New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Bitzie first impressions
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Welcome to the Graham Slee Audio Products Owners Club

 

Open to all owners plus those contemplating the purchase of a Graham Slee audio product wishing to use our loaner program: join here
Subscribe to our newsletter here (Rules on posting can be found here)


Bitzie first impressions

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 1415161718 33>
Author
mitch65 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 02 Feb 2013
Location: East Sussex
Status: Offline
Points: 533
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote mitch65 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 Mar 2013 at 12:42pm
Originally posted by AlieN AlieN wrote:

Digital could undoubtedly handle the extra information, the question (or so it seems to me) is whether there will ever be sufficient commercial interest in creating the technology to support such things, when the vast majority seem to be happy to listen to low bit-rate MP3s through low quality hardware.

And this will always be the issue, high bit-rate will remain a niche product because, generally, people are happy with mp3, etc. No commercial incentive.Ouch
Greg

Auralic Aries Mini
Naim muso qb
Solo
HIFIMAN HE-400i
Back to Top
Graham Slee View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar
Telling it as it is

Joined: 11 Jan 2008
Location: South Yorkshire
Status: Offline
Points: 8842
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Graham Slee Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 Mar 2013 at 1:35pm
Actually the bit rate is sufficient (at 24 bits which is really 20 bit) - it's the way it's used.

As usual in hi-fi it has to be about bloated boastful overkill.

WTF (sorry for swearing) do we need a -120dB noise floor? 60dB S/N is more than adequate, but hi-fi is so blinking religious the mere suggestion brands you as a heretic!

If it were to be acceptable to those with the hearing of a bat (and I don't believe for 1 second that people can hear a ratio of 1,000:1 amidst all that music), then you would be playing with 3dB intervals instead of 6dB.

But, whatever . . . if you want virtually stepless sampling and a ridiculous S/N ratio you're going to need more than 24 bit (which is 20 sample bits - the other 4 are for non-music data).

16 bit gives you 96dB S/N and 24 bit (20 bit) gives you 120dB S/N.

I'm not going to work it out here but the complexity of it all makes Edison and all who have developed his invention look like absolute geniuses, and the digital camp the complete opposite.
Not simple enough for Google-Bot to understand...
Back to Top
Humboldt View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 15 Oct 2009
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Humboldt Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 Mar 2013 at 6:27pm
Originally posted by Nuance_Ember Nuance_Ember wrote:


Overall, considering all strengths and weaknesses, I like CD more than vinyl but I still don't understand how anyone can say that digital is superior to analogue... Confused Mathematically, analogue is a 'continuous' measure (no sampling) whilst digital is a 'discrete' measure (sampling). Digital can only ever be indistinguishable from analogue (when the precision of wave reconstruction has enough resolution), not superior. That's just irrational. If it is deemed to be superior then some kind of desirable colouration/modification must have been introduced through digital processing... Natural sound is analogue so the most precise imitation of this is an unaltered analogue waveform.

It would be like saying that 320kbps mp3 can be absolutely identical to a 'lossless' WAV, when information in the mp3 has been discarded. They may only seem to be identical if your transducer and its system cannot resolve beyond the limits of the mp3. But this still doesn't change the fact that the mp3 has a less precise waveform than the WAV.

Well, I don´t think I said digital is superior to analog. Or did I? I think I said that in the end it is subjective what is best. Anyway, what I tried to say was just that theoretically - it is rather digital than analog having the potential to capture and reproduce an exact match of the recorded sound.  
I am in no way a professional when it comes to digital audio (or analog audio), but from my own readings and understanding about how digital audio works, and with all respect, I think you have misunderstood how digital audio and sampling works. It would be a very lengthy post from my side however, to try to explain how I have came to that conclusion. I suggest the following reading instead as a start. http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/feb08/articles/digitalaudio.htm


Edited by Humboldt - 26 Mar 2013 at 7:11pm
Back to Top
Humboldt View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 15 Oct 2009
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Humboldt Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 Mar 2013 at 6:44pm
Originally posted by Graham Slee Graham Slee wrote:


As usual in hi-fi it has to be about bloated boastful overkill.

WTF (sorry for swearing) do we need a -120dB noise floor? 60dB S/N is more than adequate, but hi-fi is so blinking religious the mere suggestion brands you as a heretic!

If it were to be acceptable to those with the hearing of a bat (and I don't believe for 1 second that people can hear a ratio of 1,000:1 amidst all that music), then you would be playing with 3dB intervals instead of 6dB.

I do agree, and I don´t see the need for so called hi-res downloads. But I would love to see recording engineers and record companies utilize the full potential of ordinary CD:s. I have some CD:s with a sound quality to die for... but these are rare.

The Hi-Fi world, or audiophile world, has for so long as I can remember been a lot about "magic" and "mysticism". This is not new for digital. It was the same in the 80:ties when I started go serious about Hi Fi (and had the money to afford the equipment)
A while ago I read a newspaper article. It was an interview with a Vinyl record shop owner. He tried to explain that analog vinyl is better, because we have nerves just beneath our skin, and these nerves capture the analog frequencies, and analog frequencies are different than digital frequencies - and even if we can´t hear it, we can feel it. Confused  
There have always been - from time to time - strange ideas circulating, i e strange meaning ideas that have been some sort of common sense for a while - without any rational argument behind and no ground in established facts and knowledge.  So called Hi Res files is in my opinion a perfect example - since we don´t have the hearing of the bats.


Edited by Humboldt - 26 Mar 2013 at 7:48pm
Back to Top
JamesD View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 05 Nov 2012
Location: Bolsover
Status: Offline
Points: 246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote JamesD Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 Mar 2013 at 7:38pm
Maybe I'm wrong but I think during the last century most people just had their hifiand 3 or 4 channels on TV for home entertainment and as a result more effort was made to get decent quality sound down onto vinyl so that it could be enjoyed to the full. 

These days people have access to millions of pages of information on the internet, life-like "computer" games, a myriad of TV channels, iPads, Facebook and lots of other things to keep them occupied when they're at home. Thanks to iPods, mobiles and improved car stereo systems it's now possible to listen to reasonable quality sound almost anywhere. Maybe for a large proportion of the population it's not such a big deal any more to just sit down and enjoy decent quality sound in their living rooms. Given that they spend a lot of time listening to music in less than ideal environments (whilst busy doing other things) they've forgotten what well recorded music can be all about.

Well, maybe. Just my view. Smile
Back to Top
Humboldt View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 15 Oct 2009
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Humboldt Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 Mar 2013 at 7:50pm
JamesD, I think it is a lot of substance in what you say.
Back to Top
Ash View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 18 Mar 2013
Location: Dorset
Status: Offline
Points: 2909
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ash Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 Mar 2013 at 10:54pm
Originally posted by Humboldt Humboldt wrote:

Well, I don´t think I said digital is superior to analog. Or did I? I think I said that in the end it is subjective what is best. Anyway, what I tried to say was just that theoretically - it is rather digital than analog having the potential to capture and reproduce an exact match of the recorded sound.  
I am in no way a professional when it comes to digital audio (or analog audio), but from my own readings and understanding about how digital audio works, and with all respect, I think you have misunderstood how digital audio and sampling works. It would be a very lengthy post from my side however, to try to explain how I have came to that conclusion. I suggest the following reading instead as a start. http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/feb08/articles/digitalaudio.htm


I need to come to your defence now, even though my post was not targeted directly at you. Embarrassed You did not say that digital is superior to analogue, no. You only stated your preference and you are entitled to an opinion. Smile Perhaps I am thinking wrong and perhaps it is in fact digital that has the greater potential for accurate reproduction. I'm still trying to understand the implications of everything I'm reading, that's all. So I'm going to make plenty of mistakes. Neither of us are professionals but I suspect that you have more knowledge than I do, likely making your view more credible than my own. I know that I still have a lot to learn and that my current understanding does lack in areas. Thanks for the link for further reading. Smile
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 1415161718 33>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.062 seconds.