|
Computer Audio Asylum Music servers and other computer based digital audio technologies. |
|
|
|
Computer Audio Asylum Music servers and other computer based digital audio technologies. |
|
In Reply to: RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate posted by Tony Lauck on July 28, 2009 at 07:51:15:
Tony,
In my prior systems, I absolutely heard improvements when upsampling to 88.2k or 176k (with sox). But why would I now NOT hear nearly the same improvements after I've dialed in the jitter performance? To me that says lower jitter helped 44/16 the most, thus my theory.
I understand your tests, but I still contend that 44/16 is by its nature the most vulnerable to jitter. PS Audio's Memory Player and the raves it gets playing 44/16 ("as good as SACD") attest to the effect of jitter and all the ways it can be caused - there are many!
Bit depth is pretty much all about dynamic range and I don't think it has anything to do with jitter and timing.
I wish there was something like RMAA that would measure jitter. I've read about test files that use an 11khz tone. Anyone tried that and analyzed it in RMAA?
On another topic, I just tried the J River software and it does sound better than Foobar (ASIO) - noticeably less muddled on complex classical music. I write Windows software for a living and I'm tempted to try my hand at a player just for the heck of it. Jitter reduction is a fascinating subject.
Dave
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - AstroD 07/28/0916:33:02 07/28/09 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]