|
|
Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
On 29/04/2018 21:31, Robin wrote:
On 29/04/2018 21:12, Vir Campestris wrote: On 29/04/2018 12:56, TonyGamble wrote: Don't forget that only an LP is storing the sound above 20 khz and most, if not all, musical instruments produce harmonics way above that level. Two points: - Most of us can't hear harmonics that high - DVD can have higher frequency limits. 48kHZ sample is standard, I'm sure I've seen 96k (with 24 bit!) and I've a feeling even 192 is possible. plenty of samples you can play (sic) with - eg http://www.linnrecords.com/recording-test-files.aspx "These files are available for you to test which audio format is compatible with your system. You can choose between ALAC, FLAC, CD Quality and MP3 formats and Studio Master (also known as HD, hi-res or high definition) formats from 192kHz, 96kHz and 44.1kHz sample rates." Too late for me.Â* I sold my Quad ESLs when I realised my ears could no longer justify their floor area :( I tried the Linn test records. tried the CD version, then the 96 studio master in flac format and apart from what I suspect is slightly different volume they sounded exactly the same. This is via Firefox, and a spdif optical cable connected to my Onkyo CR515. So I guess I'll be sticking to CDs and saving oodles on not buying a 'Hirez' audio system. |
Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
On Tuesday, 1 May 2018 15:22:18 UTC+1, charles wrote:
In article , Terry Casey wrote: In article , says... There was, in the early 1990s, a hifi magazine that I'd though quite reputable until it ran an article which stated that gold plated mains plugs gave better stereo separation. Are you sure that it wasn't the April edition? absolutely Within the last ten years I read a copy of Hi-Fi choice IIRC, which had a comparison of mains leads and came down in favour of a £££ one with silver wire which sounded better... Several pretty hilarious reviews on other kit as well and I don't think they even had a lab'. |
Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
On Tuesday, 1 May 2018 10:37:06 UTC+1, Terry Casey wrote:
In article , says... In article , TonyGamble wrote: AR and LWT - and music enthusiast. Can you expand the AR and LWT. I'm not sure what they stand for. Artists and Recordings? London Weekend Television? or what? Associated Rediffusion, surely? Compulsorily forced by the ITA (sorry - Independent Television Authority) to merge with ABC to form Thames Television. ABC had their studios here in Manchester in the former Capitol Cinema, then it was part of Manchester Polytechnic / MMU, before being demolished and replaced by flats and a friend lives in one of them. At the same time, the ITA forced the new London Weekend Television to buy Rediffusion's Wembley studios. https://tinyurl.com/AR-LWT-ITA which tranlates to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London...evision#Creati on -- Terry --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com |
Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
On Sun, 29 Apr 2018 00:32:45 +0100, Bill Wright wrote:
Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers? Short answer, yes. Slightly longer, I asses speakers by the dynamic range (can I hear the bass separated from the treble) and can I identify individual instruments. I can certainly hear differences between different audio set ups and form an opinion on quality. This may not match the opinion of others, but there does seem to be a noticeable difference when I swap speakers between systems, the most expensive (fortunately) giving the best quality. I do have several sets of speakers. :-) Cheers Dave R -- AMD FX-6300 in GA-990X-Gaming SLI-CF running Windows 7 Pro x64 --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus |
Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
On Tue, 01 May 2018 09:22:05 +0100, Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , Roderick Stewart wrote: It seems that people like what they are accustomed to, regardless of any objective assessment of realism. When VHF/FM first became available many preferred medium-wave AM, some people can't be bothered to type 101 instead of 1 (etc) on their Freeview receivers to see the HD version, In early DAB days when R3 was 256kbps I did some comaprisons versus FM (Yamaha CT7000). And preferred the FM. ...at least for a week or so of repeated comparisons. But I then got curious as to why the FM sounded 'warmer', but I was starting to change my mind abiut which was 'better'. Measurements shows the FM at the time had about 5-8 dB of peak compression compared with DAB. This altered the peak-sustain behaviour of instruments like piano, making them sound 'nicer'. But the DAB was clearer for orchestral music. So my initial preference was caused by habituation to the 'warmer' sound of FM cause by some amount of peak limiting. In the right circumstances, levels of peak clipping can actually augment the sonic performance being captured or recreated. Whether a grand piano can be played so forcefully as to create such an effect in the ears of an audience member sat in the middle of the front row of a live concert performance is questionable but, whilst watching the demos of the original DOS game "Wolfenstein 3D", I was greatly impressed by how they'd applied peak compression to the crack of the pistol shots so that your ears didn't have to. This added somewhat to the 'sonic realism' of firing a luger but without the damaging SPLs of actually firing it in person without ear defenders. The only thing missing was, of course, the ringing in the ears effect shortly thereafter. :-) -- Johnny B Good |
Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
On Tue, 01 May 2018 18:22:05 +0100, Andrew wrote:
On 29/04/2018 21:31, Robin wrote: On 29/04/2018 21:12, Vir Campestris wrote: On 29/04/2018 12:56, TonyGamble wrote: Don't forget that only an LP is storing the sound above 20 khz and most, if not all, musical instruments produce harmonics way above that level. Two points: - Most of us can't hear harmonics that high - DVD can have higher frequency limits. 48kHZ sample is standard, I'm sure I've seen 96k (with 24 bit!) and I've a feeling even 192 is possible. plenty of samples you can play (sic) with - eg http://www.linnrecords.com/recording-test-files.aspx "These files are available for you to test which audio format is compatible with your system. You can choose between ALAC, FLAC, CD Quality and MP3 formats and Studio Master (also known as HD, hi-res or high definition) formats from 192kHz, 96kHz and 44.1kHz sample rates." Too late for me.Â* I sold my Quad ESLs when I realised my ears could no longer justify their floor area :( I tried the Linn test records. tried the CD version, then the 96 studio master in flac format and apart from what I suspect is slightly different volume they sounded exactly the same. This is via Firefox, and a spdif optical cable connected to my Onkyo CR515. So I guess I'll be sticking to CDs and saving oodles on not buying a 'Hirez' audio system. Good call! Even CDDA is way in excess of any music lover's hearing abilities, no matter their age. 'Hirez' should stay where it belongs, in a multichannel studio or OB recording system where its enormous dynamic range and resolution can be put to very good use in creating a final stereo (or quadraphonic?) mix for domestic consumption free of rounding errors and noise build up from adding the background hiss of 48 or more audio channels. If the music industry want to flog such recordings, they'd be best getting Russ Andrews 'on board' to sell them as one of his offerings at the cheaper end of his price range. :-) -- Johnny B Good |
Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
In article , Andrew
wrote: On 29/04/2018 21:31, Robin wrote: On 29/04/2018 21:12, Vir Campestris wrote: On 29/04/2018 12:56, TonyGamble wrote: Don't forget that only an LP is storing the sound above 20 khz and most, if not all, musical instruments produce harmonics way above that level. Two points: - Most of us can't hear harmonics that high - DVD can have higher frequency limits. 48kHZ sample is standard, I'm sure I've seen 96k (with 24 bit!) and I've a feeling even 192 is possible. plenty of samples you can play (sic) with - eg http://www.linnrecords.com/recording-test-files.aspx "These files are available for you to test which audio format is compatible with your system. You can choose between ALAC, FLAC, CD Quality and MP3 formats and Studio Master (also known as HD, hi-res or high definition) formats from 192kHz, 96kHz and 44.1kHz sample rates." Too late for me. I sold my Quad ESLs when I realised my ears could no longer justify their floor area :( I tried the Linn test records. tried the CD version, then the 96 studio master in flac format and apart from what I suspect is slightly different volume they sounded exactly the same. This is via Firefox, and a spdif optical cable connected to my Onkyo CR515. Did you check that the spdif carried 44.1k rate for the CD version and ahigher rate for the 'high rez' version? It is quite common for computers to mince everything into one rate. Thus meaning you don't actually get high rez out. That said, you're probably correct. I tend to find that *well made* CDs are fine for me despite having various high rez files I enjoy. Jim -- Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me. Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa...o/electron.htm biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html |
Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
On 02/05/2018 09:36, Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , Andrew wrote: On 29/04/2018 21:31, Robin wrote: On 29/04/2018 21:12, Vir Campestris wrote: On 29/04/2018 12:56, TonyGamble wrote: Don't forget that only an LP is storing the sound above 20 khz and most, if not all, musical instruments produce harmonics way above that level. Two points: - Most of us can't hear harmonics that high - DVD can have higher frequency limits. 48kHZ sample is standard, I'm sure I've seen 96k (with 24 bit!) and I've a feeling even 192 is possible. plenty of samples you can play (sic) with - eg http://www.linnrecords.com/recording-test-files.aspx "These files are available for you to test which audio format is compatible with your system. You can choose between ALAC, FLAC, CD Quality and MP3 formats and Studio Master (also known as HD, hi-res or high definition) formats from 192kHz, 96kHz and 44.1kHz sample rates." Too late for me. I sold my Quad ESLs when I realised my ears could no longer justify their floor area :( I tried the Linn test records. tried the CD version, then the 96 studio master in flac format and apart from what I suspect is slightly different volume they sounded exactly the same. This is via Firefox, and a spdif optical cable connected to my Onkyo CR515. Did you check that the spdif carried 44.1k rate for the CD version and ahigher rate for the 'high rez' version? It is quite common for computers to mince everything into one rate. Thus meaning you don't actually get high rez out. That said, you're probably correct. I tend to find that *well made* CDs are fine for me despite having various high rez files I enjoy. Jim Err, no. The realtek audio manager shows that spdif output is 24 bit 44.1 I'll give it another try. |
Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
In article , Andrew
wrote: Did you check that the spdif carried 44.1k rate for the CD version and ahigher rate for the 'high rez' version? It is quite common for computers to mince everything into one rate. Thus meaning you don't actually get high rez out. That said, you're probably correct. I tend to find that *well made* CDs are fine for me despite having various high rez files I enjoy. Jim Err, no. The realtek audio manager shows that spdif output is 24 bit 44.1 I'll give it another try. I can't comment on Windows or Macs as I've not used them (thankfully) for over a decade. But with linux the trick is to set the playing software to go 'direct' via ALSA and bypass any OS 'mixers'. They tend to foul up high rez. This catches pros sometimes. I found more than one case at the BBC when discussing some issues. 8-] Over the years I also decided that it is vital that a computer DAC should das blinken leighten so you can see right away when the sample rate has been tampered with. Computers tend to try and 'guess what you really want', when you don't... Jim -- Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me. Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa...o/electron.htm biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html |
Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
On 03/05/2018 14:22, Jim Lesurf wrote:
I can't comment on Windows or Macs as I've not used them (thankfully) for over a decade. I've never used Mac, but I used to have a high quality DAC in a Windows machine. Windows 7 came out, and it decided the right thing to do was to re-sample all my CDs to 48kHz on the fly during playback. It was noticeably worse. I had to give up that DAC. Andy |
Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
In article , Vir Campestris
wrote: On 03/05/2018 14:22, Jim Lesurf wrote: I can't comment on Windows or Macs as I've not used them (thankfully) for over a decade. I've never used Mac, but I used to have a high quality DAC in a Windows machine. Windows 7 came out, and it decided the right thing to do was to re-sample all my CDs to 48kHz on the fly during playback. It was noticeably worse. I had to give up that DAC. What DAC was it? To clarify just in case: Most high quality DACs will accept various input rates. It seems unlikely the *DAC* was unable to accept 44.1k/16bit. So I'd have thought it would have been more appropriate to give up W7 - or at least find a way to tell it to stop messing things up. This does seem a general problems with OS's, though. The people who release an OS tend to take blythly for granted that the default must be to run all audio though a 'mixer'... which