兩聲道
CD機 | MD機 | SACD機 | DAC | CAS | 合拼擴音機 | 前級擴音機 | 後級擴音機 | 接線 | 喇叭線 | 揚聲器 | 耳機 | 耳機擴音機 | LP產品 | 膽機產品 | 開卷式錄音機 | 音響配件 | DIY音響 | 電源 | 家庭影院
電視機 | 投影機 | 錄影機 | DVD影碟機 | Blu-ray影碟機 | 多媒體播放器 | 機頂盒 | 多聲道擴音機 | 多聲道揚聲器 | 多聲道影音組合 | Mini音響組合 | 重低音揚聲器 | 輔助設備 | 同好會
同好會 | Accuphase | B&W | Burmester | Denon | Jadis | KEF | KRELL | Luxman | Marantz | Nuforce | OPPO | Pioneer | TEAC | WEISS | News
News | Blog | 其他
其他 | 所有 |
| 影音天地主旨 ﹝請按主旨作出回應﹞ 下頁 尾頁 | 寄件者 | 傳送日期
|
| [#1] CD quality no worse than High Resolution Playback My personal listening have always parted with CD quality playback and I'm pretty much happy with the experience. This is in contrary to those who have firm belief in high resolution tracks like 24/96 or higher resolution and DSD audio, on which people have more pleasant listening experience and opine that they have better sonic quality. Listening is subjective but properly conducted blind tests should reveal the sonic differences between recordings of different formats. It's to my surprise that a survey done by two AES members from Boston Audio Society indicates that listeners could not distinguish high resolution audio from CD quality audio. Have a look at the survey: http://www.drewdaniels.com/audible.pdf |
hkborn 正式會員112.xxx.xxx.16 |
2013-05-30 15:26 | |
|
|
|||
| [#2] CD quality no worse than High Resolution Playback Blasphemy!!!! |
olddude 正式會員 58.xxx.xxx.118 |
2013-05-30 15:52 |
| [#3] CD quality no worse than High Resolution Playback When CD was launched late 80's, it was considered unlistenable. Most CD players then had 4x oversampling to smooth out the digial sound from 16/44 source (which is 1.44M bit data). Nowadays, because of Apple, from the iPod days, people keep saying 330K bit is already high resolution, and when 1 people says it is, the other people would agree it is too, because they have not heard anything better as these people seldom pay for a CD, not to mention a LP or a SACD, nor have the hifi gears to tell the difference. This is so sad ＞_＜. |
Kenny 正式會員 146.xxx.xxx.16 |
2013-05-30 16:12 |
| [#4] CD quality no worse than High Resolution Playback If files ripped from CD losslessly, they should not be better than CD because all data are from CD. One may argue that real time data pickup from CDT/CDP should not be better than audio files which are securely or accurately ripped. However, the fact is CAS/FAS are even more subject to various culprits of causing suboptimal sound reproduction. CDT with DAC or CDP are relatively more simple, despite the fact that they would have more tonic characteristics added into sound reproduction , making different tastes. But that doesn't mean lower resolution ability than FAS/CAS. In my case, I treat FAS/CAS as another sources for the ease of sound reproduction, rather than a pursue of higher sound quality. You may say because one need to invest more time and $$$ for higher sound quality but if so, why not just keep CD and LP as sources? 最後修改時間: 2013-05-30 18:26:24 |
phaco 正式會員 119.xxx.xxx.245 |
2013-05-30 18:25 |
| [#5] CD quality no worse than High Resolution Playback 簡單說一說這個研究。 很多人說CD音質不及SACD/DVD audio 24/88 或更高，所以有工程師做了一個為時一年多的測試，用的是ABX測試法，AB分別是CD及SACD／DVD，X是要測試對像，測試者要說出X是A或是B。 結果是在554次測試中，只有276次或49.82%正確答案。這其中有467次測試由發燒友或專業錄音師進行的，246次或52.7%正確。 研究結論是在聽感上，CD與SACD／DVD並無明顯差異。 http://www.drewdaniels.com/audible.pdf |
hkborn 正式會員 112.xxx.xxx.16 |
2013-05-30 19:00 |
| [#6] CD quality no worse than High Resolution Playback Though there should be some limitations in this study, this a good journal to estimate the outcome in a more scientific manner. |
phaco 正式會員 119.xxx.xxx.245 |
2013-05-30 19:39 |
| [#7] CD quality no worse than High Resolution Playback 簡單說一說這個研究。 很多人說CD音質不及SACD/DVD audio 24/88 或更高，所以有工程師做了一個為時一年多的測試，用的是ABX測試法，AB分別是CD及SACD／DVD，X是要測試對像，測試者要說出X是A或是B。 結果是在554次測試中，只有276次或49.82%正確答案。這其中有467次測試由發燒友或專業錄音師進行的，246次或52.7%正確。 研究結論是在聽感上，CD與SACD／DVD並無明顯差異。 I believe the results |
batmanamesIA 正式會員 38.xxx.xxx.20 |
2013-05-30 19:41 |
| [#8] CD quality no worse than High Resolution Playback 何必講d唔講d? "The “best” listener score, achieved one single time, was 8 for 10, still short of the desired 95% confidence level. There were two 7/10 results" http://www.drewdaniels.com/audible.pdf |
dvmrp 正式會員 219.xxx.xxx.254 |
2013-05-30 19:44 |
| [#9] CD quality no worse than High Resolution Playback The conclusion is clearly stated. Even the best listener can only have 80% correctness. This tells the fact that people under test are unable to identify the difference. If SACD/DVD is far superior than CD, people should be able to identify the difference easily, average correct rate should be 70 or 80%, and the best listener 100% correct imho. The result of around 50% represents a statistical no difference on sound quality, pretty close to results of tossing a coin. |
