Skip to main content
Recent Posts
1
Audio Hardware / Re: Objective measurements of portable players using df-metric
Last post by Serge Smirnoff -
Is it even possible to be *audibly* better? (if "better" = objectively better, as in less distortion, flatter FR, etc.)
In case of traditional audio metric (that you mentioned) relationship between perceived audio quality and objective measurements is poor and your question is understandable. In SE audio metric such relationship is more defined, so in some cases we can safely predict subjective quality from objective measurements.

Quote
Still most of audio files that we listen are 44.1.
Not true, with the rise of Opus which basically makes everything 48kHz.
You'll be right when Opus become mainstream.

Quote
Most real-life audio material (especially if it is perfectly mixed and mastered) has natural high frequency roll-off
Most real-life audio material (especially if it is perfectly mixed and mastered) has quite a lot of energy above 20 kHz (that is, between 20 kHz and the upper limit which is usually 22050 Hz), even with roll-off it's still quite a lot; and sometimes people use extreme settings for noise shaping (for 16 bit conversion) which adds to that band too. Humans, though, don't hear that band at all, so taking it into account at all would introduce unnecessary mistakes.
The test set “Variety” (2 hours of music), which is used for df-measurements has the following overall amplitude-frequency characteristic:



Not so much energy between 20kHz and 22.5kHz indeed.
3
CUETools / Re: Cue Ripper and pre emphasis
Last post by jacobacci -
Thanks guys
Detect indexes = true is turned on. However the disc is not listed as having pre-emphasis. Where on the screen would I see if it was?
Luckily the highs were so overly bright, that it was obvious.
4
General Audio / fb2k's foo_hdcd not as good as hdcd.exe?
Last post by ManInTheDark -
Recently, I got a CD that has HDCD on it. I decoded a track from it using the HDCD decoder (foo_hdcd) in foobar2000. And...nothing happened. In fact, it had the same Replaygain level as the 16bit source file. But with hdcd 0.2? The total opposite happened! Here's the stats:

01. -8.28 (16bit) Whenever It Rains.wav
02. -8.28 (24bit) Whenever It Rains.24bit.01.wav (foo_hdcd)
03. -2.26 (24bit) Whenever It Rains.24bit.02.wav (hdcd.exe 0.2)

WTF? Obviously, foo_hdcd isn't working, and hdcd.exe 0.2 is I guess I'm better off creating a folder with BAT file, putting all my HDCD files into it and converting everything that way.
5
Vinyl / Re: 192/32 needed for digitized vinyl to sound as analogue as possible
Last post by The Irish Man -
Quote
[Pink Floyd, AC/DC, Genesis, Alan Parsons, The Band, Fleetwood Mac, Manfred Mann's Earth Band and all sounds are way beyond the full scale (0 dB). Is this a CD standard?

It should not matter, but could you give us the year of these CD's were released, or code on the CD.
So someone here with the some CD's can double check to see if you are not doing something wrong.
7
Vinyl / Re: 192/32 needed for digitized vinyl to sound as analogue as possible
Last post by greynol -
I can't help myself thinking that such things happen deliberately for the purpose of creating a "problem with digital".
They definitely can, though not if we confine the discussion to what it is necessary to digitize vinyl per the initial claim.  The 80dB SPL would be the next limiting factor.

Vinyl needs 14 bits, tops.  The OP is welcome to prove otherwise.
9
Vinyl / Re: 192/32 needed for digitized vinyl to sound as analogue as possible
Last post by Porcus -
I can imagine that 32 bits floating-point is good for those who notoriously mess up their conversions ... and I can't help myself thinking that such things happen deliberately for the purpose of creating a "problem with digital".

Although there is even well-reputed software which cannot convert reliably from floating-point to integer.
SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2018