Even then i dither 24/44.1 and high samplerates to 16/44.1 for use on my server and for portability. I buy higher bitrates when i know it is better sounding as some other version, less compressed or mostly the same price.
Quote from: Wombat on 23:06:53 I use 16/44.1 for everything. I am unaware that there have ever been any DBTs that compared Sigma-Delta and DSD DACs with similar performance in the normal audible range and found any audible differences. Logic says that for A to be superior to B it must be different from B which in the case of DSD, it is not. To me the most important take away is that allegations of superior sound quality due to DSD have to be false, because if you believe some sources Native DSD is the same as Single Bit Delta-Sigma which is inherently flawed, or actual implementations of it are actually the same as multi-bit Sigma Delta which is what it is supposed to be superior to. Shortly after the publication of paper referenced above it was revealed that in fact the some or all of the allegedly Native DSD converters used in certain professional DSD products were strictly speaking not Naive DSD but were actually multi-bit devices.
As the reference points out, the Single Bit Delta-Sigma is inherently and seriously flawed in a number of serious ways, but the multi-bit versions of it avoid these problems. One way that they differ among themselves is the number of bits in the DAC that is at their core. The background behind this is that real world Delta Sigma converters are not all the same. This special case has a number of built in severe technical problems that are described here: Free copy of Vanderkooy-Lipshitz paper explaining difference between Delta Sigma and DSD Native DSD is a special case of Delta-Sigma, more properly called Single Bit Delta Sigma. Quote As I know - please correct me if I'm wrong - the process of the delta-sigma DAC is technically the same as "native DSD".
0 kommentar(er)
