• If you ever spot Spam (either in the forums, or received via forum direct message) please use the Report button at the bottom of each post to make sure a Moderator can handle it quickly. Thanks for your help in keeping things running smoothly!

High-resolution audio: clarity or confusion?

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the What HiFi community: the world's leading independent guide to buying and owning hi-fi and home entertainment products.
May 28, 2013
33
0
0
Hi Native,

Post not directed at you and I agree with you entirely. Not in the market for a new DAC as irDAc passed my hearing test with flying colours.
 

Covenanter

Well-known member
Jul 20, 2012
63
0
18,540
emperor's new clothes said:
HFC has an exellent review of the Chord Hugo DAc including comment from designer Rob Watts. An expert view if ever there was one and well worth a read. Having studied psychoacoustics in addition to electronic engineering, he says that the brain samples at 4 microseconds vs CD at 22ms.

I listened to M Knophlers beautifully recorded hybrid SACD of Shangri La, followed by the Cd layer. No question about increased dynamic range and detail, but the Cd layer is excellent in its own right. I agree with the above, too many CDs are frankly rubbish which shows an arrogant and indifferent industry.
The sampling rate is totally irrelevant of course (and you means 22 microseconds for CD, ms= milliseconds, μs = microseconds). Nyquist/Shannon strikes again! Blind testing has shown that listeners can't distinguish between CD and SACD at normal listening levels.

Chris
 

BigH

New member
Dec 29, 2012
97
1
0
Native_bon said:
emperor's new clothes said:
HFC has an exellent review of the Chord Hugo DAc including comment from designer Rob Watts. An expert view if ever there was one and well worth a read. Having studied psychoacoustics in addition to electronic engineering, he says that the brain samples at 4 microseconds vs CD at 22ms.

I listened to M Knophlers beautifully recorded hybrid SACD of Shangri La, followed by the Cd layer. No question about increased dynamic range and detail, but the Cd layer is excellent in its own right. I agree with the above, too many CDs are frankly rubbish which shows an arrogant and indifferent industry.
The chord Hugo Dac is a product that has really got my attention more than any in the HIFI world. A friend in the states has just got one & tells me it sounds like nothing in the digital world. This will surely put my faith back in the digital domain or I will totaly loose faith in the Hifi indusrty as a whole. This will totaly depend on my findings myself. It may be a great portable product but may not be the type of presentation I may prefer. :pray: Will demo this very soon.
What because of one bod in the USA? wow u have some faith. I don't know about the Hugo but on some other forum which seems to have a lot of knowledge than this one, the John Kenny is said to be the best under £1000, the Metrum also does well, the Benchmark seems a bit passe.
 

davedotco

New member
Apr 24, 2013
20
0
0
BigH said:
What because of one bod in the USA? wow u have some faith. I don't know about the Hugo but on some other forum which seems to have a lot of knowledge than this one, the John Kenny is said to be the best under £1000, the Metrum also does well, the Benchmark seems a bit passe.
And a few months ago it was the M2 Tech Young dac.

The very dac shown to be indistinquishable from the dac in a Sonus Connect in a blind test on PFM.
 

Native_bon

Well-known member
Nov 26, 2008
180
2
18,595
BigH said:
Native_bon said:
emperor's new clothes said:
HFC has an exellent review of the Chord Hugo DAc including comment from designer Rob Watts. An expert view if ever there was one and well worth a read. Having studied psychoacoustics in addition to electronic engineering, he says that the brain samples at 4 microseconds vs CD at 22ms.

I listened to M Knophlers beautifully recorded hybrid SACD of Shangri La, followed by the Cd layer. No question about increased dynamic range and detail, but the Cd layer is excellent in its own right. I agree with the above, too many CDs are frankly rubbish which shows an arrogant and indifferent industry.
The chord Hugo Dac is a product that has really got my attention more than any in the HIFI world. A friend in the states has just got one & tells me it sounds like nothing in the digital world. This will surely put my faith back in the digital domain or I will totaly loose faith in the Hifi indusrty as a whole. This will totaly depend on my findings myself. It may be a great portable product but may not be the type of presentation I may prefer. :pray: Will demo this very soon.
What because of one bod in the USA? wow u have some faith. I don't know about the Hugo but on some other forum which seems to have a lot of knowledge than this one, the John Kenny is said to be the best under £1000, the Metrum also does well, the Benchmark seems a bit passe.
yea but you left out the demo part. And also read my ealier post. Seems you have not read the whole truth.
 

TrevC

Well-known member
Jun 12, 2013
370
169
19,070
As I have some truly stunning CD recordings along with some real duffers I'm forced to conclude that the problem is the recording and mastering rather than any limitations of the CD medium itself. I see no point in childish insults.
 

