8/15/2023 0 Comments Adobe audition free mega upload![]() ![]() We should not experience significant frequency response changes for example. good 'ol 16/44.1 is already great resolution). ![]() Given the excellent resolution of today's DACs, logically, the effect of this algorithm is unlikely to change the sound too much if we're already starting with good resolution content (ie. So then, if the goal of PGGB is to maintain "accuracy", this automatically locks us into an implied type of sound. But 16-bits to 24-bits is typically marginal at best ( assuming you can even hear a difference). For example, the audible improvement in resolution going from 8-bits to 16-bits is obvious. What I'm implying is the concept of diminishing returns. Again, sure, accuracy and resolution of the sound correlate but at some point, that link breaks down as to how much this matters "to you". And linking this with subjective experience, it claims "what this means to you is better depth and layering, improved resolution, a cleaner leading edge, and more accurate timbre". It claims to use long filters and states "the longer the filter, the higher the reconstruction accuracy and the more transparent the sound". If we look at the website, PGGB purports to stay "true to Nyquist-Shannon sampling theorem". (BTW, here's Linkwitz hardware if you want to build one.) Over the years, I've been an advocate of room correction DSP the difference this makes is also obvious. A little while back, someone suggested I try 112dB Redline Monitor for example. To start, I think it's important for us to consider as "audiophiles" just what kind of processing we can do that would be beneficial.Īre we talking about processing that would add certain "euphonic" benefits to the audio? For example, a vinyl DSP plugin like iZotope Vinyl might be enjoyable by some but I don't think those of us interested in " high fidelity" would consider doing something like this (or even vinyl playback itself) as beneficial.įor certain situations like with headphones, we might want to process audio through a cross-feed DSP to get the sound "outside the head". Let's talk "audiophile" audio processing. This article is a culmination of the test results and ideas. We E-mailed and chatting back and forth over a week, sharing files and ideas on what to test. Well, since we live a bit of a distance apart, I thought about this for a bit and sent him some of my test signals and music tracks to see if he could run it through his machine and upload the data to me to have a peek. ![]() He seemed to enjoy the software and noticed some differences in sound so wondered if I would have a look at this and/or suggest some testing. So with that E-mail, my friend told me he downloaded the software (he started with the "Whittaker-Shannon Edition", but more recently the "Equalizer Edition", v2.0.42 as shown above) and has been running it on a 1-month trial license converting some of his favourite tracks. My intent is to at least have a good look at the foundation of the upsampling effect and the EQ function. That's a bit of stuff so I won't promise that we'll hit on all these here. Furthermore, the website states that the software can apply settings for various levels of "transparency", apply HF noise filtering, uses noise shaping, adjusts gain monitoring for intersample overs, deal with convolution filters, and an apodizing setting. on the order of >200M-taps sinc filter for some of the tests we'll run here, very impressive big number, right?). In the process, applying very strong filtering (eg. The idea with PGGB is that this is software that will take (in batch) various tracks you have and convert these to upsampled versions like 24/384 or 32/705.6 or even higher. With the computing power we have these days, we can certainly perform highly precise filtering and DSD-PCM transcoding - like with HQPlayer. That is not to say software doesn't make a difference at all. Neither JPLAY nor Fidelizer made any difference in my testing or listening. Then there are the OS tweaks like Fidelizer. ![]() We discussed questionable programs like JPLAY. Years ago, we talked about bit-perfect players ( Windows, Mac) and really how "bit-perfect" is simply "bit-perfect" regardless of what software is used. In the past, we have talked about "audiophile" software that supposedly affect sound quality. Cute, and of course the number "42" features prominently here and there. It links to a piece of software by a site called remastero, and the program itself is called "PGGB" (Pan Galactic Gargle Blaster), obviously referring to The Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy with the main author named Zaphod Beeblebrox (who in the book is also the ex-president of the Galaxy). This article came about after I received an E-mail from an audiophile friend who saw this Audiophile Style thread in praise of "math and magic". ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |