16/44 vs. 24/96 comparison

Hi Barry, I definitely still hear a very subtle pitch difference on my computer and the length of the 16/44 file is 3:30.006 while the length of the 24/96 file is 3:30:017. Perhaps something happened in the conversion, unless my computer is doing something to it?

 

Upsampling degrades?

 

Just a quick off topic question:
Do you use a Mac as well?

I use multiple systems every day and to me, they are different Universes.
A subject for another day.

Okay. Now back to our regularly scheduled program.

Best,
Barry
www.soundkeeperrecordings.com
www.barrydiamentaudio.com

 

I always wondered this myself.

 

Hi Drifter,

The difference in length is not the issue.
I took the original files and to create these samples quickly, manually put a marker around 3:30 and faded the last 6 seconds so they wouldn't stop abruptly. Since I didn't enter a specific time for the track to end --which would have made them both exactly the same length-- but marked these points manually, I was "off" by 11/1000 of a second.

I'm at a loss to explain why you're hearing a pitch difference --unless the clock in your D-A is slightly off. (?)

Best regards,
Barry
www.soundkeeperrecordings.com
www.barrydiamentaudio.com

 

Hi JLGB,

In my experience, most resampling degrades.
It is getting better and I've heard a few algorithms that I would now call transparent but these are batch processors (not real time).

I know some folks who use real time upsampling but I've not heard their systems myself so cannot say I've yet heard real time upsampling that does not degrade the signal in some way. That doesn't mean it isn't out there -- I just haven't heard it yet.

Best regards,
Barry
www.soundkeeperrecordings.com
www.barrydiamentaudio.com

 

hah, no I do not on a regular basis- should somebody else use one and I need to use the machine the stuff is all nearly the same. I find macs to have programs that operate the same as their counterparts, but there is simply less configuration integral to the function (which can be both good and really bad) (along with the price of hardware ). This is another topic- I respect them all, but I have a preference

 

I had a chance to experience a live music feed to a DSD and 24/96 feed and a 16/24 feed and the DSD and 24/96 feeds held up very nicely to the live feed. That was some time ago. I will not start a food fight over which sounded better to my ears between the DSD and 24/96 feed since there are too many fudge factors to consider. Put it this way, both DVD-A and SACD sound great on my systems.

Richard

 

Thank you sir for your reply!

 

I just recently downloaded these two clips yesterday, but I will have to transfer them to my other PC since it has the 2496 card installed. My laptop doesn't have audio for crap as far as playing back 24/96 files. I've no doubt that the 24/96 versions are more natural sounding compared the 16/44 but of course the right hardware is needed to tell the difference.

 

bumpED
Cause of the closed thread in "Music".
BIG thanks Barry!

 

Fanning the flames, I see. Just like in your avatar.

 

Is Barry still active here? I thought at one point he decided to not participate further. I hope he is because I always appreciated his contributions whether I agreed with every point doesn't matter. I respected his opinion.