Electro

Well-known member
Mar 30, 2011
43
3
18,545
TrevC said:
As I have some truly stunning CD recordings along with some real duffers I'm forced to conclude that the problem is the recording and mastering rather than any limitations of the CD medium itself. I see no point in childish insults.
Spot on :clap:
 

Jota180

Well-known member
May 14, 2010
23
2
18,525
emperor's new clothes said:
Perhaps you should read the article, then you will see it is a matter of timing rather than frequency range.
I've re read the article and timing is not mentioned once.

People need to watch this.

http://xiph.org/video/vid2.shtml
 

Covenanter

Well-known member
Jul 20, 2012
63
0
18,540
TrevC said:
As I have some truly stunning CD recordings along with some real duffers I'm forced to conclude that the problem is the recording and mastering rather than any limitations of the CD medium itself. I see no point in childish insults.
+ another 1.

Chris
 

hifikrazy

New member
Aug 9, 2007
23
0
0
BigH said:
hifikrazy said:
I have absolutely no post purchase consumer regrets, so you guys are doing nobody any favours with your unwelcome advice. In fact, the only ones who get any benefit from your wingeing and moaning are the others who share your opinion, so that you can provide one another support and validation for being tightwads.
I suggest you spend some time on the Harbeth forum, you may learn something.
Why because there are others like you in there? Thanks for the warning, I will certainly stay away from there now.
 

hifikrazy

New member
Aug 9, 2007
23
0
0
TrevC said:
As I have some truly stunning CD recordings along with some real duffers I'm forced to conclude that the problem is the recording and mastering rather than any limitations of the CD medium itself. I see no point in childish insults.
I do agree with this. I've also heard the same album (one made in Australia and the other in USA) and the Australian one was absolutely unlistenable. However, I would not go so far as to say that the CD medium cannot be bettered and the resolution of redbook CD already higher than the human ear can detect.
 

Electro

Well-known member
Mar 30, 2011
43
3
18,545
Jota180 said:
emperor's new clothes said:
Perhaps you should read the article, then you will see it is a matter of timing rather than frequency range.
I've re read the article and timing is not mentioned once.

People need to watch this.

http://xiph.org/video/vid2.shtml
This is a very good link , I am quite thick and it made sense to me so it must be good :)
 

Native_bon

Well-known member
Nov 26, 2008
180
2
18,595
Jota180 said:
emperor's new clothes said:
Perhaps you should read the article, then you will see it is a matter of timing rather than frequency range.
I've re read the article and timing is not mentioned once.

People need to watch this.

http://xiph.org/video/vid2.shtml
Now i really understand why people take things personal. I got a copy of the mag here & it does talk about timing.
 

Electro

Well-known member
Mar 30, 2011
43
3
18,545
Native_bon said:
Jota180 said:
emperor's new clothes said:
Perhaps you should read the article, then you will see it is a matter of timing rather than frequency range.
I've re read the article and timing is not mentioned once.

People need to watch this.

http://xiph.org/video/vid2.shtml
Now i really understand why people take things personal. I got a copy of the mag here & it does talk about timing.
You are right he does talk about timing towards the end of the video and he explains and demonstrates it very well IMO . :)
 

Jota180

Well-known member
May 14, 2010
23
2
18,525
Native_bon said:
Jota180 said:
emperor's new clothes said:
Perhaps you should read the article, then you will see it is a matter of timing rather than frequency range.
I've re read the article and timing is not mentioned once.

People need to watch this.

http://xiph.org/video/vid2.shtml
Now i really understand why people take things personal. I got a copy of the mag here & it does talk about timing.
The original post said what do you think about this and he posted a link, presumably the 'this' he was talking about. Nowhere in that link do I see a video or any mention of timing in the piece. I even searched the piece using the Firefox word search and found nothing about timing.

So perhaps I'm not reading the same thing you're reading.
 

BigH

New member
Dec 29, 2012
97
1
0
hifikrazy said:
BigH said:
hifikrazy said:
I have absolutely no post purchase consumer regrets, so you guys are doing nobody any favours with your unwelcome advice. In fact, the only ones who get any benefit from your wingeing and moaning are the others who share your opinion, so that you can provide one another support and validation for being tightwads.
I suggest you spend some time on the Harbeth forum, you may learn something.
Why because there are others like you in there? Thanks for the warning, I will certainly stay away from there now.
As I say you may learn something. They do test things out to see if they do make a difference, they don't believe what some Turntable manufacturer says. Im not a member there but I have read a few posts. I don't come here much either as its seems to more about cables than hifi or music.
 
May 28, 2013
33
0
0
Jota,

It is eminently possible that you are singing from a different hymn sheet. My post stated HFC -HiFi Choice- and the review starts by stating an OPINION with the timing issue as its theme. Next is the theory followed by a technical explanation of his attempts to mitigate the inherent problem - if, indeed, there is one! All new to me and quite frankly irrelevant as I enjoy the kit I have whilst listening mainly to well-recorded CDs. Quite why I bothered posting only to be confronted by purile pedantics is a matter of regret.
 

radiorog

Well-known member
Jan 1, 2013
119
12
18,595
I only made it to page two on this thread as it all seems to be what I have read in other threads before, but nobody apparently need me to be mentioning this

http://www.whathifi.com/news/new-formal-definition-for-high-resolution-audio-agreed

Doesn't this article show that hi res will be better because it is coming from better than CD sources,and not just a case of up sampling. I not very techy so probably wrong.

Cheers.
 

BigH

New member
Dec 29, 2012
97
1
0
radiorog said:
I only made it to page two on this thread as it all seems to be what I have read in other threads before, but nobody apparently need me to be mentioning this

http://www.whathifi.com/news/new-formal-definition-for-high-resolution-audio-agreed

Doesn't this article show that hi res will be better because it is coming from better than CD sources,and not just a case of up sampling. I not very techy so probably wrong.

Cheers.
No I think you are confused.

"MQ-C: from a CD master source (16-bit/44.1kHz), then upsampled to higher resolution"
 

davedotco

New member
Apr 24, 2013
20
0
0
radiorog said:
I only made it to page two on this thread as it all seems to be what I have read in other threads before, but nobody apparently need me to be mentioning this

http://www.whathifi.com/news/new-formal-definition-for-high-resolution-audio-agreed

Doesn't this article show that hi res will be better because it is coming from better than CD sources,and not just a case of up sampling. I not very techy so probably wrong.

Cheers.
Hi radiorog. The argument is moving on, to sum up.

All modern recording produce 'better' than cd standard masters. 'Better' in this context means a higher sampling rate and greater bit depth, typically, but not always, 24/96.

The argument centers around whether this master can be downsampled to cd standard, 16/44.1 without compromising fidelity.

Scientific theory and blind testing shows that this can be done if the processing is to the required standard, in other words, all things being equal, 16/44.1 will sound exactly the same as 24/96.

Many enthusiasts believe that that 24/96 sounds better because the extra information produced at 24/96 gives more accurate playback and that this is audible as a clear improvement in sound quality.

You are now ready to join in....... :dance:

Upsampling CD standard to hi-res is nonsense, and was dealt with very early in the thread.
 

WinterRacer

New member
Jan 14, 2009
34
0
0
Hi-res can do two things standard resolution can't:

1. Capture frequencies so high that to be loud enough to hear by humans they'd be painful and cause permanent hearing damage.

2. Increase signal to noise ratio from ~96db to ~120db. Of course, this is entirely useless as the rest of your hi-fi can't reproduce this, CDs never capture it and your ears aren't good enough to need it.

Forget hi-res for playback, it's a con. 16bit/44.1KHz was chosen for good reasons by people that understand digital systems.

Regarding the question in the OP. I think it's a poor article that does nothing to further the reader's understanding of the subject.
 

nopiano

Well-known member
Feb 15, 2009
600
376
19,270
A couple of thoughts, Andy.

1. Your article say it is tricky to replay hi-res music but with products like the Dragonfly, users can pretty easily "upgrade" from phone and buds to laptop with phones can't they? I agree that getting a reasonable source for a hifi system requires more care.

2. Unlike the majority of posters here, I see the purchase of 24/96 or better as no different to buying a decent analogue LP when I first got into music forty or so years ago. I didn't have a great turntable at first, but I appreciated the source as my gear improved, and those LPs still sound great. Whether we will still be able to replay these downloads in, say, 2055 is another matter, let alone pass them on when we die.
 

basshound

Well-known member
Sep 23, 2007
116
0
18,590
TrevC said:
As I have some truly stunning CD recordings along with some real duffers I'm forced to conclude that the problem is the recording and mastering rather than any limitations of the CD medium itself. I see no point in childish insults.
+10

I think good recording/mastering is far more important than bit depth/sample rate.
 

BigH

New member
Dec 29, 2012
97
1
0
basshound said:
TrevC said:
As I have some truly stunning CD recordings along with some real duffers I'm forced to conclude that the problem is the recording and mastering rather than any limitations of the CD medium itself. I see no point in childish insults.
+10

I think good recording/mastering is far more important than bit depth/sample rate.
Yes I quite agree, high res is a red herring. If companies like ECM can produce top class cds why not every other record company.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS