On 30 Jan 2004 00:55:48 GMT, "Harry Lavo" wrote:

"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
news:a0hSb.52523$U%5.290779@attbi_s03...
On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 21:04:59 GMT, FranÃf§ois Yves Le Gal
wrote:

On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 20:25:56 GMT, Steven Sullivan
wrote:

What's the highest frequency such filters allow to pass?

The F3 point is usually at either 50 (default) or 100 KHz.

So, SACD is by definition inferior to 24/96, which has vastly lower
RF noise by design, not by artificial filtration to Band-Aid inherent
problems..

SACD when filtered is filtered low enough to protect amps and high enough
not to cause any sonic problems.

So is CD! :-)

With a very gentle roll off. I have yet
to see a DVD-A player that has a -3db point higher than any SACD player I've
seen. The argument is completely bogus as far as audibility or usability as
a muscal distribution system is concerned.

The argument is *not* bogus if you want to *use* the vaunted extra
bandwidth, when DVD-A is your only sensible option. You must not be
reading the same reviews that I do - try the Pioneer DV-868 (aka Elite
DV-59) or the Denon 2900.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering