Why 24 bit audio and anything over 48k is not only worthless, but bad for music.

[theveterans]

STEEP FILTERS ARE NOT GOOD FOR SOUND

Not sure where you go that from. So many world-renowned DAC makers (subjectively) use incredibly steep filters. Also, rather than focusing on digital filters, digital's biggest elephant in the room IMHO is jitter variations at the DAC clock. No matter how perfect your filters are, if jitter in the DAC clock is not consistently extremely low, digital will sound just bad no matter what

The MP3 will sound "cleaner"

What??? Heck no, I've A/Bed 128 Kbps MP3 vs FLAC multiple times and MP3 is actually dirtier and has tons of veil in the note edges. No clarity and black background whatsoever

Well Digital is that inexpensive but kinda blah experience. That has faster listener fatigue and rarely gets you the full alpha state unlike great immersive Analog.

Definitely demo some digital reference systems at your local dealer. You'll be in shocked that the sounds coming out of it is 100% digitally streamed since they're stupid close to high end vinyl sound

 

[Golden Ears]

LOOK, if you haven't heard it, you haven't heard it.

Once you hear it, you can't unhear it.

Lots of people go through all sorts of the same arguments you have. Then I demonstrate. They hear it. And oddly they never mention it ever again.

For instance - People who say wire doesn't make a difference often have things that don't allow for them to hear the difference in their system.
Richard and Dave are two very rightly well respected people in car audio. They claim all amplifiers sound the same once adjusted for their differences and not clipping . Well if you take $15 wine and $350 wine and toss a drop of skunk extract in both and claim it's a fair taste test....

I flew back from the Caribbean and happened to sit next to John Lyons who owned Boston Boston then Metro then Avalon on Landsdowne St. in Boston. He was about to gut the sound system that Richard Long and Associates designed for him and implement a new sound system with better specs. RLA later did Studio 54 and quite a few other clubs... not everything was great in their systems .... the Bozak Mixers were good but the Crown Amps ehhh not so hot.... but the end result overall was some of the better club sound of the time.

John Lyons was running on the theory that in his words "Voltage is voltage" doesn't matter what amps you use, and cone displacement is just displacement. He went not to say he designed these speakers "Avalon" ( no relation the the good Avalons high fidelity speakers) and that they would be great in clumps interspersed throughout the club. He removed the ceiling of the club leaving a curved dome. He removed the flocking on that dome.

The sound was horrible at opening and no amount of eq could fix it.

A lot of people in positions that should know everything, simply don't know everything. They may take a lot of credit... but they don't have a true understanding because they haven't been exposed. They haven't been taught to see the differences.

Well if you start with horrible conditions.. you ain't gonna fix it in post.

So if you are in the California area, maybe I'll put you in front of some good systems. We can change wire and sample rates. I'll show you the difference.

And I won't see retorts trying to defend your hierarchical forum status anymore. Instead you'll have a better view to share with others on this site.

Big shot has this right. If you send HF into systems that aren't designed for it you get cascading distortion throughout your audible spectrum even if it was ultrasonic frequencies that caused it. Wide bandwidth systems are needed to hear the benefits of hi-rez.

@thevetrans... yes Jitter is bad. horribly bad its what made 80s digital sound so shrill with violins and horrible piano sounding wrong. But I think there is "a baseline table stakes for digital" and it probably should start with a low jitter Femtoclock. Just like with Solid State amps a good rule of thumb is at least 110db s/n ratio. But the conversation of this thread is not about Jitter is it? It is about sample rate. And I'm saying that lower slope filters which are enabled by higher sample rates help.

Maybe a better description of MP3 is that it is stripped of nuance which is mistaken for clearer. A Yamaha or Shimmel piano sounds like it has fewer overtones than a Steinway. No thanks for the Shimmel I'll take the Steinway Grand. For some music. a Shimmel is good. I had a goofball Roomate in Corona Del Mar , Giovanni Marradi , who is a fast and flashy pianist. I'm not a fan of his music but the plexiglas Shimmel was a good tool for him. And just like a Shimmel is good for him there are certain types of music that sound less damaged by MP3 and lower bit rate, like EDM. EDM in part rose because it was more enjoyable to listen to over crappy computer speakers or a poorly tuned car audio system and low bit rate than say Classic rock. So not all music is equally degraded by lower sample rates and not all recordings benefit the same amount from better sample rates.

