In Reply to: Teresa, - that is horsepucky... posted by Sordidman on May 10, 2006 at 10:54:31:
This makes absolutely no sense to me.The perceived boosted midrange and rolled off highs are only two of Digital’s many, many problems, which I call "Digitalis". Digitalis starts to disappear at 96kHz and is almost totally gone at 192kHz. The only time SACD exhibits "Digitalis" is when it is transferred to lower resolution PCM at some point either in recording or mastering. SACDs from DSD or Analog masters do not suffer from "Digitalis"
The formats that are the most tonally correct and the closest to live acoustic music are the analog formats, especially Reel to Reel and Audiophile LPs. SACD from Analog or DSD masters does a great job of mimicking analog and real life acoustic music in a natural setting. PCM at any resolution lower than 96kHz cannot and so far has not done that.
SACD does not always sound better, it's Vinyl that usually sounds better. But SACDs sound much better than the extremely low resolution CD.
Happy listening,
Teresa
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- So if a 24 Bit 48kHz DVD-Audio or a SACD from a 24 Bit 48kHz PCM master sound BAD, how can a 16 Bit 44.1kHz sound good? - Teresa 16:08:15 05/10/06 (5)
- Re: So if a 24 Bit 48kHz DVD-Audio or a SACD from a 24 Bit 48kHz PCM master sound BAD, how can a 16 Bit 44.1kHz sound go - Plushy 15:45:35 05/17/06 (1)
- "an LP, a cassette" ARE NOT 12 Bit mediums, they have NO BITS they are not Digital! - Teresa 17:58:03 05/17/06 (0)
- Re: So if a 24 Bit 48kHz DVD-Audio or a SACD from a 24 Bit 48kHz PCM master sound BAD, how can a 16 Bit 44.1kHz sound go - bublitchki 11:25:18 05/11/06 (1)
- The Xindak upsamples Redbook to 96kHz and I did try it, smoother but with less realism than either SACD or LP. - Teresa 17:12:32 05/11/06 (0)
- Just like anything else.... a listening test... - Sordidman 16:28:30 05/10/06 (0)