Hi-res files
Posted by: DHT on 09 October 2008
Has anyone tried the new hi-res files which are starting to become avaiable, I am thinking of the 176.4 Reference recordings, and i have heard there are even some 348.4 DXD files being released.
Posted on: 09 October 2008 by js
One-upsmanship. No real benefit over 24/96. Differences will be due to other factors (conversion, errors etc)and not the format.
Posted on: 09 October 2008 by ferenc
quote:
Originally posted by DHT:
Has anyone tried the new hi-res files which are starting to become avaiable, I am thinking of the 176.4 Reference recordings, and i have heard there are even some 348.4 DXD files being released.
I have dozens of original 128x DSD files and LPs digitised in the same format. If you want I can generate short samples in 192k, 176.4k, 96k, 88.2k, 48k, 44.1k from it with 16 and 24 bit resolution. Then you can compare them. I have some 176.4k samples generated from DXD original as well, I can not make them public unfortunately.
Posted on: 10 October 2008 by SteveH
ferenc
Some music at various sample rates and bit depths would be fascinating to try
The difference between your previous 44.1 and 96k samples was audibly very obvious - thanks for these
Posted on: 10 October 2008 by DHT
Just quickly searching , it appears that 'merging' and 'digital audio denmark' developed DXD as a method of editing DSD ( SACD ) does that sound reasonable?
It appears that only Mergings own Pyramix DAW will actually let you play the 348.4 material though.
Have any of you guys, tried a desktop MAC with a Lynx 16aes interface or a mac Book Pro with a firewire interface to stram files, any thought s on the method to achieve the very best sound?
Posted on: 10 October 2008 by ferenc
quote:
Originally posted by SteveH:
ferenc
Some music at various sample rates and bit depths would be fascinating to try
The difference between your previous 44.1 and 96k samples was audibly very obvious - thanks for these
I will upload some this week-end, let you know about it.
Posted on: 12 October 2008 by Mr Underhill
DHT,
I cannot absolutely back up js's comment but there are some interesting papers on the dCS site. The point that one makes is that if you go beyond 9624 with spdif that the physical route doesn't allow you to gain the benefits of the increased resolution, so they separate the channels for >9624.
ALthough I enjoy the HiRes files for me the music is still King - I would rather listen to something I enjoy at 16/44, if that is all that is available, a lot of HiRes material doesn't float my boat.
IF I can get a good LP this still sounds best to me.
M
Posted on: 12 October 2008 by js
quote:
Originally posted by Mr Underhill:
DHT,
I cannot absolutely back up js's comment but there are some interesting papers on the dCS site. The point that one makes is that if you go beyond 9624 with spdif that the physical route doesn't allow you to gain the benefits of the increased resolution, so they separate the channels for >9624.
ALthough I enjoy the HiRes files for me the music is still King - I would rather listen to something I enjoy at 16/44, if that is all that is available, a lot of HiRes material doesn't float my boat.
IF I can get a good LP this still sounds best to me.
M
But you would probably rather listen to music that you like on CD. Same thing and the music always comes first but we should always strive to get closer to it. 24/96 done right and with the best play back EQ can be even closer to the original than an LP with same. Lets hope that more of what we like becomes available.
