Reply to post: Re: "a brave person who said that HRA has no audible benefits"

Hi-res audio folk to introduce new rules and weed out impure noises


Re: "a brave person who said that HRA has no audible benefits"

Just because something says SACD or DVD-A on the label doesn't mean it was mastered as high-res audio.

Back in the early days of vinyl, I know for a fact that some CD masters were recorded from vinyl copies.

Record companies tend to be cheap and nasty, and the likelihood they'd consistently make a special effort to get the very best from high-res media isn't high.

At the very least I'd have wanted to see some word length analysis to check that the supposed high-res content was actually there in the first place.

A more realistic test would be to record high-res audio with a clean signal path to master recorder, and then run that through the A/D/A system.

As someone who has spent a lot of time listening to converters, I find it amazing that it's apparently impossible to hear the effects of a mid-price A/D/A converter at all, never mind the source. Unless you're in the professional bracket (PrismSound, etc) most converters really don't sound that transparent. And I know from experience that the difference between a 24-bit master and a downsampled 16-bit master is absolutely and reliably audible.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019