[gregorio]

Bit depth? You guys use hybrid SACDs and feel the different when reading each layer? Yes! Different.

Yes, it often is different but that's not the question. The question is, why is it different? Is it different because SACD or other "hires" formats are better or is it different because they've deliberately used different masters for the different layers? The answer is the latter, when using the same master no one can tell the difference between SACD (or other hires formats) and CD.

This isn't necessarily true of the lossy formats like MP3 but even then, if using one of the better versions it's virtually impossible to tell the difference.

G

 

[Yuri Korzunov]

Is it different because SACD or other "hires" formats are better or is it different because they've deliberately used different masters for the different layers?

And different hardware or use different circuits/processings of single harware unit.

 

[gregorio]

And different hardware or use different circuits/processings of single harware unit.

Are you saying Sony deliberately crippled the "circuits/processings" of their SACD players when playing back the CD layer? Even if you are and it is true, that doesn't mean there is any audible difference between 16/44.1 and the SACD format, in fact there is overwhelming evidence that there isn't.

G

 

[StanD]

It is too hard way of business. To implement it need many efforts and money.

There all simple: look for demands, create or modify product for satisfying the demand.
Customers ask about its demands via email, them write it at forums, social networks, etc. There no need invent a things, that you can sell.

Apparently you haven't seen the adverts (many on this site) nor the numerous humorous articles that plague both the Internet and written media. I also get printed catalogs in the mail that are full of crazy statements designed to pick one's pockets.

 

[Yuri Korzunov]

Are you saying Sony deliberately crippled the "circuits/processings" of their SACD players when playing back the CD layer?

There may be different circuits. Different circuits, as rule, give different distortions.

Even if you are and it is true, that doesn't mean there is any audible difference between 16/44.1 and the SACD format, in fact there is overwhelming evidence that there isn't.

Do you have proper laboratory test results for such state? Give it us, please.

 

[Yuri Korzunov]

Apparently you haven't seen the adverts (many on this site) nor the numerous humorous articles that plague both the Internet and written media. I also get printed catalogs in the mail that are full of crazy statements designed to pick one's pockets.

I said about business model, that proper for me.
In my opinion, business (people who do it) and customers are partners.
Total strategy must be [win - win].

 

[bigshot]

Just give me good music then. I'll be a happy customer. Sound quality is secondary, especially theoretical sound quality.

 

[Yuri Korzunov]

Just give me good music then. I'll be a happy customer. Sound quality is secondary, especially theoretical sound quality.

Sometimes my friends-musicians ask me to check their records.
It is possibly to listen at laptop instantly.
However, for better undersatnding details of the records need listen at "big home system". There may be absolutelly other perception of the similar music.

Personally, I have threshold of quality for listening. As example, I will not listen for pleasure at mobile phone speaker.
Laptop also is not suitable enough for this purpose.

 

[gregorio]

Do you have proper laboratory test results for such state? Give it us, please.

"Audibility of a CD-Standard A/DA/A Loop Inserted into High-Resolution Audio Playback". Meyer and Moran, JAES Volume 55 Issue 9 pp. 775-779; September 2007

I said about business model, that proper for me.

I was not referring to your personal business model, I don't even know what your product is or how you market it, I was referring to audiophile marketing in general.

G

 

[Yuri Korzunov]

"Audibility of a CD-Standard A/DA/A Loop Inserted into High-Resolution Audio Playback". Meyer and Moran, JAES Volume 55 Issue 9 pp. 775-779; September 2007

I haven't access to the stuff.

Updated (I found the stuff at one site, I hope it is correct):
1. There compared direct DSD sound and the sound passed thru PCM DAC.
FIrst issue there that actually compare "how the DAC damage sound of the SACD-player".
It is not comparison of high resolution and 16/44 exactly.
Other the DAC or SACD-player implementation may give other results.

I was not referring to your personal business model, I don't even know what your product is or how you market it, I was referring to audiophile marketing in general.

"Marketing in general" don't exists.

 

[StanD]

I said about business model, that proper for me.
In my opinion, business (people who do it) and customers are partners.
Total strategy must be [win - win].

I was discussing that the common marketing practices in the Audio (and many other) business reeks with deception.

 

[Yuri Korzunov]

I was discussing that the common marketing practices in the Audio (and many other) business reeks with deception.

No "common marketing practices". Need consider each case separatelly.

 

[StanD]

No "common marketing practices". Need consider each case separatelly.

Are you kidding? Read the adverts, articles, etc. I just love the garbage I get in the mail trying to sell me incredibly expensive cables that are supposed to do magic. Not to mention DACS, Amps, etc, with equally outrageous claims. Yes there is a common marketing practice, plainly seen by the overwhelming adverts, web pages, etc. If you wish to ignore all of this, that's fine for you, not for me. My audio junk mail goes straight from the letterbox to the garbage can, after I take a quick read and laugh.

 

[Yuri Korzunov]

Are you kidding? Read the adverts, articles, etc. I just love the garbage I get in the mail trying to sell me incredibly expensive cables that are supposed to do magic. Not to mention DACS, Amps, etc, with equally outrageous claims. Yes there is a common marketing practice, plainly seen by the overwhelming adverts, web pages, etc. If you wish to ignore all of this, that's fine for you, not for me. My audio junk mail goes straight from the letterbox to the garbage can, after I take a quick read and laugh.

Do you really think, that all vendors are "bad boys"?

 

[StanD]

Do you really think, that all vendors are "bad boys"?

Common practice mean most, not all. In this case very few play fair.