0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 3834 times.
So much of it is about the recording and mastering...
Inserting an A/D/A convertor in the chain is not the same as playing a redbook CD. Without having seen the actual paper, it seems that the true result would more likely be that the bandwidth limit and quantization noise of a 16-bit 44.1 kHz signal were not sufficient to enable listeners to statistically distinguish between a signal with and a signal without.
What I would like to know (and this is the question that will become increasingly relevant in the future) is whether it's worth storing/listening to music with resolution above 16/44.1. This result says no.
Some don't mind it - and some have invested in great DAC's, players and hard drives to mostly overcome - but it's got it's share of issues.
I think the real major one is that 44,100 samples per second isn't enough to capture the essence of the original recording...most often noted in the midrange thru (most notably) treble range.
John Atkinson describes a "blind" test where there were audible differences between hi-res, red-book and MP3 formats, keeping playback datastream and equipment constant. See here: http://www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/1007awsi/. From Stereophile, October 2007 issue. Mike
Here's an article comparing Redbook VS fancier formats . Not sure if anyone has posted it already. Apparently there's 'no audible difference' between standard CD and the higher resolution discs, according to their tests.http://theaudiocritic.com/blog/index.php?op=ViewArticle&articleId=41&blogId="Incontrovertible double-blind listening tests prove that the original 16-bit/44.1-kHz CD standard yields exactly the same two-channel sound quality as the SACD and DVD-A technologies."A bit more here: http://www.bostonaudiosociety.org/explanation.htmNumerous valid questions regarding the testing panel, listening volumes, etc., can be easily raised (as always...) but it is interesting regardless.
John Atkinson describes a "blind" test where there were audible differences between hi-res, red-book and MP3 formats, keeping playback datastream and equipment constant. See here: http://www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/1007awsi/. From Stereophile, October 2007 issue.
This is the most unscientific test, posing as a scientific test, that I've ever seen. No mention of how the different formats were recorded for one. If everything was originally recorded at 16-bit/44.1-kHz, then I wouldn't suspect there would be much of a difference. The other question I have is, did the old buzzard save the hair from his ears, before attempting to do any listening?