Propeller Head Plaza

Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics.

Use this form to submit comments directly to the Asylum moderators for this forum. We're particularly interested in truly outstanding posts that might be added to our FAQs.
You may also use this form to provide feedback or to call attention to messages that may be in violation of our content rules.

You must login to use this feature.

Inmate Login

By default, logging in will set a session cookie that disappears when you close your browser. Clicking on the 'Remember my Moniker & Password' below will cause a permanent 'Login Cookie' to be set.

Moniker/Username: The Name that you picked or by default, your email. Forgot Moniker?	Examples "Rapper", "Bob W", "joe@aol.com".
Password:	Forgot Password?
	Remember my Moniker & Password ( What's this?)

If you don't have an Asylum Account, you can create one by clicking Here.

Our privacy policy can be reviewed by clicking Here.

Inmate Comments

From:
Your Email:
Subject:

Message Comments

Original Message

RE: Agreed

Posted by Pat D on June 20, 2010 at 20:12:40:
E-stat
"When every recording engineer has compared the direct feed of a recording through multiple resolutions and found Redbook lacking, why would E Brad ever consider that his test is fatally flawed?"

I am not quite sure just what E-stat is saying there, but he seems to refer to all the editing ("multiple resolutions," whatever he means by that)one might do prior to putting a recording on to a CD. I don't think anyone maintains that hi-rez editing is not better than 44.1 kHz digital. The Meyer-Moran paper doesn't address that, just whether the resulting stereo recording can be recorded onto Redbook digital without audible degradation--save for some additional noise audible at very high levels. That's all that was tested, as the very title of the article suggests:

E. Brad Meyer, "Audibility of a CD-Standard A/D/A Loop Inserted into High-Resolution Audio Playback," JAES, Vol. 55, No. 9, 2007 September.