duly them minces all audio to a pre-fixed rate. Usually 48k. The wonderful advantage of this is the user can hear a sound telling them when, say, email arrives, even when they are playing music. sigh But messes up the audio more generally. To make things worse, sometimes a user may reset the output rate by a method which means the output *still* gets minced. i.e. 44.1k material is converted to 48k assuming it will go to a mixer, but is then converted bck to 44.1k again to output because "that's what the user wants". So the output is at the same rate as the source, but has been boogered up along the way. aargh Sadly, this often catches out people you'd think would be aware of the problem. e.g. some people at the BBC I was talking to the iplayer about a year of few ago about iplayer quality tests. The lesson is, sadly, that you may need to be able to test your computer setup to find out what may be going wrong, and then fiddle about to fix the problems. Some OSs make this easier than others, but they all tend to make assumptions about what the user 'wants' (without saying so) that may simply be wrong. Jim -- Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me. Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa...o/electron.htm biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html |
Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
On 04/05/2018 09:30, Jim Lesurf wrote:
Most high quality DACs will accept various input rates. It seems unlikely the*DAC* was unable to accept 44.1k/16bit. So I'd have thought it would have been more appropriate to give up W7 - or at least find a way to tell it to stop messing things up. The Windows 7 driver wouldn't do 44.1 - or I'd have told it to do that for everything. And the choice of OS wasn't mine. This was a work machine. 15 years later I don't recall the model of DAC... hang on. It must have been XP, not 7. In most ways XP was a great improvement on 2000, and an enormous improvement on the DOS-based 9x series. Andy |
Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
On Fri, 04 May 2018 22:56:05 +0100, Vir Campestris wrote:
On 04/05/2018 09:30, Jim Lesurf wrote: Most high quality DACs will accept various input rates. It seems unlikely the*DAC* was unable to accept 44.1k/16bit. So I'd have thought it would have been more appropriate to give up W7 - or at least find a way to tell it to stop messing things up. The Windows 7 driver wouldn't do 44.1 - or I'd have told it to do that for everything. And the choice of OS wasn't mine. This was a work machine. 15 years later I don't recall the model of DAC... hang on. It must have been XP, not 7. In most ways XP was a great improvement on 2000, And yet, in ever so many more ways, it was not. It might have had some improved features but these were entirely negated by needless bling and a lobotomised Explorer interface. IMHO, compared to win2k, winXP was a festering PoS. -- Johnny B Good |
Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
In article , Vir Campestris
wrote: On 04/05/2018 09:30, Jim Lesurf wrote: Most high quality DACs will accept various input rates. It seems unlikely the*DAC* was unable to accept 44.1k/16bit. So I'd have thought it would have been more appropriate to give up W7 - or at least find a way to tell it to stop messing things up. The Windows 7 driver wouldn't do 44.1 - or I'd have told it to do that for everything. And the choice of OS wasn't mine. This was a work machine. Ah, that old friend the 'driver', etc. Classic way MS tie down users. Jim -- Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me. Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa...o/electron.htm biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html |
Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
|
Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
On 05/05/2018 10:13, Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , Vir Campestris wrote: On 04/05/2018 09:30, Jim Lesurf wrote: Most high quality DACs will accept various input rates. It seems unlikely the*DAC* was unable to accept 44.1k/16bit. So I'd have thought it would have been more appropriate to give up W7 - or at least find a way to tell it to stop messing things up. The Windows 7 driver wouldn't do 44.1 - or I'd have told it to do that for everything. And the choice of OS wasn't mine. This was a work machine. Ah, that old friend the 'driver', etc. Classic way MS tie down users. Jim I don't remember having any difficulty with operating in 44.1 kHz, 16-bit under Windows 7. |
Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
In article , JNugent
