Skip to main content
Topic: High-Resolution Audio: A perspective (Read 5533 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

High-Resolution Audio: A perspective

Reply #25
It's rumored Einstein defined insanity as doing the same thing over and over then expecting different results.
So let's reinvent 2ch "Hi-Rez" and have another go at the market eh? The piano notes and  timing seems right this time...
Loudspeaker manufacturer

High-Resolution Audio: A perspective

Reply #26
... In fact, I don't believe any passive analog filter can give you the kind of interpolation required. ...


It can be done, and was the only way to do it back in the days of NOS DACs. The trouble was you need 7th or 8th order filters, and they are expensive to build due to the component tolerances required.

Edit: I missed the word "passive" in your post. There was a choice of passive (using inductors) or active (using opamp gyrators).
Regards,
   Don Hills
"People hear what they see." - Doris Day

High-Resolution Audio: A perspective

Reply #27
@splice: Thanks for the info and your constructive posting.

I did not claim anything...

"...this is probably not very relevant for people without golden ears" ?

Well, that includes me  I've been discussing in an abstract way properties of the sampled signal and its conversion to the analog domain, not wether there is anything audible or not. After all this thread is in the scientific discussion forum, isn't it?

High-Resolution Audio: A perspective

Reply #28
You can go as abstract as you want as long there is nothing related to audibility conflicting with our beloved TOS
Is troll-adiposity coming from feederism?
With 24bit music you can listen to silence much louder!

High-Resolution Audio: A perspective

Reply #29
Then what you meant to say was, only relevant to people with "imagined golden ears" disorder.
AFAICT, the orthogonal dimension to bandwidth limit and quantization error in digitized audio amounts to nothing more than magic.
Is 24-bit/192kHz good enough for your lo-fi vinyl, or do you need 32/384?

High-Resolution Audio: A perspective

Reply #30
I won't be the one to judge abilities of other people's ears.

High-Resolution Audio: A perspective

Reply #31
Unless you want to involve yourself in these distractions, I would probably refrain from implying that they exist unless you're able to provide proof.
Is 24-bit/192kHz good enough for your lo-fi vinyl, or do you need 32/384?

High-Resolution Audio: A perspective

Reply #32
I won't be the one to judge abilities of other people's ears.

Maybe they can jump tall buildings too, but I'd have to see some proof.
I asked for as much in the paper comments section, but given what we know about audiophile-studiophiles, might be waiting for a while.
Loudspeaker manufacturer

 
SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2020