|
Paul S
San Diego, California, USA
Posts 2,671
Joined on 10-12-2006
Post #:
|
3
|
Post ID:
|
19041
|
Reply to:
|
19035
|
|
|
Response to Ric (Intentionally Moved Here)
|
|
|
|
fiogf49gjkf0d Ric, let's keep the digital cable thread about digital cable and "compare sampling/resolution options" here.
As for my problems with digital sound, again, I have covered these at length in my "Digi Redux" thread, and in Romy's SACD thread. Again, in the Digi Redux thread I lay out my digital compromises and chronical my efforts to "add" Music - via digital sources, converters and tweaks - via redbook CD. Basically, to date, I have found that certain "digital problems" increase as "resolution" is increased, but I cannot tie this specifically to "sampling rates", per se, because I have not yet tried to isolate this as a variable. I was hoping that others had done this and that they would talk intelligently about it if asked specifically.
As for sources in general, I abandoned my dream of "master tape" by the mid 70's, and since then my focus has been on LPs. I do have CDs, and I try to stay alert in case good sound happens by way of digital. Hence this thread. I agree that recordings themselves can be problematic, and I also know that many "up-res" recordings are just re-sampled 16/44. There is A LOT of "legacy" material now in 16/44 that I suspect will never be made better by any further manipulation. However, this does not mean that higher sampling rates or over sampling are worse than 16/44. Rather, I am saying I have not heard anything yet that motivates me to start in with other, higher-res sources and converters, etc. In my dreams, there is a large pool of great material that is rendered and renderable better than my 16/44 CDs that can be swapped, downloaded and/or "streamed" without breaking the bank or losing hair.
Goetz, I do try to glean what I can from available sources. FWIW, I have read the Altmann, and also the Fikus you recommend, albeit not "extensively", and I have no wish to imitate them, despite I agree with some of their observations. More to the point, I don't understand how you mean by these references to answer my questions, which I hoped would draw more direct and directed responses...
Best regards, Paul S
|
|
|