Re: Is 44.1 KHz sample-rate enough? Yes and No.

"Edmund" <nomail@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:4817a565$0$19973$bf4948fe@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > So why waste your time on deceptive testing?
>
> Because I am curious and like to know if I and others would
> hear any difference.

Which an incorrect testing methodology will NOT prove!
Simply a waste of time and misleading to boot.


> > A common misbelief, easily proven wrong by inserting a good 16/44
AD/DA
> > into the vinyl playback chain. Make sure the gain is unity and see if
> > anybody can pick when it's in or out. I have been doing that for ten
> > years and nobody has reliably picked which is which.
>
> I find that very interesting can you tell us how you exactly do that
> what equipment and all?

Extremely simple these days to do a similar test with almost any decent
computer sound card. A stand alone A-D/D-A simply makes it easier, but is
far from necessary.
And as far as vinyl playback equipment is concerned, the beauty of the
method is that anything can be used including those $100,000+ systems, if
you have access to one :-) Simply use whatever the other person CLAIMS to
be
superior to CD.

BTW if you do get a positive result one way or the other, simply look for
where you have gone wrong in your tests. Often a level mismatch, or using
a
SoundBlaster card with it's pitiful 48-44 resampling for example. (someone
I
told a few years ago had that exact problem when trying to use a
SoundBlaster Audigy, problem was solved with an M-Audio Audiophile. I will
admit to being surprised that even the Audigy could be worse than vinyl
:-)
(actually not really worse, but still a detectable difference)

MrT.