wrote: On 05/05/2018 10:13, Jim Lesurf wrote: In article , Vir Campestris wrote: On 04/05/2018 09:30, Jim Lesurf wrote: Most high quality DACs will accept various input rates. It seems unlikely the*DAC* was unable to accept 44.1k/16bit. So I'd have thought it would have been more appropriate to give up W7 - or at least find a way to tell it to stop messing things up. The Windows 7 driver wouldn't do 44.1 - or I'd have told it to do that for everything. And the choice of OS wasn't mine. This was a work machine. Ah, that old friend the 'driver', etc. Classic way MS tie down users. Jim I don't remember having any difficulty with operating in 44.1 kHz, 16-bit under Windows 7. Did you use the same 'driver' and DAC as Vic? Jim -- Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me. Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa...o/electron.htm biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html |
Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
On 05/05/2018 16:36, JNugent wrote:
I don't remember having any difficulty with operating in 44.1 kHz, 16-bit under Windows 7. I said I abandoned the DAC. The motherboard's own sound chip ran fine at 44.1 Andy |
Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
On 06/05/2018 09:09, Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , JNugent wrote: On 05/05/2018 10:13, Jim Lesurf wrote: In article , Vir Campestris wrote: On 04/05/2018 09:30, Jim Lesurf wrote: Most high quality DACs will accept various input rates. It seems unlikely the*DAC* was unable to accept 44.1k/16bit. So I'd have thought it would have been more appropriate to give up W7 - or at least find a way to tell it to stop messing things up. The Windows 7 driver wouldn't do 44.1 - or I'd have told it to do that for everything. And the choice of OS wasn't mine. This was a work machine. Ah, that old friend the 'driver', etc. Classic way MS tie down users. Jim I don't remember having any difficulty with operating in 44.1 kHz, 16-bit under Windows 7. Did you use the same 'driver' and DAC as Vic? Only the soundcrad driver(s) that came installed with Windows. I did attach a Toshiba External card for a while and had no difficulty with that. |
Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
In article , JNugent
wrote: On 06/05/2018 09:09, Jim Lesurf wrote: In article , JNugent wrote: On 05/05/2018 10:13, Jim Lesurf wrote: In article , Vir Campestris wrote: On 04/05/2018 09:30, Jim Lesurf wrote: Most high quality DACs will accept various input rates. It seems unlikely the*DAC* was unable to accept 44.1k/16bit. So I'd have thought it would have been more appropriate to give up W7 - or at least find a way to tell it to stop messing things up. The Windows 7 driver wouldn't do 44.1 - or I'd have told it to do that for everything. And the choice of OS wasn't mine. This was a work machine. Ah, that old friend the 'driver', etc. Classic way MS tie down users. Jim I don't remember having any difficulty with operating in 44.1 kHz, 16-bit under Windows 7. Did you use the same 'driver' and DAC as Vic? Only the soundcrad driver(s) that came installed with Windows. I did attach a Toshiba External card for a while and had no difficulty with that. The point here is that because of the way MS have behaved, people have often had to install a 'driver', and the behaviour of the setup may be obscure or limited or setup inappropriately. e.g. Although MS participated on the committee that set up the USB Audio Class 2 standards, the then didn't bother to add support into their OS for many *years* afterwards. Thus lagging behind Macs, Linux, and even RISC OS in this respect! MS users were left with whatever the 'driver' for their OS version allowed. I've lost count of how many people I've encountered who had problems because of this. Jim -- Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me. Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa...o/electron.htm biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html |
Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
In article , Johnny B Good johnny-b-
scribeth thus On Sat, 05 May 2018 11:17:46 +0100, tony sayer wrote: In article , Johnny B Good johnny-b- scribeth thus On Fri, 04 May 2018 22:56:05 +0100, Vir Campestris wrote: .. 15 years later I don't recall the model of DAC... hang on. It must have been XP, not 7. In most ways XP was a great improvement on 2000, And yet, in ever so many more ways, it was not. It might have had some improved features but these were entirely negated by needless bling and a lobotomised Explorer interface. IMHO, compared to win2k, winXP was a festering PoS. Yes went from WIN2K pro here to WIN 7 seems I missed out on a LOT of grief then;)... I guess you did but, imo, you could have saved yourself even more grief (or not) if you'd done what I did which was to go straight from win2k to Linux Mint 17.1, bypassing the grief of win8.x and win10 altogether. :-) Yes we did have a brief flirtation with Linux but i got a bit fed up trying to get some applications and drivers etc to work with it and I know i could have run win under Linux but in the end I've stuck with 7 and it does all of what I want it to do fine inc some legacy progs which we still need. I used to have a few mates who where Linux enthusiasts but now they all are running WIN 10 and seem very happy with it... -- Tony Sayer |
Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
In article , tony sayer
wrote: I guess you did but, imo, you could have saved yourself even more grief (or not) if you'd done what I did which was to go straight from win2k to Linux Mint 17.1, bypassing the grief of win8.x and win10 altogether. :-) Yes we did have a brief flirtation with Linux but i got a bit fed up trying to get some applications and drivers etc to work with it and I know i could have run win under Linux but in the end I've stuck with 7 and it does all of what I want it to do fine inc some legacy progs which we still need. Do you mean problems running *Linux* 'applications' on Linux? The matter of 'drivers' really hinges on if something needs them and the makers cannae be bothered. Linux developers do look for ways around this, but when makers keep requiring different drivers it can be a PITA. Suits MS because it ties people in. Jim -- Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me. Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa...o/electron.htm biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html |
Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
On 03/05/2018 12:05, Andrew wrote:
On 02/05/2018 09:36, Jim Lesurf wrote: In article , Andrew wrote: On 29/04/2018 21:31, Robin wrote: On 29/04/2018 21:12, Vir Campestris wrote: On 29/04/2018 12:56, TonyGamble wrote: Don't forget that only an LP is storing the sound above 20 khz and most, if not all, musical instruments produce harmonics way above that level. Two points: - Most of us can't hear harmonics that high - DVD can have higher frequency limits. 48kHZ sample is standard, I'm sure I've seen 96k (with 24 bit!) and I've a feeling even 192 is possible. plenty of samples you can play (sic) with - eg http://www.linnrecords.com/recording-test-files.aspx "These files are available for you to test which audio format is compatible with your system. You can choose between ALAC, FLAC, CD Quality and MP3 formats and Studio Master (also known as HD, hi-res or high definition) formats from 192kHz, 96kHz and 44.1kHz sample rates." Too late for me.Â* I sold my Quad ESLs when I realised my ears could no longer justify their floor area :( I tried the Linn test records. tried the CD version, then the 96 studio master in flac format and apart from what I suspect is slightly different volume they sounded exactly the same. This is via Firefox, and a spdif optical cable connected to my Onkyo CR515. Did you check that the spdif carried 44.1k rate for the CD version and ahigher rate for the 'high rez' version? It is quite common for computers to mince everything into one rate. Thus meaning you don't actually get high rez out. That said, you're probably correct. I tend to find that *well made* CDs are fine for me despite having various high rez files I enjoy. Jim Err, no. The realtek audio manager shows that spdif output is 24 bit 44.1 I'll give it another try. I set my audio manager digital output to 96/24 and listened to the 3 pieces of music again. The PCM light came on, on my Onkyo miniHiFi front panel. I still can't really hear any difference, so that only leaves one option, to try a better quality DAC to bypass the one in my Onkyo CR515. Back in 2007 someone asked a question like this and this was the reply :- "It will go through the internal DAC on the Onkyo. The 515 should have a Wolfson DAC in it so should be decent. I don't think it pays to go via external DAC in your case as it will easily cost as much as or more than your 515. So invest in a Toslink cable and enjoy!" |
Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
On Tuesday, 8 May 2018 16:22:32 UTC+1, Andrew wrote:
