Re: [LAU] edirol fa101 on differant rate that 48k ?

On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 15:43:02 -0500
David Santamauro <david.santamauro@email-addr-hidden> wrote:
> > 1. Nobody could hear any difference between the original recordings,
> > reproduced using the best equipment available, and the transcoded
> > versions.
> >
> > 2. Almost all listeners preferred the 'audiophile' recordings to
> > other versions of the same music released on CD.
>
> I don't understand how the second question could even posed in relation
> to the first.
>
> If there is no difference, there can be no preference, unless, of
> course, they had other factors to consider besides music.

I had to read Fons' original message a couple of times before I got
what his points were.

The first was that no one could tell the difference between the original
audiophile recording and the transcoded version of the audiophile recording.

The second was that there was a big preference for the audiophile recording
compared to the standard commercially released CD of the same music.

The second point indicates that listeners can tell when extra care is taken
to make the finished product, but that it really doesn't matter what the
sample rate and sample bit size is for that product.

-- 
======================================================================
       Joe Hartley - UNIX/network Consultant - jh@email-addr-hidden
 Without deviation from the norm, "progress" is not possible. - FZappa
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user