I do not have to go to a local dealer and spend 20-40 min listening to high end DACS. If I need gear for shows I get manufacturing loans. I can keep the gear for much longer than at a dealer or a dealer loan. I kinda like the Denafrips Terminator Plus as a value expensive DAC - I used to have he MSB Analog Dec full stack with separate power supplies $24k.. So it's not like I haven't heard decent digital. I'll go to shows and make it a point to try and hear every worthwhile DAC at a show. Mostly because I have the amps and pre-amps and speakers already figured out so I tend to Key on DACs which I am doing once again. I need a DAP or DAC , or portable recording DAC like a Hilo2 for a high end car system I am designing. I don't want to stuff a Wadia 860x in a car (even though I bought it for that purpose- its just too big and needs too long to warm up).

You can make digital sound close to vinyl , just start crippling the system. Until the vinyl sounds so bad digital wins.

Keep crippling the system and at some point - even pre-recorded cassette sounds good. (oddly played back through a Tandberg 3104a and most pre recorded cassettes can sound very good - but you would have to own/owned one to experience this bewildering thing).

Most home audio systems aren't good enough to appreciate all that vinyl has to offer, but are at least good enough to show SOME of what good things vinyl has to offer which often is more valuable to the listening experience than what good things digital has to offer.

Streaming Digital IMHO is a great "auditioning tool". Then you know what vinyl to buy. Vinyl is a pain in the ass, because you can buy an album and then go over to your buddies house who has a lesser system but a better pressing and his vinyl sounds better.

If you hear a digital master and go out and buy brand new vinyl the brand new vinyl will often sound worse than the digital... but if you have an older copy on vinyl the vinyl wins. For the most part vinyl beats digital ...but you need an expensive turntable and cartridge and phono pre-amp. in the $3000-$5000 range typically Digital wins. Above and below vinyl has a good shot. Master tape is really where it's at. Forget high Rez- we did lots of experiments with hi Rez digital and master tape and the master tape always wins...... not matter how high the sampling rate.


Problem with vinyl .. It's a crap shoot of when you got the pressing in the stamper ..near the start of stamping or near the end where that particular stamper is worn. Was the vinyl made in the early morning when it wasn't flowing well, did they just recycles a Buch of vinyl into the hopper? But a good vinyl pressing generally beats the digital made of the same master.

Look sometimes I wonder why I try and help this headphone crowd. Because it's headphone based, It's like your sound staging isn't good. Like the view of the world of a horse hearing blinders. And you guys debate over which blinders are best for the horse. And frankly it's harder to discern in headphones and the differences. because some of the cross feed that interacts on a well set up speakers on a good system in a good room help you hear the difference that you would never hear in headphones. But when I see a thread like this..... I comment. It's click bait for me.

 

[bigshot]

That’s a whole lot of words to convey so few facts. You really love the sound of your own voice.

 

[2leftears]

Look sometimes I wonder why I try and help this headphone crowd. Because it's headphone based, It's like your sound staging isn't good. Like the view of the world of a horse hearing blinders. And you guys debate over which blinders are best for the horse. And frankly it's harder to discern in headphones and the differences. because some of the cross feed that interacts on a well set up speakers on a good system in a good room help you hear the difference that you would never hear in headphones. But when I see a thread like this..... I comment. It's click bait for me.

Now that's an odd argument. Headphones and speakers indeed give a different experience, imaging & soundstage (or perceived lack thereof) included. But both have their different individual sonic advantage and disadvantages. There are a few music genres which shine on headphones but will fall relatively flat on speakers, and with all the unsigned bedroom-production artists on the rise an increasing number of them seem to be mixed to sound better over headphones and have sound effects observed better over headphones. Whether that is on purpose or by accident one can argue about till the cows come home (bedroom mixing skills vary), but it is undeniable that headphone/IEM use is on the rise compared to speaker listening, and has been for some time.

 

[gregorio]

@thevetrans... yes Jitter is bad. horribly bad its what made 80s digital sound so shrill with violins and horrible piano sounding wrong.

Do you have reliable evidence for that assertion or did you just make it up? The actual facts are the opposite; Achieved jitter (specifications) are actually good, terrifically good and 80’s digital sound was not “so shrill with violins and horrible piano”.

But I think there is "a baseline table stakes for digital" and it probably should start with a low jitter Femtoclock.

There is a baseline, that would be lower than the lowest demonstrated audible threshold, which typically is around 200ns, although 27ns was once demonstrated with a particular piece of music. However, there is no DAC with a jitter anywhere near that level. Even cheap DACs in OEM CD drives 30 years ago averaged around 150ps jitter, which is more than 1,000 times below typical audibility and still around 200 times below the lowest demonstrated audibility and none had femtoclocks! Your just repeating false marketing.

Just like with Solid State amps a good rule of thumb is at least 110db s/n ratio.

Why would “a good rule of thumb” be so far below audibility? Why wouldn’t “a good rule of thumb” just be the limit of audiblity?

For instance - People who say wire doesn't make a difference often have things that don't allow for them to hear the difference in their system.

True, I for example don’t have a system that’s so screwed up that changing the wire could make an audible difference. Fortunately, not many people do. I’m sorry if yours does, have you considered upgrading it? Even a mediocre mass produced consumer system would do the trick.

If you send HF into systems that aren't designed for it you get cascading distortion throughout your audible spectrum even if it was ultrasonic frequencies that caused it. Wide bandwidth systems are needed to hear the benefits of hi-rez.

What audio systems aren’t designed for HF? Most systems aren’t designed for ultrasonic frequencies but then the obvious solution would be not to feed ultrasonic frequencies to such a system, EG. Use 16/44 rather than hires.

You can make digital sound close to vinyl , just start crippling the system. Until the vinyl sounds so bad digital wins.

You have that backwards. You can make digital sound close to vinyl if you cripple it (the digital!), until the digital sounds so bad the vinyl wins.

Most home audio systems aren't good enough to appreciate all that vinyl has to offer

I can’t remember ever hearing a home audio system, even a cheap one, that couldn’t reproduce the surface noise and clicks/crackles of vinyl.

If you hear a digital master and go out and buy brand new vinyl the brand new vinyl will often sound worse than the digital... but if you have an older copy on vinyl the vinyl wins.

So you’re saying that vinyl isn’t better than digital but vinyl with significant wear does? Presumably a worn out and badly scratched vinyl record sounds best of all or maybe a century old wax cylinder?

Look sometimes I wonder why I try and help this headphone crowd.

How exactly does posting a bunch of misinformation, marketing BS and false audiophile myths “help this headphone crowd” or help any other crowd?

G

 

[old tech]

Which fantasy land do these people like Golden Sound come from?

 

[Golden Ears]

I guess red book is the best all DACs and anmps and wire sounds the same so buy only the cheapest stuff you can that meet your specs Gregorio. I’m exiting bizzarro world now . Heading to Axpona for sound .

 

[castleofargh]

Sometimes you find at least a coherent rational, flawed by missing something important like hearing threshold, the magnitude of things happening, or some other confusion about digital or humans. But in this post and those from the xylo guy, we're missing all that, and we're also missing the intuitive rational. They contradict themselves so openly that I once again can't tell if it's trolling or serious.

 

[chef8489]

I guess red book is the best all DACs and anmps and wire sounds the same so buy only the cheapest stuff you can that meet your specs Gregorio. I’m exiting bizzarro world now . Heading to Axpona for sound .

Well you have proven over and over you don't understand biology and human hearing capabilities. you also have proven over you understand absolutely nothing about sound engineering nor studio engineering or recording sound and records.

All you do is bable on with nonsense, myths and misinformation and constantly contradict even yourself.

 

[Golden Ears]

Gregorio, you know it all! You are 100% right I studied audio for the last 50 years for nothing. . All DACs sound alike, all wire sounds alike, redbook was perfect as were all the original 1980's DACs. Sorry I have to leave your bizzaro world now ...good job chasing away people who actually make better sound in their wildest nonsense fantasies.. By the way- here's a tip .. $5 box wine tastes just as good as the best wines, you can find studies to support this like all your other ideas. And a Kia is better than my Mercedes supercar and my Teslas because you can only go the speed limit anyway. Thanks for showing me the light.

chef - that's something called sarcasm.

