This is my 16 bit and 24 bit Flac collection.......bout 40% ripped from my CD collection.....any interested buyer??...
This post has been edited by Fusion: Apr 12 2011, 09:45 PM
AudioPhile KopiTiam, Instead of the "bragging right" thread
|
|
Apr 12 2011, 09:44 PM
Return to original view | Post
#1
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
1,201 posts Joined: Jan 2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Apr 12 2011, 10:01 PM
Return to original view | Post
#2
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
1,201 posts Joined: Jan 2003 |
hahaha....anything also can sell as long as there are buyers.....
by the way ....the selling part is just a joke.... |
|
|
Apr 14 2011, 01:23 PM
Return to original view | Post
#3
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
1,201 posts Joined: Jan 2003 |
QUOTE(DaEMoNteNTAcLe @ Apr 14 2011, 09:21 AM) i read some previous post saying lossless is all the same.. well.. mathematically speaking that is.. i think you got the concept of lossless totally wrong....when you rip from a digital to another digital format....lossless with give the identical sound quality (i am talking about the format giving the identical sound...not the equipment used)so how come lossy vinyls.. that even degrades (scratches when played).. sounds better than the so called lossless CD? probably it can be proved by mathematics.. or not. but there's definitely some calculation or consideration being left out somewhere. it would also fail to describe as well why all dacs that measures 20-20kHz at 0db signal doesnt sound the same also. perhaps we should do a math on how our ears hears zeros and ones? Maybe some people do not want to listen to what their own ear hears? if equipments are always correct.. we are all better off using hearing aids to replace our ears? the point is, measurements and theories are always a guidelines.. the implementation is never going to be as ideal as any theories or measurements. what matters in the end is what the human perceives, and not what is being calculated. (lets start teh flame wars! i made my point.. muehehehe) when you do an analog vs digital comparison is lossless has nothing to do with it....it all boils down to the mastering of the digital format... in an analog curve, the curve is smooth and when you convert it to digital, this curve is converted using sampling rates (44.1khz or 96khz)....the higher the rate, the smoother the curve is but it is impossible to attain a perfectly smooth curve therefore digital will always be inferior to analog but there a lot of things that you could do with digital which analog is not able to achieve.....imagine sending audio signal to another place....digital would not degrade as it is all 0 and 1 but if you send analog signal ....even the best analog equipment would degrade the sound due to the distances that the signal has been sent..... as for the DAC, all DAC sound differently although they use the same chipset is not because the chipset sound differently....the DAC chip will sound identical but after converting it to analog, the analog design circuit and the electronics used are the one that make the difference..... This post has been edited by Fusion: Apr 14 2011, 01:24 PM |
|
|
Apr 14 2011, 02:21 PM
Return to original view | Post
#4
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
1,201 posts Joined: Jan 2003 |
in a Pure analog system, the waveform is most likely uglier than a digital because of the pressing (vinyl) and the analog equipments used to pick up the signal.....i dont think it is possible to pick up a perfect signal from analog source....what i meant from the explanation above is the comparison of the digital and analog signal at its purest form....in any conversion of analog to digital or digital to analog, it is impossible to have a perfect conversion without any lost of details....
|
|
Topic ClosedOptions
|
| Change to: | 0.0143sec
0.77
7 queries
GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 17th December 2025 - 08:46 PM |