Bleedink
Well-known Member
Not sure if this is good news or not:
http://www.stereophile.com/content/dolby174-upsamples-apodizes-truehd
http://www.stereophile.com/content/dolby174-upsamples-apodizes-truehd
Sooooo - for surround music are most people recording at 96 Khz or higher already - I assume so right?
This is Kals article, but if you just look down on the page it says it is for every player capable of 96.
Not really "mine." Written by Jason Serinius, our West Coast scribe.This is Kals article, but if you just look down on the page it says it is for every player capable of 96.
If you search for apodizing filters, you will find a lot of info particularly from Meridian and Ayre. It has become a fairly well accepted approach and those of us who use it regularly find it a real improvement without any downside.While I am not a fan of selling music that has undergone all kinds of who knows what, I found it interesting that the Stereophile scribe (whom we must assume has at least a passing fancy in audio) describes what almost sound like missing dynamics from the original recording. He does limit this assessment to the orchestral piece but it is interesting--but nearly everyone I have ever heard on any audio forum/zine/ect is nearly unanimous in claiming that dynamics can never be restored. Anyone know more about this tech?
I don't think all her albums were recorded at this rate. I believe just the latest is. It's a pretty 'big' release. One of those 'breakthrough' kinda projects with DangerMouse. The CD version is really loud. The HDtracks isn't bad but it isn't a drastic improvement. It's quieter. That's all I can say about it. I find the tunes catchy. I like them. I seem to be a minority. Don't like the sound quality but it's on par or better than most pop. I don't see this album benefitting from anything but maybe separating the instruments through a multichannel release. But it is so processed it's hard telling what you'd get unless it was completely remastered.
If you search for apodizing filters, you will find a lot of info particularly from Meridian and Ayre. It has become a fairly well accepted approach and those of us who use it regularly find it a real improvement without any downside.
http://www.ayre.com/pdf/Ayre_MP_White_Paper.pdf
http://www.meridian-audio.info/public/stereophile_-_april_2009-_808.2[1060].pdf
If you have access to AES papers, the original Craven paper from 2004 is where to start.
Thanks! Actually I did re-reading the article I looked more into what they were doing. I personally didn't see a downside--it actually looked like it cleaned up what they used as reference material (Dolby's own paper), but I haven't heard either of them so I can't really comment. Hey if it improves sound quality I'm all for it. I'm not that much of a purist as long as it makes me respond.
Enter your email address to join: