32/172? O.o

Can you even hear the difference between that and regular 24/96? Bit depth just affects the dynamic range/noise floor and even a 20-bit bit depth is plenty for music. Sampling rate...well the Nyquist Theorem. A sampling rate of 48 kHz should give plenty of headroom for music.

Quote:

davidmahler said:

Wow I really fell behind with this thread. When I get home to it, I'll respond

Click to expand...

Thanks David for your consideration - did not mean to stir up a hornet's nest on the cabling issue.  Why this seems to drive folks nuts - after my decades of audio experience has proved to me their value - is puzzling.  I know Engineers are especially skeptical, I don't need charts and graphs - my ears are my true test.  But such as it is. 
 
I completely understand if you wish to avoid this issue.
 
As always your thoughts and experience are highly valued!

Quote:

miceblue said:

32/172? O.o

Can you even hear the difference between that and regular 24/96? Bit depth just affects the dynamic range/noise floor and even a 20-bit bit depth is plenty for music. Sampling rate...well the Nyquist Theorem. A sampling rate of 48 kHz should give plenty of headroom for music.

Click to expand...

I spent over two months comparing different ADCs, mostly pro gear from Apogee, RME, EMU, etc... then spent another month experimenting on sampling rates and bit rates.  I could tell the difference between the 24/96 and 32/176 files every time.  Not as large of a difference as 16/44 to 24/96, but a difference none the less.  Since this was a massive project - I only wanted to do it once.  Besides once the analog rig was sold there would be no chance to repeat.  
 
Funny the 32/192K samples were not quite as good as the 32/176k at least to my ears.  These were all compared A/B to the LP playing - across all music (Rock, Alt, Emo, Vocals, Jazz, New Age, Reggae, Pop, R&B, and Classical (Chamber and Symphonic))  Approximately half my collect is Rock, Alt and Emo.
 
We now have DxD as an emerging standard - that is PCM at 24/352.8k.  Many are finding it superior to DSD.
Here is a great whitepaper on digital sampling rates.
 
http://www.merging.com/uploads/assets//Merging_pdfs/dxd_Resolution_v3.5.pdf
 
It's not just the noise floor - but the pulse response rate.  And my own theory as to the capture of inter-phase relationships.
 
 
I used Steinberg WaveLab 6.0 the best audio software package available at the time.

Won't even comment with my opinion. Follow your own ears and be happy, I will do so too I guess...
 
It would be easier not to care about how things should work out in theory and just listen to the music and equipment, but on the other hand, I don't want to fool myself. I'm torn

rb2013 said:

miceblue said:

32/172? O.o


Can you even hear the difference between that and regular 24/96? Bit depth just affects the dynamic range/noise floor and even a 20-bit bit depth is plenty for music. Sampling rate...well the Nyquist Theorem. A sampling rate of 48 kHz should give plenty of headroom for music.

Click to expand...

I spent over two months comparing different ADCs, mostly pro gear from Apogee, RME, EMU, etc... then spent another month experimenting on sampling rates and bit rates.  I could tell the difference between the 24/96 and 32/176 files every time.  Not as large of a difference as 16/44 to 24/96, but a difference none the less.  Since this was a massive project - I only wanted to do it once.  Besides once the analog rig was sold there would be no chance to repeat.  

Funny the 32/192K samples were not quite as good as the 32/176k at least to my ears.  These were all compared A/B to the LP playing - across all music (Rock, Alt, Emo, Jazz, New Age, Reggae, Pop, R&B, and Classical (Chamber and Symphonic))  Approximately half my collect is Rock, Alt and Emo.

We now have DxD as an emerging standard - that is PCM at 24/352.8k.  Many are finding it superior to DSD.
Here is a great whitepaper on digital sampling rates.

http://www.merging.com/uploads/assets//Merging_pdfs/dxd_Resolution_v3.5.pdf

It's not just the noise floor - but the pulse response rate.  And my own theory as to the capture of inter-phase relationships.


I used Steinberg WaveLab 6.0 the best audio software package available at the time.

