MacBook Pro - optical out?
Posted by: MontyW on 18 May 2009
Hi,
Can anyone advise me if it is possible to output 192kHz from the optical Toslink out from a MacBook Pro?
Monty
Posted on: 22 May 2009 by spacey
quote:
Originally posted by PMR:
Guys, it's important to remember that whether it's 16/44 or not there is no garantee the recording will be of high fidelity. My best and most enjoyable recordings are still 16/44. All this marketing rubbish for 24/96 etc., just means the music is rubbish for the most part.
i have well over 2000 cds i have 4 24bit recordings which were downloaded just to hear 24 bit recording i've listend to them about as many times...
Posted on: 22 May 2009 by spacey
get the kit to resolve to 24/44 allows 16/44 to sound better though.
Posted on: 22 May 2009 by PMR
quote:
Originally posted by r-tee:
get the kit to resolve to 24/44 allows 16/44 to sound better though.
It might, but you cannot hear better than 16/44. Fancy a test?
Posted on: 22 May 2009 by spacey
yeh why not, would be interesting
Posted on: 22 May 2009 by garyi
PC, the mac is not input and output there are two ports on a mac combi out put and combi input.
The supernait has combi input on the front. Look it up.
Posted on: 23 May 2009 by js
Never found some one that couldn't hear the difference in our shop with good (not expensive)gear. Same file either properly downsampled or transfered in both formats from analog.
Posted on: 23 May 2009 by js
quote:
Originally posted by pcstockton:
For what its worth, I have a few rips in 24/192, and the same identical rips dithered to 96khz.
I cant differentiate between the two.
16/44 and 16/48 - sound identical to me
24/48 - much better than above
24/96 and 24/192 - sound identical to me but still much better than both of the above.
And I agree with js, 24/96 is good enough for me.
I guess we can start discussing 32/192 at some point (lets not quite yet), as we can also entertain a 14 blade razor.
I really do like my 4 blade Gillette (24/96) though. Much better than the old single blade deals (Redbook).
Just did the 192 vs 96 thing on a Nagra LB from analog dub. Overall preferred the 96 but it wasn't a substancial difference. Could be current tech, specific bits or some other factor but it appears 96 is plenty good for now.
Posted on: 24 May 2009 by js
By the way, did this double blind
as it's all the rage with Ken doing the dem. Picked right each time and called which was 192 before being told as it didn't sound quite as tangible as I'm accustomed. Again, doesn't mean that it's a worse format but for me it wasn't quite as good in this comparison.
Posted on: 25 May 2009 by garyi
Who do you get to help on these gimpy experiments?
There has to come a time where a person gets happy with the system they have regardless of its resolving abilities. For me this is a combination of sound (Naim of course) and quality of media access.
I certainly would not restrict my self to certain files in order to enjoy music, and i think there is a real risk of that happening the way some of you guy go on.