On 03/05/2018 12:05, Andrew wrote: On 02/05/2018 09:36, Jim Lesurf wrote: In article , Andrew wrote: On 29/04/2018 21:31, Robin wrote: On 29/04/2018 21:12, Vir Campestris wrote: On 29/04/2018 12:56, TonyGamble wrote: Don't forget that only an LP is storing the sound above 20 khz and most, if not all, musical instruments produce harmonics way above that level. Two points: - Most of us can't hear harmonics that high - DVD can have higher frequency limits. 48kHZ sample is standard, I'm sure I've seen 96k (with 24 bit!) and I've a feeling even 192 is possible. plenty of samples you can play (sic) with - eg http://www.linnrecords.com/recording-test-files.aspx "These files are available for you to test which audio format is compatible with your system. You can choose between ALAC, FLAC, CD Quality and MP3 formats and Studio Master (also known as HD, hi-res or high definition) formats from 192kHz, 96kHz and 44.1kHz sample rates.." Too late for me.Â* I sold my Quad ESLs when I realised my ears could no longer justify their floor area :( I tried the Linn test records. tried the CD version, then the 96 studio master in flac format and apart from what I suspect is slightly different volume they sounded exactly the same. This is via Firefox, and a spdif optical cable connected to my Onkyo CR515. Did you check that the spdif carried 44.1k rate for the CD version and ahigher rate for the 'high rez' version? It is quite common for computers to mince everything into one rate. Thus meaning you don't actually get high rez out. That said, you're probably correct. I tend to find that *well made* CDs are fine for me despite having various high rez files I enjoy. Jim Err, no. The realtek audio manager shows that spdif output is 24 bit 44.1 I'll give it another try. I set my audio manager digital output to 96/24 and listened to the 3 pieces of music again. The PCM light came on, on my Onkyo miniHiFi front panel. I still can't really hear any difference, so that only leaves one option, to try a better quality DAC to bypass the one in my Onkyo CR515. Back in 2007 someone asked a question like this and this was the reply :- "It will go through the internal DAC on the Onkyo. The 515 should have a Wolfson DAC in it so should be decent. I don't think it pays to go via external DAC in your case as it will easily cost as much as or more than your 515. So invest in a Toslink cable and enjoy!" I got some of mine from the pound shop. The long one shipped from Hong Kong or thereabouts for £3. |
Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
On 07/05/2018 16:47, tony sayer wrote:
I used to have a few mates who where Linux enthusiasts but now they all are running WIN 10 and seem very happy with it... Funny that/ I was pretty happy with Win7. I have a laptop with Win10, and I hate it. Not least because every time it comes out of standby it has to do an update check _right_ _now_ which stops me doing much else on it (it is pretty low powered). As it happens the last few years I've been using Linux at work, and I'm leaning in that direction. IAC mostly I just run Thunderbird... Andy |
Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
On Tuesday, 8 May 2018 21:32:58 UTC+1, Vir Campestris wrote:
On 07/05/2018 16:47, tony sayer wrote: I used to have a few mates who where Linux enthusiasts but now they all are running WIN 10 and seem very happy with it... Funny that/ I was pretty happy with Win7. I have a laptop with Win10, and I hate it. Not least because every time it comes out of standby it has to do an update check _right_ _now_ which stops me doing much else on it (it is pretty low powered). As it happens the last few years I've been using Linux at work, and I'm leaning in that direction. IAC mostly I just run Thunderbird... Andy Set it up to do checks in the middle of the night. |
Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
In article , Jim Lesurf
scribeth thus In article , tony sayer wrote: I guess you did but, imo, you could have saved yourself even more grief (or not) if you'd done what I did which was to go straight from win2k to Linux Mint 17.1, bypassing the grief of win8.x and win10 altogether. :-) Yes we did have a brief flirtation with Linux but i got a bit fed up trying to get some applications and drivers etc to work with it and I know i could have run win under Linux but in the end I've stuck with 7 and it does all of what I want it to do fine inc some legacy progs which we still need. Do you mean problems running *Linux* 'applications' on Linux? The matter of 'drivers' really hinges on if something needs them and the makers cannae be bothered. Linux developers do look for ways around this, but when makers keep requiring different drivers it can be a PITA. Suits MS because it ties people in. Jim No just progs that run under Windose.. No Linux specific progs.. Yes and the driver issues, no real befit using Linux in this case tho there may well be in others.. -- Tony Sayer |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:59 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HomeCinemaBanter.com