Audio Asylum Thread Printer

Get a view of an entire thread on one page

FAQ / News / Events

Classical Court

Maybe it would help if I provided an example of what I'm talking about

77.111.245.10

Chris from Lafayette

In Reply to: RE: It might be helpful for the rest of us. . . posted by Mel on April 25, 2021 at 12:45:10

For years, I've used a spectrograph app called Spek. You can save the output of this program in png format. Here's an example (Mehta's Farao recording of the first movement of Schoenberg's Chamber Symphony, Op. 9) which shows a nominal 24/96 file (over its 5:54 length) which has obviously been truncated at what looks to me like 48 kHz (with the highest signal "hard stopped" at 24 kHz - hard to see the scale on the left at this small size I know). I think this is the only instance I've ever run into where a 24/96 container did not hold an actual 24/96 file. Is this what you're talking about?

In this case however, this is the frequency spectrum over the 5:54 duration of the track, and of course you can't see individual bits (!), so I'm not sure where that part of the discussion is coming from.

Follow Ups:

RE: Maybe it would help if I provided an example of what I'm talking about - Mel 19:44:59 04/25/21 (2)
Here is the MusicScope output of the first 30 seconds of the Poulenc 2 Piano Concerto as streamed from Amazon Music this morning. The descending orange line in the middle section shows sound frequency going to 48kHz. The width of the diagram defines the "container." A 48kHz wide container of sound is a 96kHz container. That the sound frequency goes to the end demonstrates the 48kHz, hence the 96kHz recording. The bit depth is most easily examined when the output is live, not a picture.

If within the 98kHz container the sound file was just a CD, the orange line would go quickly to 0 no higher than 22kHz, if a 48kHz file, at no higher than 24kHz.

The bottom section is somewhat like yours but on its side.

I cannot verify bit for bit. I'd like to know how it was done; that has not yet been explained. But we can verify a 98/24 stream (really 20 bits is the max you will really hear and possibly measure) from Amazon Music and, I suspect the same would be true of Qobuz.

For annual users of Amazon Prime, Amazon Music will cost about $6.50 a month. If Qobuz is better, I'd like to see someone prove it. More information is always better.
- Thanks! I remember that app now, although I don't use it myself - Chris from Lafayette 01:24:50 04/26/21 (1)
  Although I've been happy with Qobuz so far, Amazon music does seem to be a good value proposition from what you say. I suppose its usefulness would also depend on how deep their catalog is compared to what Qobuz offers. Qobuz also has some 24/192 streams too, and, as Kal informed us, even has a few MCh streams (which I've been able to confirm). I think that all these streaming services are continuing to develop and that the situation will remain fluid for the near future.
  - RE: Thanks! I remember that app now, although I don't use it myself - Mel 04:57:33 04/26/21 (0)
    PAR is correct in that the Qobuz application permits for WASAPI or ASIO outputs, bypassing the Windows mixer, which Amazon Music does not. Qobuz (and Tidal) also has arrangements with some streamers to incorporate their streams into their integrated software. IIUC Amazon also has some 192/24 streams. Will Amazon eventually fix this??
    
    One has to use work-arounds to capture the full Amazon hi res stream.

Post a Followup:

FAQ

Post a Message!

Forgot Password?

Moniker (Username):
Password (Optional):
	Remember my Moniker & Password (What's this?) Eat Me
E-Mail (Optional):
Subject:

Message:	(Posts are subject to Content Rules)

Optional Link URL:
Optional Link Title:
Optional Image URL:
Upload Image:
E-mail Replies:	Automagically notify you when someone responds.

To view your new posting or follow-up, click on the RELOAD or REFRESH button on your browser.

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Michael Percy Audio