[miceblue]

Graaah 16-bits' noise floor is too high and I can totally hear it. I will only buy 32-bit tracks from now on because 24-bit is flawed too.

 

[astrostar59]

Wow, what a load of bull shi!@ flying around here...Crap noise floor with 16 bit? Poor sound quality with 16 bit.
 
Hmmm, like is 120db plus not low enough? I bet the mike leads and amplifier / mixer noise is above that level.
 
And good Redbook through None Oversampling DACs sounds fabulous.
 
And as for 24 bit sounding better, yeah, maybe, in a None oversampling DAC playing at dead on 24 bit res. But these modern Delta-Sigma DACs don't do that do they? They upsample, downsample, oversample, generally mess with the sound signature.
 
For me, R-2R DAC chips at None Oversampling are the only sound I can live with, the rest sounds lifeless and synthetic. But it sounds good in the spec sheets, and punters buy it, so why bot?

 

[3X0]

So I got my SRM-T1 today and it's HUGE! I honestly had no idea what I was getting into.
 
I heard the HEV70 sounds like a portable amp compared to other electrostatic amps, but I had no idea it looked like one compared to them too. 

 
Even the cord was a beast in of itself!

 

[arnaud]

Since we're specializing in the fracturing of open doors, I will add my minus 2 cts to the conversation.

16 bit is absolutely fine as far as discretizing real world signals since you're lucky when you get more than 40dB of actual dynamic range. Probably the one exception is full orchestra playing some prokofiev and other extreme dynamic range recordings.

The benefits of higher bit depths come into play during processing (be it at the mastering stage or even at the playback stage with reconstruction filters and such).

For image processing, you're actually retouching the images yourself so it makes sense to have it done at bit depths that exceed the output dynamic range (like a computer screen).

For audio playback with pretty much only reconstruction filters involved, 24/32/35 bit processing sounds a bit overrated imo.

 

[autoteleology]

Since we're specializing in the fracturing of open doors, I will add my minus 2 cts to the conversation.

 
This. Why is 96dB of dynamic range not good enough? You will never use anything close to that in actual music, even in the most dynamic classical recording. The only actual helpful use for 24 and 32-bit is during the production stage, and ultra-high sampling rates are scientifically proven to theoretically sound worse than the standard 44.1kHz.
 
There is literally no justification to use consumer "HD" tracks over the standard fare in terms of technical ability. I'm aware that special "audiophile" formats often get special mastering, so there's that (even in places where it makes zero sense, like vinyl, where you DON'T want a quiet master because of surface noise, but whatever), but other than that, I just don't get it.

 

[DefQon]

Quote:

44Khz/16bits is flawed and don't have enough low noise floor. Do the maths. If Redbook would have been something like 48Khz/20bit, CD would have been the perfect media for music for eternity...

For you and all those that want a bit of further "education" on the 16bit vs 24bit and whatnot myths.
 
This thread is a great read.
 
http://www.head-fi.org/t/415361/24bit-vs-16bit-the-myth-exploded
 
Most well mastered sources are 16bit (standard for CD) this makes up a very large percentage 90% + with the exception of SACD, DVD and Redbook. 24Bit is overkill sometimes but provides plenty of overhead, anything else more is just marketing bs imo. It's like magically using a 32bit/384 conversion you can out of no where pull extra bits out of a 16bit/24bit recording when it was never there in the first place. 

 

[telecaster]

For ur education red book is CDs... 96Db noise to signal ratio is not enough. 120db would have been. A n orchestra fortissimo is 120db...
I meant perfect media forever.
For the consumer for God sakes, mastering is another story.

 

[DefQon]

Quote:

For ur education red book is CDs... 96Db noise to signal ratio is not enough. 120db would have been. A n orchestra fortissimo is 120db...
I meant perfect media forever.
For the consumer for God sakes, mastering is another story.

And what else about it? Does it change the fact that most things are based on that 16bit/40-44khz recording format with a small handful being 24bit? This is what I was originally talking about?

 

[miceblue]

http://xiph.org/video/vid2.shtml
 
Don't fall for HD marketing....
 
24/192 my @$$

 
Yup, most of the important stuff is below 20 kHz more or less.....24/96 not needed

 
 

---

Anywho, back on topic, is there any place where I can buy a new SRS-2170 for under $850 USD? I'm not too keen about buying used stuff.

 

[milosz]

While we're taking an excursion away from Stax specifics into music format arguments, I'll toss another spanner into the works...
 
There's a general feeling among many that vinyl sounds better than CD.  
 
You're lucky to have 35 to 40 dB S/N ratio on a vinyl surface on all but the most exquisite audiophile pressings. There's a lot of harmonic and IM distortion inherent in the cutting / playback process - certainly upwards of 1%. 
 
I think many are so used to these "analog artifacts" that hearing a CD without these vinyl-specific characteristics sounds "wrong" to them.  

 

[Michgelsen]

Yes, pricejapan.com.
 
Quote:

Anywho, back on topic, is there any place where I can buy a new SRS-2170 for under $850 USD? I'm not too keen about buying used stuff.

 

[DefQon]

@Miceblue: PM'd you about the 2170.

 

[autoteleology]

While we're taking an excursion away from Stax specifics into music format arguments, I'll toss another spanner into the works...
 
There's a general feeling among many that vinyl sounds better than CD.  
 
You're lucky to have 35 to 40 dB S/N ratio on a vinyl surface on all but the most exquisite audiophile pressings. There's a lot of harmonic and IM distortion inherent in the cutting / playback process - certainly upwards of 1%. 
 
I think many are so used to these "analog artifacts" that hearing a CD without these vinyl-specific characteristics sounds "wrong" to them.  

 
I have a theory about this, and I believe it's the fact that vinyl sounds more "live" in a sense that it adds its own flavor to the music every time it's listened to, like how a live performance always sounds slightly different every time. I agree that for some people, not hearing these distortions might make the music sound a bit odd, somewhat similar to how tubes make music sound more soft (not warm or bright, soft, as in smooth) at the expense of absolute accuracy. Then again, a lot of the time, it's just the romanticism of using analog technology because it really is a whole lot more intimate than loading up a file in Foobar and having the music decoded inside a box.

 

[davidsh]

Why does said words in your profile make you cringe?
 
I kind of agree with you about vinyl, but on the other hand a live performance should sound very live on an accurate digital system if the performance is recorded the right way and such..

 

[jeffreyfranz]

3X0: Did you get the black one that's shown in the For Sale here, in Europe?
Thanks,
Jeffrey
Quote:

So I got my SRM-T1 today and it's HUGE! I honestly had no idea what I was getting into.
 
I heard the HEV70 sounds like a portable amp compared to other electrostatic amps, but I had no idea it looked like one compared to them too. 

 
Even the cord was a beast in of itself!