hkborn 正式會員 112.xxx.xxx.16 |
2013-05-30 19:58 |
| [#10] CD quality no worse than High Resolution Playback I think your title should be something like "CD quality no worse than high resolution playback to most of the people". That would be closer to the conclusion of the article. 最後修改時間: 2013-05-30 20:43:38 |
dvmrp 正式會員 219.xxx.xxx.254 |
2013-05-30 20:31 |
| [#11] CD quality no worse than High Resolution Playback 玩開ＨＩ－ＦＩ既發燒友，耳朵經歷長期聽覺經驗，靈敏度唔多唔少都會比一般人好。除非佢地搵灑所有聽覺正常既發燒友去做依個測試，咁個說服力會大好多。如果連ＳＡＣＤ同ＣＤ都分不出，基本上佢可以洗少好多錢，聽ＣＤ已經夠，更何況ＬＰ？ 最後修改時間: 2013-05-31 09:58:09 |
Esquire 正式會員 158.xxx.xxx.187 |
2013-05-31 09:55 |
| [#12] CD quality no worse than High Resolution Playback 玩開ＨＩ－ＦＩ既發燒友，耳朵經歷長期聽覺經驗，靈敏度唔多唔少都會比一般人好。 Plus true music lovers that love live music playing ^_^. |
Kenny 正式會員 146.xxx.xxx.16 |
2013-05-31 10:41 |
| [#13] CD quality no worse than High Resolution Playback audio...coffee...wine... taste of mushroom all the same.. nice test.., the result seem to reflect the real life too many people cannot taste the different of a hk$500 wine..to some hiend wine.. many people do not distinglish the different ..if brew within 15 mins of grinding vs.. after3 months...etc.. same case applied..about half of those people feel CD no worst than HRP same fact founding and always a few side of using those data..understand those data.. my family used to think i am chi ma gan.., spending hours for changing the speaker position..., and now they know |
hahayanyan 正式會員 202.xxx.xxx.116 |
2013-05-31 12:53 |
| [#14] CD quality no worse than High Resolution Playback hiend...= paid a silly sum above good quality for marginal benefit.. and surprise..it is more than 50% of people..feel the HRP is better.. haha... many those HIEND lover less "chi sin" 最後修改時間: 2013-05-31 13:17:51 |
hahayanyan 正式會員 202.xxx.xxx.2 |
2013-05-31 13:11 |
| [#15] CD quality no worse than High Resolution Playback my family used to think i am chi ma gan.., spending hours for changing the speaker position..., and now they know _____ Because of the Proac 5? |
icefox_2001 正式會員 203.xxx.xxx.18 |
2013-05-31 13:19 |
| [#16] CD quality no worse than High Resolution Playback not only because..for the proac.. for a few yrs... they come to my room and wait for me.. , and i always force them to learn..haha .. THEY LIKE BIG WILSON and proac... they do not like Avalon, THEY LIKE VINTAGE JBL... and disagree the value of big wilson.., they prefer Krell, but not pass labs... even my mum like vintage JBL..haha... .they WOR..about those Goldmund...and they oooo after they know the cost.. and now.. they do not feel a waste of time..if i make them to sit down for 45 mins for help.., at least they know what i am doing..haha , they now can tell me.. "Good change.." or..oh..a bit less focus..less pin point... and also able to suggest me and tell me the different within 30 cm sitting distance..haha ...not bad good to use them...as they have no brand and price perception however one of the cosine ., a professional pianist.. still feeeling i waste my time for all piano recording.. ,she demo me what are the true dynamic of a piano.... last yr..she had her back up piano in my room... and...oh.... not even 5% capture.. bad even my mum come to help me for cleaning..she comment..this is no better than that..haha 最後修改時間: 2013-05-31 13:35:39 |
hahayanyan 正式會員 202.xxx.xxx.2 |
2013-05-31 13:22 |
| [#17] CD quality no worse than High Resolution Playback VINTAGE JBL??? _________ 55000? |
icefox_2001 正式會員 203.xxx.xxx.18 |
2013-05-31 13:28 |
| [#18] CD quality no worse than High Resolution Playback haha not 5500... but what they said about Goldmund.. "oh...it sound so high class" and what they said about Vintage JBL " hey..how much are they...u waste too much $$...is just nice tone..and easy" well it is music machine..and i make them understand..i am playing hifi..not exactly music for music..i do not need help.. for playing hifi..i need a few pair of good ear.and one more pair of strong arm..haha 最後修改時間: 2013-05-31 13:33:49 |
hahayanyan 正式會員 202.xxx.xxx.2 |
2013-05-31 13:31 |
| [#19] CD quality no worse than High Resolution Playback HKborn C hing give out the content.., he told us all.. already..haha |
hahayanyan 正式會員 202.xxx.xxx.2 |
2013-05-31 13:34 |
| [#20] CD quality no worse than High Resolution Playback ABX盲聽測試法最考驗金耳朵，這個波士頓音頻學會的測試者肯定是冒牌發燒友，冒牌工程師！ |
hkborn 正式會員 112.xxx.xxx.16 |
2013-05-31 14:34 |
