willbill wrote:
Steven Sullivan wrote:
Actually it's from a 2007 AES conference, not the JAES,
so I'm not sure it's peer reviewed...but anyway:
"Which of the Two Digital Audio Systems Best Matches the Quality
of the Analog System?"
http://www.hitech-projects.com/hera/...s/aar07pu4.pdf
nice ref! thank you very much
It appears that the formats compared to a live feed (analog) were
DXD (353.8 kHz/24) and 44.1/24, both in surround, using a blind
comparison protocol. Two additional listening conditions were tested:
one where the A/D signal bandwith was 100 kHz (thanks to special
microphone 'super-tweeters') and the other where bandwidth was
limited to 20kHz. The authors say their results show that listeners
'more often than not' identify the hi-rez audio (and not the 44.1 kHz
audio) as being similar in quality to the analog feed...but only when
the bandwidth is limited! In other words, only the initial sampling
need be done in hi-rez, the listening can (and SHOULD) be done in
'standard rez', to achieve the analog-like effect.
Their test setup and signals must be seen/read to be believed (the pdf
includes photos). They're not your typical listener setup, to say the
least (compare to, say, Meyer and Moran's setup for their SACD vs
CD test).
if there is an open on-line ref to this, i'd very
much appreciate someone providing it; thanks in advance
Meyer and Moran's paper isn't available online AFAIK, but it's in
circulation...
Also, I'm having trouble making heads or tails of their statistics.
Also being discussed on HA.org
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/...howtopic=55966
very nice 2nd ref!
only 5 people, but still very interesting
i'm going to have to start reading www.hydrogenaudio.org
on a regular basis
Also discussed on AVSforum
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=953640
I'm kinda guessing it WON'T be hashed over in Stereophile, though
even thougb John Atkinson is citing this paper as proof that
Redbook sample rate is inadequate for home audio.
'"In October I will write more on Peter's ideas about why this should be. I will end this month's essay by quoting, from
a paper given at the conference, the results of experiments on the audibility of high sampling rates: "To achieve a
higher degree of fidelity to the live analog reference, we need to convert audio using a high sampling rate even when we
do not use microphones and loudspeakers having bandwidth extended far beyond 20kHz. Listeners judge high sampling
conversion as sounding more like the analog reference when listening to standard audio bandwidth." (footnote 2)
So that's that, then. "
http://stereophile.com/asweseeit/907awsi/
Atkinson used to post here, maybe he can be induced to comment?
of course SACD doesn't have video, but is the
multichannel sound on Magic Flute comparable
to SACD?
all ears, bill
Surely DVD-A is comparable to SACD (I'd wager that in a blind test, DTS 24/96 is
indistinguisbale form them too). So why not the new 'hi rez' formats?
___
-S
"As human beings, we understand the world through simile, analogy,
metaphor, narrative and, sometimes, claymation." - B. Mason