Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
(P.S)Which of these speakers do you think are better?
Just wondering if anyone else would be worried too that the speakers don't say they
support 192khz sample rate in addition the the 96khz sample rate. I wanted to get the speakers with the idea that I would have them for the future when 192/96khz becomes more common. For the money I plan to have them that long. Anyone know if there is a similar model planned to come out soon? THANKS |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
(P.S)Which of these speakers do you think are better?
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
(P.S)Which of these speakers do you think are better?
"Les Cargill" wrote in message
wrote: Just wondering if anyone else would be worried too that the speakers don't say they support 192khz sample rate in addition the the 96khz sample rate. I wanted to get the speakers with the idea that I would have them for the future when 192/96khz becomes more common. For the money I plan to have them that long. Anyone know if there is a similar model planned to come out soon? THANKS Speakers don't implement 44.1k properly, much less 192k. Generally true. There are a number of well-respected speakers including studio monitors that have sharp roll-offs starting in the 13 to 16 KHz range. Until recently, speakers with more extended response went up to about 25 KHz, had a pretty well-damped resonance, and again go into a 12 dB or steeper roll-off. Now, there are a few speakers that have fairly smooth response up to 40 KHz or so and maybe one or two that claim response up to 100 KHz. The 40 KHz claims I can verify, but after that I only know about what I read. However, the hidden gotcha is the fact that at above 15-20 KHz, these drivers are as a rule highly directional. So, if you sit right *there* you might actually get bathed in a little sonic bat bait. I've studied and experienced response in this area because of the somewhat disappointing data that exists in the scientific literature and my own personal experiences with bias-controlled testing relating to the audibility of brick wall filtering at various frequencies. I won't belabor the results, but they are pretty grim. They suggest that speakers with response up to 16 KHz are well-matched to the capabilities of the best human ears. Hope springs eternal, and my thought has been that speakers with extended response might make a difference. So far, no cigar. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
(P.S)Which of these speakers do you think are better?
In article ,
wrote: Just wondering if anyone else would be worried too that the speakers don't say they support 192khz sample rate in addition the the 96khz sample rate. I wanted to get the speakers with the idea that I would have them for the future when 192/96khz becomes more common. For the money I plan to have them that long. Anyone know if there is a similar model planned to come out soon? THANKS Speakers support particular sample rates? Huh? --scott Why not, you know, just get speakers that sound good instead? -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
(P.S)Which of these speakers do you think are better?
Arny Krueger wrote:
Hope springs eternal, and my thought has been that speakers with extended response might make a difference. Maybe. It's hard to tell until you have signal material to try. My experience with the Tannoy Ellipse is that the supertweeter can be turned on or off and I can't really tell any damn difference. But then, I am used to Maggies that are pretty much useless above 16 KC. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
(P.S)Which of these speakers do you think are better?
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
(P.S)Which of these speakers do you think are better?
Jay Kadis wrote:
In article , Les Cargill wrote: wrote: Just wondering if anyone else would be worried too that the speakers don't say they support 192khz sample rate in addition the the 96khz sample rate. I wanted to get the speakers with the idea that I would have them for the future when 192/96khz becomes more common. For the money I plan to have them that long. Anyone know if there is a similar model planned to come out soon? THANKS Speakers don't implement 44.1k properly, much less 192k. -- Les Cargill I spent a little time looking at traditional 20-kHz BW analog-input speakers fed 50 kHz bandwidth noise and they are really quite unpredictable above 20 kHz. This should be a consideration if you start sampling at 96 kHz. I'd figure the 96k would be well bandlimited. I can certainly see how you'd get side effects from stuff up that high in that passband if it makes it to the speakers. -Jay -- x------- Jay Kadis ------- x---- Jay's Attic Studio ------x x Lecturer, Audio Engineer x Dexter Records x x CCRMA, Stanford University x http://www.offbeats.com/ x x-------- http://ccrma-www.stanford.edu/~jay/ ----------x -- Les Cargill |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
(P.S)Which of these speakers do you think are better?
Mike Rivers wrote:
In article writes: Speakers support particular sample rates? Huh? Those with digital inputs do. Roland has a model or two with S/PDIF input, Edirol has a few with USB input. Genelec and Dynaudio also have models with digital inputs. And I'd forgotten about those, although in my mind "speakers" are passive devices which hook to the output of an amplifier. -- I'm really Mike Rivers - ) However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over, lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- Les Cargill |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
(P.S)Which of these speakers do you think are better?
|
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
rec.audio.car FAQ (Part 4/5) | Car Audio | |||
rec.audio.car FAQ (Part 2/5) | Car Audio | |||
AER Pisces PB-651 V2.0 speaker review | Audio Opinions | |||
P/review of Jupiter Audio Europa speakers pt.1 | Audio Opinions | |||
Remote speakers? L-pads? Totally confused! | General |