Audiophile witch hunt or basic common sense?

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the What HiFi community: the world's leading independent guide to buying and owning hi-fi and home entertainment products.

ToppingSMSL

Well-known member
Oct 10, 2024
87
39
70
Visit site
Yes I have an opinion, as does everyone on this forum, however I am simply stating I will not be bothering to watch your latest edition nor any that simply show someone else's opinion on a subject matter that's usually pointless.
I think I am allowed to do that.
I do not think most people want to read that you wont be watching something. Most people will not care.
 

Jasonovich

Well-known member
I thought I share. I got a reminder to renew my CD burning software: there's a EZ CD software update. I thought the pinnicle of digital was 32 bit floating point PCM 758khz DSD 1024. It's kind of got silly now with the sampling rate.
Some rebranding Ultra HD, interesting development but we barely have DSD512.

1737218793128.png
 
I thought I share. I got a reminder to renew my CD burning software: there's a EZ CD software update. I thought the pinnicle of digital was 32 bit floating point PCM 758khz DSD 1024. It's kind of got silly now with the sampling rate.
Some rebranding Ultra HD, interesting development but we barely have DSD512.

View attachment 8238
Silly and utterly pointless. They’ve given the marketing department too much influence. I’m sure there are gullible types who’ll get taken in by it though.
 

podknocker

Well-known member
Silly and utterly pointless. They’ve given the marketing department too much influence. I’m sure there are gullible types who’ll get taken in by it though.
CD quality covers the entire range of human hearing and the dynamic range is more than enough with CD, accepting the fact that the mastering process is as careful as it is with vinyl mastering. All these numbers don't change anything. It's just numbers for the sake of it and you won't hear the difference.
 
CD quality covers the entire range of human hearing and the dynamic range is more than enough with CD, accepting the fact that the mastering process is as careful as it is with vinyl mastering. All these numbers don't change anything. It's just numbers for the sake of it and you won't hear the difference.
Some time ago I downloaded an album from Qobuz that was 24bit 172KHz and, couldn't hear any noticeable improvement, on my Pathos amp and Focals.
 

Revolutions

Well-known member
And what do we do with turntables?

BURN THEM!!!!!
monty-python.gif
 

podknocker

Well-known member
I thought I share. I got a reminder to renew my CD burning software: there's a EZ CD software update. I thought the pinnicle of digital was 32 bit floating point PCM 758khz DSD 1024. It's kind of got silly now with the sampling rate.
Some rebranding Ultra HD, interesting development but we barely have DSD512.

View attachment 8238
These numbers are just nonsense and buying an 'upgrade' licence is a waste of money. IF recording studios used this level of recording quality AND it was available on streaming platforms AND all the streaming amps had DACs capable of this level of recording, then it would all work, but nobody would hear the difference. People need to remember that most recording studios are using 24 bit at most and this is decimated to 16 bit for CD, which I think is good enough. There will be 24 bit masters available on a few streaming platforms, but can you really hear the difference? It's just this relentless marketing of higher and higher numbers, which don't translate into real world improvements. You can chop up a recording as much as possible, but there's a point where human hearing can't tell the difference. The only way to experience your favourite albums at studio quality is to visit one and ask them to play the source tapes or digital files. Everyone's chasing unicorns and you won't catch one.
 
Last edited:

Jasonovich

Well-known member
These numbers are just nonsense and buying an 'upgrade' licence is a waste of money. IF recording studios used this level of recording quality AND it was available on streaming platforms AND all the streaming amps had DACs capable of this level of recording, then it would all work, but nobody would hear the difference. People need to remember that most recording studios are using 24 bit at most and this is decimated to 16 bit for CD, which I think is good enough. There will be 24 bit masters available on a few streaming platforms, but can you really hear the difference? It's just this relentless marketing of higher and higher numbers, which don't translate into real world improvements. You can chop up a recording as much as possible, but there's a point where human hearing can't tell the difference. The only way to experience your favourite albums at studio quality is to visit one and ask them to play the source tapes or digital files. Everyone's chasing unicorns and you won't catch one.
I think people are hang up on the frequency spectrum, what human ear can hear and can't.
I'm not really arguing against that, it's really about the Process.
PCM is good enough but bitstream in my own humble opinion is more faithful to the original analogue source.
I'm not an engineer and someone with qualification can better elucidate the pros and cons.
I have compared CD of the same artist with the DSD equivalent, well the CD replicated the music very well, DSD on the other hand Was The Music!
That's the difference between painting by numbers and a work of art.
Like I said before, whatever is your poison, enjoy and be happy 😁
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Kenneth Fernandes

ToppingSMSL

Well-known member
Oct 10, 2024
87
39
70
Visit site
If a turntable floats, is it a witch?

CD quality covers the entire range of human hearing and the dynamic range is more than enough with CD, accepting the fact that the mastering process is as careful as it is with vinyl mastering. All these numbers don't change anything. It's just numbers for the sake of it and you won't hear the difference.
Higher bit depth are useful with mastering so that eq changes etc make as little impact as possible on fidelity. For the end listener 16 bit is perfectly fine.
 

ToppingSMSL

Well-known member
Oct 10, 2024
87
39
70
Visit site
I think people are hang up on the frequency spectrum, what human ear can hear and can't.
I'm not really arguing against that, it's really about the Process.
PCM is good enough but bitstream in my own humble opinion is more faithful to the original analogue source.
I'm not an engineer and someone with qualification can better elucidate the pros and cons.
I have compared CD of the same artist with the DSD equivalent, well the CD replicated the music very well, DSD on the other hand Was The Music!
That's the difference between painting by numbers and a work of art.
Like I said before, whatever is your poison, enjoy and be happy 😁
Yeah the problem is you're wide open to placebo effects etc here.
 

ToppingSMSL

Well-known member
Oct 10, 2024
87
39
70
Visit site
The placebo effect is another abstract we pull out of the sky to neutralise an argument, not saying it doesn't exist and doesn't colour your perception of the actual sound but I like to give my ears a little bit of the credit also :)
No, placebo effect is something that very much happens but we ignore far too often.
 

Jasonovich

Well-known member
No, placebo effect is something that very much happens but we ignore far too often.
For every argument there's a counter argument, life is far more layered and complicated than the stuff conjured by social scientists - see link below.

Just to add, placebo effect originated from medical diagnosis, not sure how it found it's way into audio sphere?

I always like to keep an open mind but willingly to accept my errors :)

 
Last edited:

TRENDING THREADS