|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
71.131.194.128
In Reply to: Re: To be sure, there are many other causes of resolution loss. posted by Ted Smith on February 14, 2007 at 15:34:38:
All audio systems have finite resolving power, and some physical mechanism is responsible for the limit. If a system is well-tuned and makes pleasing music, I don't think what particular mechanism limits the resolution will be apparent, even if the resolution limit prevents full reproduction of the details present on Redbook CD. Chances are good that several mechanisms would have about the same degree of influence in such a system, so it would take a lot of careful experiments to distinguish them.There is an analogy to optical microscopes. I used to use these quite a lot in my professional work as a semiconductor engineer. Visible light wavelengths range from 400 to 700 nm. It used to be a commonplace bit of folklore that optical systems could not resolve features on the order of the size of the wavelengths used to illuminate them. I still recall the surprise I felt when I was invited to look at some 500-nm line-space pairs, fabricated with e-beam lithography, with a newly designed inspection microscope. Not only could I see the features, I could see details in them. This microscope cost $50,000 in 1980.
The point of this story is that resolution limits are not hard and fast. We can hear details below the resolution floor, just as we can hear signals below the noise floor. The question remains, are the details presented with adequate realism to keep them in the context of the program? Will additional details from a hi-rez source add to the musical enjoyment, or will the distortions (in a broad sense of the word) added by the playback system make them irritants?
Follow Ups:
HowdyI understand all of your words but in my experience hi-res sources win in low res systems and in hi res systems. But I don't know if this means I agree with or I am in conflict with your statements :)
I've only heard hi-rez formats at shows, and have not liked any of them.People whose audio judgments are more exact than mine have told me they also have not heard music from hi-rez sources.
I'm trying to comprehend the conflict between these and observations like yours. Hi-rez formats deliver more information, so, if audio systems could resolve the extra information, why would everyone not prefer hi-rez? In my experience with tweaking my system, I keep finding more honest detail in the Redbook format as I reduce the effects of vibration and RF noise. Perhaps at this point, I should try hi-rez, but the cost of a player comparable to my Wadia 861 is daunting.
HowdyThere are a lot of players that fail to deliver hi-res IMO, and a few that do better than expected. If you're ever in the Seattle area look me up. I could show you some music and you could offer your insights about possible improvements in my system. (We could also visit inmate MikeL whose system is always interesting.)
As to your questions: I've seen a lot of systems that have taken, shall we say, "interesting routes" to fixing some of their problems with Redbook. When you then give them a higher res source it's extra detail could simply be masked by these warts or even in some cases the extra hi freqs could have non-liniar effects in their systems. A simple example is the number of people using TacT or the equivalent which may indeed help their systems. When you give it an analog or DSD sourced input however you may loose more than you gain... I could go on, but you get the idea.
For a while after I first experienced SACDs I was a hi-res bigot but as I've improved my system I now see that Redbook has a lot to offer and that it has more detail and music than I ever expected, but still in my experience it's always a shadow of hi-res in a system similarly tweaked/optimized.
:)
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: