Super hi res music from your existing CDs. Impossible? Maybe not...
jaxwired
Posts: 201
Anybody ever heard of "compressed sensing" technology. Apparently this new technology allows for sparse data to be filled in with extremely high accuracy. Like fuzzy pictures made super hi-res and accurate with no extra data. Magic! Sounds like this could be applied to existing data on compact discs. Your existing CDs could be read and transformed into super hi res audio streams by the next generation of players. WOW!
http://www.wired.com/magazine/2010/02/ff_algorithm
http://www.ratchetup.com/eyes/2010/03/compressed-sensing.html
http://www.wired.com/magazine/2010/02/ff_algorithm
http://www.ratchetup.com/eyes/2010/03/compressed-sensing.html
2 Channel
NAD C545 -> Benchmark DAC1 -> Bryston BP6 -> Bryston 4B SST2 -> Dynaudio Contour S1.4
NAD C545 -> Benchmark DAC1 -> Bryston BP6 -> Bryston 4B SST2 -> Dynaudio Contour S1.4
Post edited by jaxwired on
Comments
-
But the standard for CD remains 16/44.1
On the other hand, if they can "clean up" the source material and properly remaster them onto CD, it can sound very good. An example would be DSD-remastered CDs....they're still regular CDs but the source material was remastered using DSD. -
Anybody ever heard of "compressed sensing" technology. Apparently this new technology allows for sparse data to be filled in with extremely high accuracy. Like fuzzy pictures made super hi-res and accurate with no extra data. Magic! Sounds like this could be applied to existing data on compact discs. Your existing CDs could be read and transformed into super hi res audio streams by the next generation of players. WOW!
http://www.wired.com/magazine/2010/02/ff_algorithm
http://www.ratchetup.com/eyes/2010/03/compressed-sensing.html
Didn't Carver do this with the Digital Time Lens? I have this feature on my CD player and I find that it can sound almost as good as my vinyl, depending on the recording of course.:)The Gear... Carver "Statement" Mono-blocks, Mcintosh C2300 Arcam AVR20, Oppo UDP-203 4K Blu-ray player, Sony XBR70x850B 4k, Polk Audio Legend L800 with height modules, L400 Center Channel Polk audio AB800 "in-wall" surrounds. Marantz MM7025 stereo amp. Simaudio Moon 680d DSD
“When once a Republic is corrupted, there is no possibility of remedying any of the growing evils but by removing the corruption and restoring its lost principles; every other correction is either useless or a new evil.”— Thomas Jefferson -
But the standard for CD remains 16/44.1
The whole point is that it does not matter what resolution of data is actually on the CD. They can turn 500mb of data into 10 gig of data and the new super hi res version created is actually extremely close to perfect. In other words, they make hi res accurate data out of low res data.
So a CD player of the not so distant future would read whatever is on your old CDs, but would play like 10 or 50 times more data was there.2 Channel
NAD C545 -> Benchmark DAC1 -> Bryston BP6 -> Bryston 4B SST2 -> Dynaudio Contour S1.4 -
You can't fashion a silk purse from a sow's ear!
If the recording is mediocre, upsampling won't help it. It will help in some circumstances. Does it compare favorably to hi rez? My experience is that most of the hi rez material is better mastered (or remastered) to begin with.Carl -
nooshinjohn wrote: »Didn't Carver do this with the Digital Time Lens? I have this feature on my CD player and I find that it can sound almost as good as my vinyl, depending on the recording of course.:)
Do you have a Carver CDP? If so which one?
I didn't know Bob made those..but then again there are A LOT of things I don't know!
cnhCurrently orbiting Bowie's Blackstar.!
Polk Lsi-7s, Def Tech 8" sub, HK 3490, HK HD 990 (CDP/DAC), AKG Q701s
[sig. changed on a monthly basis as I rotate in and out of my stash] -
You can't fashion a silk purse from a sow's ear!
If the recording is mediocre, upsampling won't help it. It will help in some circumstances. Does it compare favorably to hi rez? My experience is that most of the hi rez material is better mastered (or remastered) to begin with.
This is something new that makes what was considered "impossible" by pretty much everyone, possible. It's not a marketing gimmick...
I agree that bad recordings can't be made into good recordings. That's an entirely different issue.
