[TT]

After following the thread on Ultra-High Sample Rates I
thought to myself I would have to give this a go. So I have
been to your site and downloaded the latest PCABX program
that I could find but I fail to see how I can get it to
compare 44.1/16 wave files with even 96/24 wave files. In
it's existing state I get 100% correct on every test.
Anything higher than 44.1/16 is no sound ;-) An interesting
exercise non the less as it shows some very devious
reasoning behind it and it is most definitely not random.

So will it do it? (compare 44.1/16 to higher bit rates)

If so what am I doing wrong so as to not be able to use it?

If it wont do it why not?

If not, what is available that will?

I ideally wish to compare 44.1/16 with 192/24 wave files.

Forgive me for asking this way but I have previously sent
mail via your site and never received an answer.

Regards TT

[Arny Krueger]

"TT" wrote in message
...

After following the thread on Ultra-High Sample Rates I
thought to myself I would have to give this a go. So I have
been to your site and downloaded the latest PCABX program
that I could find but I fail to see how I can get it to
compare 44.1/16 wave files with even 96/24 wave files.

It's possible that it isn't clear from my web page that you're supposed to
compare files that are presented at the same sample rate. The downsampling
takes place during the preparation of the files.

IOW, always compare files presented at 44/16 with other files presented at
44/16. Always compare files presented at 24/96 with other files presented at
24/96.

In it's existing state I get 100% correct on every test.

Good observation.

That's why I prepared the files as I did. If you switch presentation sample
rates in the middle of a test, such as during a switch from A to B, most
sound cards make some characteristic noises during the sample rate
change-oer.

Anything higher than 44.1/16 is no sound ;-)

Oh, well then you need a sound card that is truely capable of running at
24/96. I tested these files and the procedures for comparing them with cards
like the M-Audio Audiphile 24/96, LynxTWO, Card Deluxe, etc. These are all
true 24/96 cards, and not botched-up abortions like say the SoundBlaster
Audigy that only pretend to support 24/96 in a meaningful way.

An interesting
exercise non the less as it shows some very devious
reasoning behind it and it is most definitely not random.

So will it do it? (compare 44.1/16 to higher bit rates)

If so what am I doing wrong so as to not be able to use it?

Use samples presented at the same sample rate (either 44/16 or 24/96) with a
audio interface that can run cleanly at the presentation sample rate.

If it wont do it why not?

Well, lets dialog about this until we get a solution for you. What do you
think after reading my previous comments?

If not, what is available that will?

See the cards I mentioned above.

I ideally wish to compare 44.1/16 with 192/24 wave files.

Entirely doable, if you've got the hardware and software. The PCABX samples
were prepared ca. Y2K, when audio interfaces that run at 192 were pretty
rare. Now, they are as close as the nearest Guitar Center superstore (in the
US, at least).


Forgive me for asking this way but I have previously sent
mail via your site and never received an answer.

Because of all of the spam, my web site email addresses end up in bit
buckets. Sorry, but its not my fault that spammers decided to ruin email for
the rest of us. My *real* email address is arnyk at comcast dot net. I say
this being sure that one of the usual suspects will feed that to their
favorite spammers just to show their love for me. :-(

[TT]

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..

"TT" wrote in message
...

After following the thread on Ultra-High Sample Rates I
thought to myself I would have to give this a go. So I
have
been to your site and downloaded the latest PCABX
program
that I could find but I fail to see how I can get it to
compare 44.1/16 wave files with even 96/24 wave files.

It's possible that it isn't clear from my web page that
you're supposed to
compare files that are presented at the same sample rate.
The downsampling
takes place during the preparation of the files.

IOW, always compare files presented at 44/16 with other
files presented at
44/16. Always compare files presented at 24/96 with other
files presented at
24/96.


Uh!!! Now you have previously told me I am not very smart
but even I can see a small problem here. From what you have
just said I must take a 96/24 recorded file, downsample it
to 44.1/16 and *then* so I can compare it to the original
file up-sample it back to 96/24 because your ABX program
won't/can't handle it?


In it's existing state I get 100% correct on every
test.

Good observation.

That's why I prepared the files as I did. If you switch
presentation sample
rates in the middle of a test, such as during a switch
from A to B, most
sound cards make some characteristic noises during the
sample rate
change-oer.

Anything higher than 44.1/16 is no sound ;-)

Oh, well then you need a sound card that is truely capable
of running at
24/96. I tested these files and the procedures for
comparing them with cards
like the M-Audio Audiphile 24/96, LynxTWO, Card Deluxe,
etc. These are all
true 24/96 cards, and not botched-up abortions like say
the SoundBlaster
Audigy that only pretend to support 24/96 in a meaningful
way.

http://tinyurl.com/y5gf2p So this won't do it eh?

It has no trouble capturing/playing 192/24 *except* through
your PCABX program.

An interesting
exercise non the less as it shows some very devious
reasoning behind it and it is most definitely not
random.

So will it do it? (compare 44.1/16 to higher bit rates)

If so what am I doing wrong so as to not be able to use
it?

Use samples presented at the same sample rate (either
44/16 or 24/96) with a
audio interface that can run cleanly at the presentation
sample rate.

So it won't compare 44.1/16 with 96/24?

If it wont do it why not?

