|
Music Lane It's all about the music, dude! Sit down, relax and listen to some tunes. |
|
|
|
Music Lane It's all about the music, dude! Sit down, relax and listen to some tunes. |
|
In Reply to: Those extra 5,900 samples posted by Chris from Lafayette on November 28, 2008 at 13:04:29:
"Going back to the original question (as to whether the 50 kHz Soundstream Telarcs sounded better than the 44.1 kHz digital recordings from that time, or for that matter, sounded better than the subsequent 44.1 kHz Telarcs), there may be many valid reasons for this perception."
The big reason is the superior technology in the Soundstream analog to digital converters, compared to the 44/16 converters others were using:
1. The 50 KHz sampling rate allowed for a gradual roll off from the top of the audible range (20 KHz) to the Nquist limit (25 kHz). This made it possible to use filters with less time distortion than required at 44 KHz where the transition region is from 20 to 22 kHz. Filters for 44 kHz sampling will either ring, alias (distort) or soften the upper portion of the audible range.
2. The Soundstream recorders were the only early recorders to use correct triangular dither which meant that they could have significantly better low level resolution and avoid noise modulation that other systems had. Soundstream kept this technology a trade secret for a number of years.
Even so, there were early audiophiles who did not like these Telarc LPs. They even dumped some of them in Boston Harbor in protest back in 1983.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: Those extra 5,900 samples - Tony Lauck 21:49:53 12/09/08 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