 

[chef8489]

Gregorio, you know it all! You are 100% right I studied audio for the last 50 years for nothing. . All DACs sound alike, all wire sounds alike, redbook was perfect as were all the original 1980's DACs. Sorry I have to leave your bizzaro world now ...good job chasing away people who actually make better sound in their wildest nonsense fantasies.. By the way- here's a tip .. $5 box wine tastes just as good as the best wines, you can find studies to support this like all your other ideas. And a Kia is better than my Mercedes supercar and my Teslas because you can only go the speed limit anyway. Thanks for showing me the light.

This post confirmed you are just a troll. You have not studied audio for the last 50 years. All your posts clearly prove that. You dont understand any of the science behind any of it.

 

[Golden Ears]

Look fellas. You have to understand that some people are better at creating coherent quality audio than others,. And often with has nothing to do with degrees... Saul Marantz had to have his wife help him out with math for his circuits...he obviously learned to make great sounding circuits without fancy mics and test gear. Conrad Johnson was a company not founded by electronics wiz guys- but they knew what sounded better.

If anyone here thinks they can build a better Stradivarius or Steinway.... well good luck. And there are plenty of people that think piano or violin quality doesn't matter...it just matters who is playing it. But they are wrong. You need good artists with good instruments in a decent space with good recording engineers , great mastering, great playback.

You can find a study to support any falsehood you wish to believe. I do trust my own ears. But I'm sure not going to trust a person who just wants to limit the gear thinking that we have ALL reached the point of inaudibility in terms of the gear resolution. Almost every time I think , some aspect of audio can't get better.... well it does. So I stopped putting limitations on humans creativity.

I mean do you really think some dude who mostly writes code listening to $75 ear buds is going to create a DAC that beats the best analog? If you were to look at the audio system that Audirvana used for reference and for writing some of the early codecs you would be horrified. They weren't always moving forward.

If my audio views don't agree with yours , try to learn more than just stopping when you find the first study that agrees with you. Its like the SS guys trying to argue with Tim De Paravincini about Solid state being superior to Vacuum tubes ...when Tim designs both and can explain why tubes work better for audio..But guys like you shout people down....before they can explain. It's like cancel culture at is worst. Because it denies advancement. The world ain't flat bros.

 

[bigshot]

The problem is that it’s difficult to consider contrary opinions when they fly in the face of physics and electrical engineering. You keep writing, but you flat out don’t know what you’re talking about.

 

[Quazar]

"In science, contrary evidence challenges the theory. In religion, contrary evidence challenges the evidence."

 

[gregorio]

You are 100% right I studied audio for the last 50 years for nothing.

Sure you have. Maybe you mean you’ve only studied audiophile marketing for 50 years or maybe you’re just outright lying and have never studied audio? Your posts indicate you haven’t studied audio for 50 minutes, let alone 50 years!

But I'm sure not going to trust a person who just wants to limit the gear thinking that we have ALL reached the point of inaudibility in terms of the gear resolution. Almost every time I think , some aspect of audio can't get better.... well it does.

If you’ve studied audio for 50 years why would you even think in terms of “trust a person”? And as for your second sentence, again, if you’d studied audio for only 50 days you would never make such a statement.

If my audio views don't agree with yours …

It’s got nothing to do with your views not agreeing with mine, it’s got everything to do with your views disagreeing with the proven, demonstrable facts. You know, those facts you claimed you’ve been studing for 50 years but are disagreeing with.

It’s like the SS guys trying to argue with Tim De Paravincini about Solid state being superior to Vacuum tubes ...when Tim designs both and can explain why tubes work better for audio.

Sure, that’s why all studios use tubes in their DAWs, ADCs and DACs and that’s why tubes have been replacing SS for 60 years, which in case you’re not aware, is 10 years before you started studying audio. It’s for the same reason that wax cylinders are replacing CDs and donkeys are replacing cars. What have you been studying for 50 years, was it time going backwards? lol

But guys like you shout people down....before they can explain. It's like cancel culture at is worst.

Yep, terrible isn’t it? Don’t cancel those wax cylinders, traveling by donkey, fax machines, blood letting, slide rules, flint tools, wooden wheels, telegraph, witch doctors, etc., cancel culture at it’s worst!

G