|
Music Lane It's all about the music, dude! Sit down, relax and listen to some tunes. |
|
|
|
Music Lane It's all about the music, dude! Sit down, relax and listen to some tunes. |
|
In Reply to: You're arguing that copying redbook and changing it's original digital posted by tinear on September 19, 2014 at 21:23:42:
Actually, if you change the bits (audio samples) in the file you may improve the sound quality, particularly if it was a bad recording to start with, but also possibly to compensate for some quirk in your playback. :-) This works best if you are prepared to keep a 24 bit file and play that as the conversion from 16 bits to floating point and back to 16 bits adds dither noise.
As to true copies of files (e.g. done by an operating system file copy), a copy may sound the same, better or worse than the original, depending on the quirks of your system. If there is any difference at all and the copies have the same bits in them then it is an indictment of the quality of your playback chain. I routinely copy files from hard drive to RAM disk before playback, because I don't like to hear any seek "clunks" from the 4 TB drive that holds my music library. This is definitely a problem with my system which sits too close to my listening position, but it is easily fixed by a copy.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: You're arguing that copying redbook and changing it's original digital - Tony Lauck 09/20/1407:19:31 09/20/14 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
