[ProAudio] [ProAud] The High-Resolution Challenge

Tue Feb 11 00:13:04 EST 2020

There are so many issues with “Hi-res” audio, it’s not really surprising.

Consumers are used to hi res TV, and can clearly see the difference, especially when the image is magnified by ever larger TVs.  We have no audio equivalent of this magnification effect, so it hard to tell the difference, especially in double blind tests.  Hence the marketing is mostly hype based.

The higher frequency sample rates also carry with them issues with so-so designed consumer audio gear.  As a safety net, I wouldn’t like to see any high frequency noise etc, possibly at full range put into some domestic gear, so HF filtering should be applied.  But then you’d see this is the spectra and would somebody cry foul?

With older masters at 44.1, can we actually make a 192K version without smirking as we sell it?  The only way I can see of adding any value is to resample it via an analogue chain, in which case it’s really been re-mastered, not converted.

It would seem consumer audio is all going back to specmanship, rather than concentrating on the actual musical experience.

Cheers

Crispin Herrod-Taylor
Managing Director, Crookwood
 <http://www.crookwood.com/> www.crookwood.com  

Tel: +44 (0)1672 811 649
Mobile:+44(0)7910 637 634

Sign up for our great newsletter here <http://crookwood.com/newsletter/> ! and keep up to date with the audio world

From: ProAudio [mailto:proaudio-bounces at bach.pgm.com] On Behalf Of James Johnston via ProAudio
Sent: 11 February 2020 06:29
To: mark whitehouse <mark at procopy.com.au>; proaudio at bach.pgm.com
Subject: Re: [ProAudio] [ProAud] The High-Resolution Challenge

I must say that I am sorely tempted to see if I can get somebody to whip up an app that measures effective bandwidth of a PCM track at any common sampling rate.

On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 10:15 PM mark whitehouse via ProAudio <proaudio at bach.pgm.com <mailto:proaudio at bach.pgm.com> > wrote:

Following on from our discussion of around 18 months ago,

I know in Australia there were moves to get some kind of "truth in marketing" 

in regards to High sample rate recordings.

And promoting the differences in standards that are now available. 

Essentially a standard that could be understood by and promoted to consumers, musicians etc.

It doesnt seem to have gone far and when you see things like this

http://archimago.blogspot.com/2013/07/list-suspected-44-or-48khz-pcm.html  

It makes you wonder if things will improve.

Is there any consensus on getting this acknowledged? 

regards

Mark  

To upload files to our server, Please click the following link and follow the steps on the Hightail page.  <https://spaces.hightail.com/uplink/ProCopy-Data> https://spaces.hightail.com/uplink/ProCopy-Data

Pro-Copy - Promote Media Group 
Unit 2  39 Enterprise Crescent 

Malaga

WA  6090 

PH +61 (08) 9375 3902 

AustWide: 1300 4 PROCOPY  

For general enquiries email -  <mailto:info at procopy.com.au> info at procopy.com.au
 <http://www.procopy.com.au/> www.procopy.com.au

This transmission is confidential. This e-mail including any attachments, is for the original addressee only. Virus detection software has been used to detect the presence of any computer viruses, however, we cannot guarantee that this e-mail and any attached files are virus free.

On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 8:25 AM Mark Waldrep <mwaldrep at aixmediagroup.com <mailto:mwaldrep at aixmediagroup.com> > wrote:

In the interest of exploring the issue of perceptibility of high-resolution vs. Redbook versions of the exact same file, I've posted on my blog page today "The High-Resolution Audio Challenge". I've prepared 6 of my AIX Records native 96 kHz/24-bit PCM masters as A and B versions. One is the original high-res master and the other is a Redbook downconversion. You are welcome to download the files and play them. Please do not share them outside of the group. I'm conducting a casual survey to see if people can detect differences. I don't claim this will be definitive. However, I've always complained that previous tests failed because the source materials weren't actual high-resolution files. This removes that flaw. These are the real deal. The conversion was done using triangular dither and noise shaping.

You can find the article at http://www.realhd-audio.com/?p=6197

Mark Waldrep, Ph.D.
AIX Records and author of
Music and Audio: A User Guide To Better Sound

On 6/14/18, 3:13 PM, "Stephen Morley" <proaudio-bounces at bach.pgm.com <mailto:proaudio-bounces at bach.pgm.com>  on behalf of stephenmorley at iprimus.com.au <mailto:stephenmorley at iprimus.com.au> > wrote:

    I can record DXD and the downsample in Pyramix, or else at 192/24 and then downsample to 44/24
    -------- Original message --------From: James Johnston <audioskeptic at gmail.com <mailto:audioskeptic at gmail.com> > Date: 14/6/18  8:56 pm  (GMT+10:00) To: proaudio at bach.pgm.com <mailto:proaudio at bach.pgm.com>  Subject: Re: [ProAud] Wow. 384/32 LPCM! 
    Just make sure the content is identical on both.

    On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 2:36 AM, Stephen Morley <
    stephenmorley at iprimus.com.au <mailto:stephenmorley at iprimus.com.au> > wrote:

    > Hi James,I could send something, but not until next week when I return
    > from leave.Stephen
    > -------- Original message --------From: James Johnston <
    > audioskeptic at gmail.com <mailto:audioskeptic at gmail.com> > Date: 13/6/18  8:53 am  (GMT+10:00) To:
    > proaudio at bach.pgm.com <mailto:proaudio at bach.pgm.com>  Subject: Re: [ProAud] Wow. 384/32 LPCM!
    > I'll repeat my request:
    >
    > Send me some recordings at 24/192 and a similar one at 44/16. I can and
    > will measure the actual "information" present, via SFM and bit depth.
    >
    > _______________________________________________
    > ProAudio mailing list
    > ProAudio at bach.pgm.com <mailto:ProAudio at bach.pgm.com> 
    > http://bach.pgm.com/mailman/listinfo/proaudio
    >

    -- 
    James D. (jj) Johnston
    Independent Audio and Electroacoustics Consultant
    _______________________________________________
    ProAudio mailing list
    ProAudio at bach.pgm.com <mailto:ProAudio at bach.pgm.com> 
    http://bach.pgm.com/mailman/listinfo/proaudio
    _______________________________________________
    ProAudio mailing list
    ProAudio at bach.pgm.com <mailto:ProAudio at bach.pgm.com> 
    http://bach.pgm.com/mailman/listinfo/proaudio

_______________________________________________
ProAudio mailing list
ProAudio at bach.pgm.com <mailto:ProAudio at bach.pgm.com> 
http://bach.pgm.com/mailman/listinfo/proaudio

_______________________________________________
ProAudio mailing list
ProAudio at bach.pgm.com <mailto:ProAudio at bach.pgm.com> 
http://bach.pgm.com/mailman/listinfo/proaudio

-- 

James D. (jj) Johnston

Independent Audio and Electroacoustics Consultant

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://bach.pgm.com/pipermail/proaudio/attachments/20200211/9791c3b7/attachment-0001.html>