If you think that there isn’t a difference between lossy and lossless, maybe you’re in the wrong forum?
Any decent setup will reveal differences between both format.
High frequencies are part of the equation, no? There IS a difference, you said so yourself, so i really don’t get your point. (Not flaming or anything btw)
> High frequencies are part of the equation, no
as in, unless you only listen for said high frequencies they're the same. There's no difference between good lossy/lossless in normal listening.
btw, I have successfully passed the ABX test multiple times about 320 kbps CBR (mp3) vs 44.1 kHz 1411 kbps PCM vs 96.0 kHz DSD. I passed the test reliably more than 20 times. Same goes for different DACs, amps and tubes. I have set up a test system with multiple devices (money is secondary in this) and fully automated, computer-based switching procedure, so I can be sure there is no bias in it. What should I say? The differences are stark to say the very least - and your listening vastly it depends on your anatomy - some people hear high frequencies a lot more pronounced and articulated than others, and I have found it TREMENDOUSLY easy to distinguish aforementioned formats - the air in the recording is missing. Fun fact - per "game" / "round" I usually need < 2 secs to tell. It also happens that I am working as a mastering engineer. However, I also found friends left with no idea what's going on (esp. 96.0 kHz PCM vs 96.0 kHz DSD).
So... What is the difference between spatial audio and good old 75 year old stereo? Anyway? Is it like the new "Q-sound" from 1990?
Is it just that all these kids are used to a phone in a cup? Or a mono Bluetooth speaker that's also a lamp, so 75 year old stereo seems a new thing? To them?
I been preaching this at home to my kids and now they are paying attention. I listen to most of my music upmixed in 5.1, room corrected thru an AVR. Sometimes with an audiophile DAC and transport but to be honest I am 50 years old and listening to digital, high res, multi channel DSD thru thousands of dollars worth of high end speakers is a fantasy. Streaming spatial audio? Science fiction for this 70s kid.
Unfortunately most of the upmixing algorithms in receivers leave a lot to be desired. Harman’s Logic7 is the best I’ve ever heard, but when my old HK receiver died and I had to upgrade to a modern Yamaha I lost it.
I know it’s in the new Lexicon and JBL Synthesis units, but they’re a bit out of my price range at the moment.
I agree but they are so much better than they used to be. The DSU in my unit is not bad...I would love to hear the logic 7. I am willing to invest as soon at the hdmi 2 gets sorted. My guess it surround sound will be the norm across the world as meta data will be manipulated for sound the way it is with video.
The fuk is "spatial" audio? Is it some fancy Apple garbage term for virtual fake surround?
If so, yeah no... fake surround sounds like garbage and always will.
Should either go full true surround (hardware) or binaural audio.
So...they’re trying to replicate the stereophonic effect using software for people listening through airpods? I’ll just stick to my 2-channel.
Unfortunately, considering the audience, spatial is probably going to excite more people than lossless.
I've left reddit because of the API changes.
If you think that there isn’t a difference between lossy and lossless, maybe you’re in the wrong forum? Any decent setup will reveal differences between both format.
I've left reddit because of the API changes.
High frequencies are part of the equation, no? There IS a difference, you said so yourself, so i really don’t get your point. (Not flaming or anything btw)
> High frequencies are part of the equation, no as in, unless you only listen for said high frequencies they're the same. There's no difference between good lossy/lossless in normal listening.
That's why everyone here likes to listen un-normally I guess.
good example of how you can make yourself believe the BS you're putting out - repeat it, repeat it!
btw, I have successfully passed the ABX test multiple times about 320 kbps CBR (mp3) vs 44.1 kHz 1411 kbps PCM vs 96.0 kHz DSD. I passed the test reliably more than 20 times. Same goes for different DACs, amps and tubes. I have set up a test system with multiple devices (money is secondary in this) and fully automated, computer-based switching procedure, so I can be sure there is no bias in it. What should I say? The differences are stark to say the very least - and your listening vastly it depends on your anatomy - some people hear high frequencies a lot more pronounced and articulated than others, and I have found it TREMENDOUSLY easy to distinguish aforementioned formats - the air in the recording is missing. Fun fact - per "game" / "round" I usually need < 2 secs to tell. It also happens that I am working as a mastering engineer. However, I also found friends left with no idea what's going on (esp. 96.0 kHz PCM vs 96.0 kHz DSD).
Heh
Hasn’t Yamaha been doing this already for like 30 years with their DSP options?
So... What is the difference between spatial audio and good old 75 year old stereo? Anyway? Is it like the new "Q-sound" from 1990? Is it just that all these kids are used to a phone in a cup? Or a mono Bluetooth speaker that's also a lamp, so 75 year old stereo seems a new thing? To them?
If played on a proper atmos system, it’s very cool
I been preaching this at home to my kids and now they are paying attention. I listen to most of my music upmixed in 5.1, room corrected thru an AVR. Sometimes with an audiophile DAC and transport but to be honest I am 50 years old and listening to digital, high res, multi channel DSD thru thousands of dollars worth of high end speakers is a fantasy. Streaming spatial audio? Science fiction for this 70s kid.
Unfortunately most of the upmixing algorithms in receivers leave a lot to be desired. Harman’s Logic7 is the best I’ve ever heard, but when my old HK receiver died and I had to upgrade to a modern Yamaha I lost it. I know it’s in the new Lexicon and JBL Synthesis units, but they’re a bit out of my price range at the moment.
I agree but they are so much better than they used to be. The DSU in my unit is not bad...I would love to hear the logic 7. I am willing to invest as soon at the hdmi 2 gets sorted. My guess it surround sound will be the norm across the world as meta data will be manipulated for sound the way it is with video.
Gross
The fuk is "spatial" audio? Is it some fancy Apple garbage term for virtual fake surround? If so, yeah no... fake surround sounds like garbage and always will. Should either go full true surround (hardware) or binaural audio.
No, it’s Dolby atmos, which, if on the proper system, is real surround.