I suppose I should recommend you spend some time at Hi-Rez but I suspect after reading any number of testimonials from the high-rez fans you'd still be posting about not having encountered any such "claims and anecdotes".
Oh wait, just thought of a new angle... here's a little thought experiment for you. Ask yourself why the high rez formats have attracted supporters. Is it bacause:
A. They find the sonics to be superior compared to Redbook CD?
B. They are attracted to the vast catalogs of music (new and re-issue)available in the high rez. formats compares to the "slim pickings" that now accurately describes what is avialable on CD Reedbook?
C. They just want one player that will do it all? Including playing their DVDs since after all they believe everything sounds the same anyway.
Challenge yourself Todd... but do ease up if you sense something about to snap in the old grey matter, wouldn't want that!
I feel a dirty wind blowing
Devils and dust
"Oh wait, just thought of a new angle... here's a little thought experiment for you. Ask yourself why the high rez formats have attracted supporters. Is it bacause:
A. They find the sonics to be superior compared to Redbook CD?"
Several have claimed that..... I don't agree, but otherwise no problem.
"B. They are attracted to the vast catalogs of music (new and re-issue)available in the high rez. formats compares to the 'slim pickings' that now accurately describes what is avialable on CD Reedbook?"
If you say so..... I don't think it's the case.....
"C. They just want one player that will do it all? Including playing their DVDs since after all they believe everything sounds the same anyway."
I might get one if it can also play vinyl..... [-;
"Challenge yourself Todd... but do ease up if you sense something about to snap in the old grey matter, wouldn't want that!"
I'm not sure what you want..... You may want to re-phrase..... Thanks.
"Oh wait, just thought of a new angle... here's a little thought experiment for you. Ask yourself why the high rez formats have attracted supporters. Is it bacause:
A. They find the sonics to be superior compared to Redbook CD?"
> Several have claimed that..... I don't agree, but otherwise no problem.
You just finished saying you'd not seen any such claims! Are intentionally playing the fool, or what?
I feel a dirty wind blowing
Devils and dust
"You just finished saying you'd not seen any such claims!"
I've seen them.... I've only had a hard time finding them with great regularity......
"Are intentionally playing the fool, or what?"
I guess you'll have to determine that..... I think you've already come to that belief anyway.....
We obviously listen to different kinds of music. In my world, available music in digital formats is distributed as 100%/0% for CD/High Rez.
It's probably cost-prohibitive for small labels to do SACD, especially considering that some albums are limited to only few hundreds or thousands copies.
If SACD were readily available, it would be like it was for me when CD first came out. I may have had a player by now, but I'd be on this huge learning curve, once again, in determining which players are any good (if they exist), and which recordings are as well (if such recordings exist). But the lack of selection makes me think it isn't worth the trouble. At least for now.
I think my initial ordeal with CD is why I'm so hesitant with new formats. Even more so than the limited selection of recordings. (If I thought SACD sounded fabulous, I'd definitely be using one now, and talking about it like I talk about Don Allen's products.) Remember, I once thought there was no such thing as "good-sounding CD playback" as well, until that "Wadia 7/9" experience. The only difference with high-rez is that it won't be likely that I'll purchase anything until such experience occurs, if it were to happen.
go too far down the road with the Dumb and Dumber routine one of you might want to look up "sarcasm" in a dictionary.
Just a suggestion.
I feel a dirty wind blowing
Devils and dust
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: