In Reply to: Perhaps one of you posted by E-Stat on January 26, 2015 at 18:18:13:
Lab test(your quote)-
"Listeners could significantly discriminate between files recorded at different sample rates only for the orchestral excerpt, the only recording of a complex scene with different musical instruments playing in a medium concert hall. This finding provides support for theories that high-resolution formats better reproduce the details of transients and room acoustics.
"My point -
"Not sure the study proves anything other than that the converters and down sampling algorithms may impose a sonic signature. "
You say -
"Either you understand the concept or you don't."
I understand the concept but I question whether or not this study "...provides support for theories that high-resolution formats better reproduce the details of transients and room acoustics."
There's no need for your disingenuous paraphrasing, nastiness and name calling. Either one buys into the suggestion that this test supports the theories of high resolution formats as better reproducers "..of transients and room acoustics" or they don't. You buy it - I don't (at least not completely) and I laid out my reasoning for my position.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: Perhaps one of you - Goober58 18:42:45 01/26/15 (4)
- At the expense of confusing the obvious (again) - E-Stat 19:47:22 01/26/15 (3)
- Excuse me - Goober58 20:18:39 01/26/15 (2)
- It is past your bedtime and you're incoherent - E-Stat 20:27:22 01/26/15 (1)
- All of my comments have been about the whole test - not a cherry picked portion of it! - Goober58 20:44:12 01/26/15 (0)