Click to expand...

Mmk. I'll have to look at that paper when I get back on my desktop computer with a proper PDF viewer. XD

For the record though, I've done ABX tests between 24/96 music and the same file downsampled to 16/44 and I can't hear a difference.

Quote:

davidsh said:

Won't even comment with my opinion. Follow your own ears and be happy, I will do so too I guess...

 
It would be easier not to care about how things should work out in theory and just listen to the music and equipment, but on the other hand, I don't want to fool myself. I'm torn

Click to expand...

+1  Yes, I always ask myself with new equipment that I feel sounds better- Is it the placebo effect?  Having two systems helps.
Now a days, I'm more likely to hear the sound quality decrease with changes.  Usually it's an immediate reaction.
 
It's tougher when it's a case of - well not necessarily better but different.

That would save you a lot of disc space.
 
Can you hear a difference between a MP3 and Redbook file?
 
For a while the AES even had 16/44 as their official archive standard - they then moved it to 24/96

rb2013 said:

That would save you a lot of disc space.

Can you hear a difference between a MP3 and Redbook file?

For a while the AES even had 16/44 as their official archive standard - they then moved it to 24/96

Click to expand...

Nope....
V0 LAME MP3 is indistinguishable from CD-quality lossless from ABX tests. I'm in the process of re-tagging my music properly and I'm going to switch to the technically superior AAC format even though I can't hear a difference.

I've got to admire David's huuuuuuuuuge music collection and I can't even imagine how long it took him to properly tag his music. This is taking forever. T-T

24/96 and above is typically used in the mastering process such that the mastering engineer has some wiggle room to do their thing, not necessarily for better sound quality.

It still boggles my mind when people put lossless music, or even HD music for that matter, on their portable media players. *scratches head*

Quote:

miceblue said:

It still boggles my mind when people put lossless music, or even HD music for that matter, on their portable media players. *scratches head*

Click to expand...

 

Peace of mind. Especially if you're using a full fledged portable rig.

Quote:

rb2013 said:

I spent over two months comparing different ADCs, mostly pro gear from Apogee, RME, EMU, etc... then spent another month experimenting on sampling rates and bit rates.  I could tell the difference between the 24/96 and 32/176 files every time.  Not as large of a difference as 16/44 to 24/96, but a difference none the less.  Since this was a massive project - I only wanted to do it once.  Besides once the analog rig was sold there would be no chance to repeat.  
 
Funny the 32/192K samples were not quite as good as the 32/176k at least to my ears.  These were all compared A/B to the LP playing - across all music (Rock, Alt, Emo, Jazz, New Age, Reggae, Pop, R&B, and Classical (Chamber and Symphonic))  Approximately half my collect is Rock, Alt and Emo.
 
We now have DxD as an emerging standard - that is PCM at 24/352.8k.  Many are finding it superior to DSD.
Here is a great whitepaper on digital sampling rates.
 
http://www.merging.com/uploads/assets//Merging_pdfs/dxd_Resolution_v3.5.pdf
 
It's not just the noise floor - but the pulse response rate.  And my own theory as to the capture of inter-phase relationships.
 
 
I used Steinberg WaveLab 6.0 the best audio software package available at the time.

Click to expand...

Was there any one ADC you used that you felt did the best transfer.

Quote:

miceblue said:

Nope....
V0 LAME MP3 is indistinguishable from CD-quality lossless from ABX tests. I'm in the process of re-tagging my music properly and I'm going to switch to the technically superior AAC format even though I can't hear a difference.

I've got to admire David's huuuuuuuuuge music collection and I can't even imagine how long it took him to properly tag his music. This is taking forever. T-T

24/96 and above is typically used in the mastering process such that the mastering engineer has some wiggle room to do their thing, not necessarily for better sound quality.

It still boggles my mind when people put lossless music, or even HD music for that matter, on their portable media players. *scratches head*

Click to expand...

