Interview with Dan Lavry of Lavry Engineering
http://www.monoandstereo.com/2008/06/in ... lavry.html
Q:We see that year by year there is kind of race for bits and high sampling rates. Where do you think this will stop?
A:Regarding bits: The ear can not hear more then about 126dB of dynamic range under extreme conditions. At around 6dB per bit, that amounts to 21 bits, which is what my AD122 MKIII provides (unweighted).
Regarding sample rate: The ear can not hear over 25-30KHz, therefore 60-70KHz would be ideal. Unfortunately there is no 65KHz standard, but 88.2KHz or even 96KHz is not too far from the optimal rate. 192KHz is way off the mark. It brings about higher distortions, bigger data files, increased processing costs, and all that for no up side! People that think that more samples are better, and that digital is only an approximation, do not understand the fundamentals of digital audio.
24/192 Music Downloads
...and why they make no sense
192kHz considered harmful
192kHz digital music files offer no benefits. They're not quite neutral either; practical fidelity is slightly worse. The ultrasonics are a liability during playback.
Neither audio transducers nor power amplifiers are free of distortion, and distortion tends to increase rapidly at the lowest and highest frequencies. If the same transducer reproduces ultrasonics along with audible content, any nonlinearity will shift some of the ultrasonic content down into the audible range as an uncontrolled spray of intermodulation distortion products covering the entire audible spectrum. Nonlinearity in a power amplifier will produce the same effect. The effect is very slight, but listening tests have confirmed that both effects can be audible.
Gomila tzv. 24/192 download-ova je u stvari dobijena konverzijom SACD diskova, jednostavnim izborom opcije u Weiss Saracon softveru
i nema nikakvu korisnu informaciju iznad 30 kHz.
Znaci sadrzaj 24/192 fajla je u sustini ISTI kao i kod "regularnog" 24/88.2 fajla koji se standardno dobija ekstrakcijom iz DSD formata.
To se lepo vidi kada se u nekom editoru zvuka otvore i uporedi frekventni spektar 24/88.2 i 24/192 verzije istog albuma sa HDtracks.
Ali zato je 24/192 verzija znacajno skuplja!
Scandal Brewing in High Resolution Downloads?
http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f13-a ... oads-7735/
Many of us download our High-Resolution music from sites like "HDtracks" "High Definition Tape Transfers" (HDTT), and the Linn Records site. We make these purchases confident that we are getting, for our money, 24-bit/192 KHz, 24/176.4, 24/96 or 24-bit/88.2 KHz copies of master tapes either analog or, in the case of Linn, hi-res digital originals. But is that confidence misplaced?
If a recent article in Britain's "Hi-Fi News and Record Review" is anything to go by, we're at least sometimes being cheated. I'm not saying that these download sites are purposely cheating us by not giving us what we think we're buying, what is happening is that these digital transfers aren't actually done by HDTracks, HDTT, and Linn Records, et al, themselves. They get sent the digital copies they offer by whoever owns the masters and the rights to license the music.
According to HFN&RR, a sampling of these three sites show that when the downloads of some of them have been examined by a spectrum analyzer, the analysis shows that many are not hi-rez at all but merely up-sampled standard resolution digital that have been converted from 44.1 or 48 KHz digital copies. I don't know about you, but I have a stand-alone 24/96 up-sampler that can do that on the fly to any 16-bit/44.1 KHz CD or other digital source that I care to play. Why would I want to purchase (for a healthy premium too) a copy of a CD that has been up-sampled from CD quality already? Yet that is what a lot of are getting here.
The sad part about this is that it seems that these download services didn't know that they were short-changing their customers. One case in point was HDTrack's recent addition of the "Frampton Comes Alive" album. HDTRacks was selling this album as 24/96 on their web-site, but after HFN&RR's investigation, the download service's spokesman, Mike Lawson replied: "We appreciate our attention being brought to these titles. "Frampton Comes Alive" has been relabeled as 24/48, and it's still the very best version of that album available anywhere."
Lest classical music and jazz snobs think that they have escaped this problem, The HDTRacks release of Coltrane's "Lush Life" appears to have been filtered twice which indicates that it was up-sampled from 44.1 KHz to 96 KHz. Also from HDTRacks, Is the Pentatone recording of Shostakovich's Symphony #5 which is listed as being 24/88.2 but is really, again, merely 16-bit/44.1 up-sampled.
Linn Records too, has found their share of "ringers" in their catalog as well. Their recoding of Bach's "Brandenberg Concerto's was found to be also up-sampled from a 44.1 KHz original.
When asked to comment, Linn's Catherine Ward informed HFN&RR: "As soon as were aware of this issue, all customers who bought these titles were immediately contacted and informed of the situation. We are taking this one album at at a time and are making each album available on the website when we are satisfied with the quality. The customers who previously purchased these downloads are automatically given the corrected versions of each release when it becomes available."
This is an important issue. If you have bought any high-resolution downloads via the web, you need to contact the people from which you made these purchases and ascertain what it is that you REALLY bought. These are reputable businesses and they seem truly determined to make this situation right.