PDA

View Full Version : 24/96



Shakey
2008-02-15, 10:05
Why doesn't Logitech develope a product, other than the Transporter for those of us that want 24/96 capability without having to buy the Transporter?
I would like to rip some vinyl to the 24/96 format, load it on my NAS, steam it to my SB and dig out to my external DAC.

I can't be the only one that wants this.

morris_minor
2008-02-15, 11:04
I record vinyl to 24/48 for SB streaming.

Am I right in thinking that the bit depth plays a more significant part in improving sound quality than the sampling rate?

I know I'm hard pushed to tell vinyl straight from the groove from my homegrown 24bit 48Khz FLACs.

pfarrell
2008-02-15, 11:19
morris_minor wrote:
> Am I right in thinking that the bit depth plays a more significant part
> in improving sound quality than the sampling rate?

One can argue.
If you are recording straight and then compressing it makes very little
difference if you are wide (24 vs 16) or high (44.1 vs 88.2)

I see no value in 48k samples over 44.1, its too close to care.

But, if you do any signal processing, say scratch elimination, EQ to
clean up, etc. then wider and higher are justified for intermediate steps.

Most LPs don't have more than a 80dB signal to noise ratio, so wider
doesn't gain much. But its easy to record wider, and you can then do
better dithering.


--
Pat Farrell
http://www.pfarrell.com/

msherman
2008-02-15, 11:50
Shakey wrote:
> Why doesn't Logitech develope a product, other than the Transporter for
> those of us that want 24/96 capability without having to buy the
> Transporter?

Because they've already developed one, called the Transporter, and you
haven't bought it. Why should they develop a second?

- Marc

Shakey
2008-02-15, 12:05
Shakey wrote:
> Why doesn't Logitech develope a product, other than the Transporter for
> those of us that want 24/96 capability without having to buy the
> Transporter?

Because they've already developed one, called the Transporter, and you
haven't bought it. Why should they develop a second?

- Marc

Thanks Marc that was REAL helpful.

Regarding bit depth or higher sampling rate; there are many who believe higher sampling rates produce the most transparent files. I just hate to have to do the needle drops at 48 Mhz when 96 Mhz is available.

It would be nice to get a Transporter without the DAC for about a thousand or less. I don't need their DAC and quite frankly, I don't want it.

amcluesent
2008-02-15, 12:31
If the rest of your hi-fi is good enough to make 24/96 audibly superior to 16/44.1, you can surely meet the cost of the Transporter?

Shakey
2008-02-15, 12:52
If the rest of your hi-fi is good enough to make 24/96 audibly superior to 16/44.1, you can surely meet the cost of the Transporter?


Well I think it is but that doesn't warrant blowing dough on somehting I don't want and most likely won't use.

My Stereo:
Linn LP12/IttokLVIIImk2/BenzRuby2/HerculesPS/Cirkus...
Pass Labs Aleph Electronics (ONO, P, & 5)
Dynaco Contour 1.3SEs
Squeezebox3 Benchmark Media DAC-1 Infrant NAS NV+
Magnum Dynalab MD 90

jmourik
2008-02-15, 14:18
If the rest of your hi-fi is good enough to make 24/96 audibly superior to 16/44.1, you can surely meet the cost of the Transporter?
"Can" and "want to" are two very different things. I'd love to be able to play 24/94 downloaded from say the Linn music store, but my SB2 can't. But I don't feel like spending $2000 on a Transporter just to be able to play the few albums I have in that format. So an SB4 with 24/96 (and maybe higher) would be perfect for me. And for a few others too, probably...

Shakey
2008-02-15, 16:57
"Can" and "want to" are two very different things. I'd love to be able to play 24/94 downloaded from say the Linn music store, but my SB2 can't. But I don't feel like spending $2000 on a Transporter just to be able to play the few albums I have in that format. So an SB4 with 24/96 (and maybe higher) would be perfect for me. And for a few others too, probably...

Now were talking.

Pale Blue Ego
2008-02-15, 19:02
To my ears the extra bit depth give more improvement than the extra sampling rate.

The solution, for the original poster, is to create or buy 24/96 files, downsample to 24/48 for the SB3, and also keep the 24/96 versions for the future playback device (SB4) that handles them.

Shakey
2008-02-15, 19:17
To my ears the extra bit depth give more improvement than the extra sampling rate.

The solution, for the original poster, is to create or buy 24/96 files, downsample to 24/48 for the SB3, and also keep the 24/96 versions for the future playback device (SB4) that handles them.

I think that is correct. I have some 24/96 files and they do play back through the SB3. I was told you just lose half the sampling. Some files will not playback this way.

I will have to give it a try both ways and see if first 24/96 will play, then if so if they sound worse than just ripping them 24/48.

Is there a SB4 in the offing and if so is it supposed to do 24/96?
Linn's Klimax will do several hi-rez formats but it doesn't do some things the SB does.

Anne
2008-03-18, 15:20
I use a bryston dac , which upsamples, and I really dont need 24/96 since the vast majority of my music is 16/44.1
When you download 24/88 or thos 24/96 files from the internet that are playable on the SB3 I think I benefit more from the care taken in the recording event, not especially the 24/96 or whatever recording technique.
Besides, the dac in the Transporter is superiour to your SB3/Benchmark combo, and it has multible inputs, so, think about it.....

mortslim
2008-03-18, 16:26
But, if you do any signal processing, say scratch elimination, EQ to clean up, etc. then wider and higher are justified for intermediate steps. Most LPs don't have more than a 80dB signal to noise ratio, so wider doesn't gain much. But its easy to record wider, and you can then do better dithering.

I agree with the quoted post and its implications for this thread's originator.

Vinyl was not recorded with the specs that are sought, viz. 24/96. Although it was originally recorded to analog, and assuming pristine quality of the master tapes, you are still limited by the fact that the recording equipment at that time (eons ago in tech years) is nowhere near the specs being sought.

24/96 of vinyl without any additional editing or processing would only show up the imperfections of the source material.

I assume the original poster is not intending to do any editing or processing. That being the case, not only would nothing be gained by 24/96, it might actually make the original sound worse.