Most mastering is at 24/196K or 24/176K today.  Mastering with DSD or DSD128 would be used - but it's to hard to edit.  These files are then converted  to SACD's DSD or down sampled to Redbook - or used to produce the LP's acetate master blank.
Some mastering is moving to DxD.
 
David knows more about this - he is a professional.  So correct me if I'm wrong.  I'm just a lunatic audiophile
 
You can now download free music samples done at 24/196k, DSD, and even DxD from the L2 website.
http://www.2l.no/hires/
One of my DACs can handle native 24/352k files fed directly from the PC using USB, unfortunately it does not have tube driven analog outputs.  Some DACs today can handle native DSD files.  Mine are converted in Foobar to PCM.  Foobar feeds the native 24/352k data stream directly to this DAC via high speed USB.
 
I still prefer my tubed DACs though - and the APL is limited to 32/192 via RCA SPDIF, the Xindak DAC-5 is limited to 24/176 via RCA SPDIF.
 
I also use the SoX re-sampler as a DSP in Foobar to upsample all my 16/44 Redbook files to 24/176k or 24/196k.  I find the files sound better with this upsampling. 
My Hi Res files I play without upsampling  -they are already at 32/176k anyway.
 
One of the reasons I love this review, (sorry for the previous tangent) is the absolutely amazing MSB DAC and transport David uses,  Diamond DAC IV. http://www.msbtech.com/products/dac4diamond.php?Page=platinumHome
This is really a remarkable machine with unique digital filtering.  http://www.msbtech.com/products/32xdf.php?Page=dac4

Quote:

rumay408 said:

Was there any one ADC you used that you felt did the best transfer.

Click to expand...

After much experimentation I used the EMU 1616m - which used the amazing AKM 5394 ADC.  I did this 6 or 7 yrs ago - at the time pretty good stuff.  This unit was mediocre as a DAC but for Analog to Digital conversion it gave me the best results.  Plus it used a custom PICMA card PC interface that fed the external box - it handled up to 32/196k recording with ease.
 
From their website "Mastering grade 24-bit/192kHz converters - the same A/D converters used in Digidesign's flagship ProTools HD 192 I/O Interface delivering an amazing 120dB signal-to-noise ratio"
 
http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/oct05/articles/emu1616m.htm

Quote:

goldfishx said:

 

Peace of mind. Especially if you're using a full fledged portable rig.

Click to expand...

+1 I have an IPod 80gb loaded with 16/44 wave files. Plus I don't have to convert the files to MP3

i now just have 160kbps low res on my ipod, its mostly for my car or for my crappy buds, but once i buy th-900, i'll  be using them at work sometimes, so i'll have to convert more of my songs to m4a unless jriver can convert flac to m4a when it syncs my ipod or i do some weird itunes ****. lossless kinda stinks with phones though because they're not as big as the ipod classic, so u mostly have to make a playlist and only keep a few, or just deal with 320kbps.

Quote:

dubstep girl said:

i now just have 160kbps low res on my ipod, its mostly for my car or for my crappy buds, but once i buy th-900, i'll  be using them at work sometimes, so i'll have to convert more of my songs to m4a unless jriver can convert flac to m4a when it syncs my ipod or i do some weird itunes ****. lossless kinda stinks with phones though because they're not as big as the ipod classic, so u mostly have to make a playlist and only keep a few, or just deal with 320kbps.

Click to expand...

On my little Sandisk player I use 320kbps -   I listen mostly to EDM with the Sandisk while running or at the gym.  Nice that it has a MicroSD slot.  Those prices have plummeted.  I put a 16gb in there.  My suv also has a USB port -  and a really nice interface screen.  I use a 32gb USB stick loaded with 320kps files there.  Prices for memory are dropping like crazy!  $21 for a 32 gb MicroSD on amazon. 
 
How long before we have cheap 1TB MicroSDs and USB sticks?  In fact USB3.0 sticks are here - talk about through put!
 
http://www.amazon.com/Patriot-Supersonic-Flash-Drive-PEF64GSRUSB/dp/B008R6OPQE/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1373170786&sr=8-3&keywords=usb+3.0+flash+drives