Well, lets dialog about this until we get a solution for
you. What do you
think after reading my previous comments?

So far I'm stunned. I can see why you say 44.1/16 is as
good as 96/24 because it would appear you have only ever
compared 96/24 with 96/24. Please correct me here if I have
misinterpreted your comments.

If not, what is available that will?

See the cards I mentioned above.

I ideally wish to compare 44.1/16 with 192/24 wave
files.

Entirely doable, if you've got the hardware and software.
The PCABX samples
were prepared ca. Y2K, when audio interfaces that run at
192 were pretty
rare. Now, they are as close as the nearest Guitar Center
superstore (in the
US, at least).

So it will only work with the limited number of sound cards
listed? As far as using your samples go I would prefer to
prepare my own. That is, take tracks of hi-res music that I
think are particularly good and change the sample rate/bit
depth using Cool Edit Pro.

Now if any of that is unclear what I want to do is use your
PCABX to compare and original 192 or 96/24 file with a
44.1/16 downsampled version of it. I can see little point
in upsampling it back again.


Regards TT

[Arny Krueger]

"TT" wrote in message
...

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..

"TT" wrote in message
...

After following the thread on Ultra-High Sample Rates I
thought to myself I would have to give this a go. So I
have
been to your site and downloaded the latest PCABX
program
that I could find but I fail to see how I can get it to
compare 44.1/16 wave files with even 96/24 wave files.

It's possible that it isn't clear from my web page that
you're supposed to
compare files that are presented at the same sample rate.
The downsampling
takes place during the preparation of the files.

IOW, always compare files presented at 44/16 with other
files presented at
44/16. Always compare files presented at 24/96 with other
files presented at
24/96.


From what you have
just said I must take a 96/24 recorded file, downsample it
to 44.1/16 and *then* so I can compare it to the original
file up-sample it back to 96/24 because your ABX program
won't/can't handle it?

It is the audio interfaces that have shown this problem with playing files
with different sample rates in quick sucession.

In it's existing state I get 100% correct on every
test.

Good observation.

That's why I prepared the files as I did. If you switch
presentation sample
rates in the middle of a test, such as during a switch
from A to B, most
sound cards make some characteristic noises during the
sample rate
change-oer.

Anything higher than 44.1/16 is no sound ;-)

Oh, well then you need a sound card that is truely capable
of running at
24/96. I tested these files and the procedures for
comparing them with cards
like the M-Audio Audiphile 24/96, LynxTWO, Card Deluxe,
etc. These are all
true 24/96 cards, and not botched-up abortions like say
the SoundBlaster
Audigy that only pretend to support 24/96 in a meaningful
way.

http://tinyurl.com/y5gf2p So this won't do it eh?

I dunno. That looks like a pretty serious piece of hardware. Are you saying
that it can't play 24/96 files?

What happens if you try to play those files with an industry standard tool
like the Windows Media Player?

I've heard that EMu's support for higher sample rates and standard windows
program used to be deficient, but I thought they fixed that!

It has no trouble capturing/playing 192/24 *except* through
your PCABX program.

Even Windows Media Player?

What about the other PCABX programs that you can dowload through my web
page?

An interesting
exercise non the less as it shows some very devious
reasoning behind it and it is most definitely not
random.

So will it do it? (compare 44.1/16 to higher bit rates)

If so what am I doing wrong so as to not be able to use
it?

Use samples presented at the same sample rate (either
44/16 or 24/96) with a
audio interface that can run cleanly at the presentation
sample rate.

So it won't compare 44.1/16 with 96/24?

Not directly, at least not with the audio interfaces I've tried. The usual
results are that it will eventually play both files, but there may be some
delays and/or clicks and pops during the transitions.

If it wont do it why not?

Well, lets dialog about this until we get a solution for
you. What do you
think after reading my previous comments?

So far I'm stunned. I can see why you say 44.1/16 is as
good as 96/24 because it would appear you have only ever
compared 96/24 with 96/24.

Wrong.

If 44/16 is the great evil that people claim it is, then converting music to
44/16 will forever ruin it. Therefore upsampling a 44/16 file to 24/96 can't
undo the purported damage, and its a relevant comparison.

Entirely doable, if you've got the hardware and software.
The PCABX samples
were prepared ca. Y2K, when audio interfaces that run at
192 were pretty
rare. Now, they are as close as the nearest Guitar Center
superstore (in the
US, at least).

So it will only work with the limited number of sound cards
listed?

No, I've never seen any of the PCABX programs fail to work with PC's that
properly support the standard MMC (not Asio) sound card interface.

As far as using your samples go I would prefer to
prepare my own. That is, take tracks of hi-res music that I
think are particularly good and change the sample rate/bit
depth using Cool Edit Pro.

Sounds like a procedure that is identical to the one I used.

Now if any of that is unclear what I want to do is use your
PCABX to compare and original 192 or 96/24 file with a
44.1/16 downsampled version of it.

Then do that, and upsample the resulting 44/16 file. If you use the CEP
frequency response analysis tool, you'll see that the upsampled 192/24 file
has the same total loss of information above 22 KHz that the 44/16 file had.

BTW be sure to check the 192/24 file to make sure that it had something
above 24 KHz to start with. Many don't.

I can see little point in upsampling it back again.