..895705@attbi_s52 WUDTb.169267$nt4.755764@attbi_s51
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Path:
NNTP-Posting-Host: 213.200.229.23
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: 213.200.229.23
X-Trace: news.cybercity.ch 1075808688 213.200.229.23 (3 Feb 2004 12:44:48 +0100)
Lines: 27
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: 127.0.0.1

chung wrote:
We agree that SACD's can have a better S/N ratio, below, oh, around 10KHz.


What is the S/N you can achieve with SACD and DSD-Wide from 10 Hz to say
10 Khz? How many bits will that amount to? I mean with existing mics and
preamps and also with ideal noise free mics and preamps?


I also said that DVD-A had cleaner highs and sounded smoother than CD in the
treble, which it does.

This is an unverified observation. Whether the better S/N translates
into cleaner highs or a smoother sound has not been proven, since CD's
can have ruler flat frequency response up to 20KHz. My take is that
recording and mastering have a much larger effect on the smoothness of
the sound.

So can and usually do your speakers and you room response.
Yesterday I experimented with a new lab quality measurement mic which is
flat to ~+- 1 db from 9 hz to 27 Khz. I corrected the sound to be linear
between 30 Hz and 15 Khz (and go down on a gentle curve below and above)
at my listening position. The difference is striking. And I have a very good
room with minimal echoes and very good speakers to begin with.
I would say the sound differences between well recorded SACD and DVD-Audio
are very small compared to room corrected and not room corrected sound on
a high quality reproduction chain.