|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
77.170.179.129
In Reply to: RE: Digital Resolution -- An Analysis posted by John Elison on September 02, 2020 at 17:21:46
I'm afraid you most of all made a file size calculator.
Not to be mistaken for resolution.
IMHO resolution should be expressed in dynamic range and frequency range.
If you do, you will notice that DSD64 isn't such a big (4000!) improvement at all
The Well Tempered Computer
Follow Ups:
The number is four -- not four thousand. However, I think you're right about it representing the difference in file size instead of the difference in resolution.Thanks!
John Elison
Edits: 09/03/20
2,822,400 / 705,600 = 4.000-times Higher Resolution than RedbookFor me (Europe) 4000 is written as 4.000
LOL
The Well Tempered Computer
Edits: 09/03/20
> 2,822,400 / 705,600 = 4.000-times Higher Resolution than Redbook
>
> For me (Europe) 4000 is written as 4.000There's another valid method for using commas and periods when writing numbers. I use a period as the decimal separator and I use a comma for the thousands separator or digit group separator. This should have been apparent when you saw the number 2,822,400 written with commas to separate each three-digit group.
Best regards,
John Elison
Edits: 09/03/20
/
The lay listener should also not think of 'resolution' in this context as something qualitative, it is simply a representation of the dynamic range (though, as Roseval points out, you cannot compare PCM & DSD on bit rate because of the DSD noise shaping). And, as redbook PCM already has more dynamic range than anyone can reproduce is 'resolution' even meaningful in the quantitative sense?
Regards,
13DoW
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: