So, is it normal for these high resolution releases to be upscaled?
I'm not sure that you can tell from just the band limiting though. There are two separate issues with 24-96 compared with 16-44.1 CD audio. (1) The lower quantization noise, and (2) the greater bandwidth. They're not completely unrelated though, you can use the extra bandwidth to extend the normal audio content into the ultra-sonic region, or you can use it (via dithering) to increase the effective bit depth. In the latter case, you may well still see sharp roll off at the limits of the audible spectrum, but some additional (dither) noise at much higher frequencies.
Which DVD-Audio/SACD releases are known to be genuine 24/96?
I've analysed 2channel rips of some DVD-As in my own collection, and there were certainly some with > 22kHz spectral content, and also >24kHz IIRC. With SACDs it's a bit harder to tell because instead of ripping I have to capture those from analog output and redigitize at a high SR/bit depth to detect trans-Redbook content.
Let's say [upscaled content] it's not that unusual. But the fact that you have 'always' seen it, every time you look, seems unusual to me. How big is your sample?
I don't know know that there is a list today of such things. ISTR seeing a website in the heyday of DVDA/SACD that did tabulate 'real' format information for dozens of releases.
Here's one. From Neil Young's "Harvest ' DVDA, which has nominal 192kHz sample rate (Neil Young is utterly ridiculous when it comes to audio) , 24bitsNo real musical content above 20 Hz or so, but the visible 'cutoff' for background noise -- the faint purple/blue speckling going completely to black -- is slightly above 40kHz, suggesting that perhaps the 'effective' SR was 88.2.
Thanks for posting that. Not having any HD content myself, I was interested to see a spectrograph.Given that "Harvest" is rather old, what would that have been mastered from krabapple, the original tapes?
You must a have a really high end analog set up krabapple. I cant even get true 16 bit SNR from any of my analog captures.
Original analogue master tapes will certainly contain content above 24kHz, and a level of depth beyond that of 16-bits.
Given that "Harvest" is rather old, what would that have been mastered from krabapple, the original tapes?
BTW. You can just make out a faint line in that spectrum at about 30 kHz, I wonder what that is?
Frequency Pass Band 20Hz-20KhzPeak Dynamic Range 86 dB
ATR Master Tape Specifications: http://www.atrtape.com/technical.phpQuoteFrequency Pass Band 20Hz-20KhzPeak Dynamic Range 86 dB
QuoteBTW. You can just make out a faint line in that spectrum at about 30 kHz, I wonder what that is?IIRC, it's noise from video monitors or TVs that were in the recording studio -- you see that line on a number of old recordings.
PS. It would be rather unfortunate if this thread were to turn into "yet another analogue vs digital debate", all because my original post insulted certain people's "religion".
That video noise @ ~29kHz is crazy looking on this one!
Your latter case did occur to me, but if it's a native 24-bit recording, actual bit depth is relatively plentiful to begin with In addition, one might ask "Why would the engineers just happen to always choose 22.05 or 48 for the intentional roll off point?".
Probably means a flat frequency response and linearity from 20Hz-20Khz within pre-defined tolerances. Unlike digital recorders, analogue ones do not require a sharp cut-off in frequency response above their rated maximum.
I have many AAD CDs which show no signs of roll-off at 20kHz, incidentally.
Dynamic range of analogue vs digital cannot be compared so easily either - the former can provide subjectively useable dynamic range which exceeds that of its digital equivalent, because it 'fails gracefully' above its rated maximum range, continuing to capture information which, in the digital domain, would have simply been truncated (resulting in a clipped waveform).