Lots of people think that hi res versions sound better than redbook CDs. Many people also think vinyl sounds better than CDs because they are not a digitally sampled vesion of the original analog sound. This technology could possibly address both of those issues.2 Channel
NAD C545 -> Benchmark DAC1 -> Bryston BP6 -> Bryston 4B SST2 -> Dynaudio Contour S1.4 -
-
Do you have a Carver CDP? If so which one?
I didn't know Bob made those..but then again there are A LOT of things I don't know!
cnh
I had a Carver CDP with DTL technology, back in the mid 80's.Source: Bluesound Node 2i - Preamp/DAC: Benchmark DAC2 DX - Amp: Parasound Halo A21 - Speakers: MartinLogan Motion 60XTi - Shop Rig: Yamaha A-S501 Integrated - Shop Spkrs: Elac Debut 2.0 B5.2 -
Interesting concepts.Source: Bluesound Node 2i - Preamp/DAC: Benchmark DAC2 DX - Amp: Parasound Halo A21 - Speakers: MartinLogan Motion 60XTi - Shop Rig: Yamaha A-S501 Integrated - Shop Spkrs: Elac Debut 2.0 B5.2
-
I'd be curious to hear one of these cds... the technology certainly is incredibly promising for MRIs. If you could decrease the length of time needed to scan someone from 45 minutes to 1 minute or even 5 minutes, that would be HUGE.
The efficiency of those machines relative to what we have now would be mind-boggling.2-Channel - So far...
Pre: Dodd ELP
DAC: W4S-Dac2
Source(s): Computer and Denon 2910
Amp: Parasound HCA-1200II
Speakers: LSi9s - Vr3 Fortress Mod -
I want one.And a sonic hologram generator too.SDA-2BTL with custom IC
Adcom 565 monoblocks--Monarchy Audio M-10 preamp
Theta Data Basic Transport--Stello DA100 Signature DAC--Camelot Dragon Pro2 MK III
Harman Kardon T-55c TT
DH Labs Q-10 Signature Speaker Cables With Furez silver plated copper bananas
Revelation Audio Labs Prophecy Cryo-Silver Reference AES/EBU
Revelation Audio Labs Prophecy Cryo-Silver i2s digital cable
4 Furutech FP-314Ag with FI-11cu Plugs/FI-11AG IECs--- Power Cords
DH LABS REVELATIONS ICs-amps
Revelation Audio Labs Paradise cryo-silver ICs-Source to pre -
honestly CDs dont sound that bad, 44.1khz will give you a 0hz-22khz response, theres no reason to increase sampling rate, now bit depth, of course. this was the original complaint of vinylphiles is the music was not as "smooth" the bit depth has alot to do with how much accuracy you have, its just like pixels, the more the better. in reality if you could look the sine wave of a recording and freeze it and view only 1/44100th of a second, you would see the wave is making sharp square transitions, where as vinyl makes perfect curved ones.
-
yepimonfire wrote: »in reality if you could look the sine wave of a recording and freeze it and view only 1/44100th of a second, you would see the wave is making sharp square transitions, where as vinyl makes perfect curved ones.
That has to be wrong. If your are right, I'm about to invent the greatest improvement in CD players ever. I call it "interpolation" or for marketing purposes "connect the dots"...2 Channel
NAD C545 -> Benchmark DAC1 -> Bryston BP6 -> Bryston 4B SST2 -> Dynaudio Contour S1.4 -
That has to be wrong. If your are right, I'm about to invent the greatest improvement in CD players ever. I call it "interpolation" or for marketing purposes "connect the dots"...
apparently you dont understand my post or how digital music works because it already is a "connect the dots" -
yepimonfire wrote: »in reality if you could look the sine wave of a recording and freeze it and view only 1/44100th of a second, you would see the wave is making sharp square transitions, where as vinyl makes perfect curved ones.
This isn't how digital playback works. A digital recording is a set of samples that get converted into an analog signal with the use of a DAC (this required for digital playback) and the output is a continuous wave. There are no stair steps or connect-the-dots going on. The original sound wave is reproduced exactly the way it looked when it was recorded. (Well, that's the goal anyway)
If your explanation was correct, (it's not) then you are implying that your speaker cones do not move in a continuous fashion. They would jump from point to point. This simply is not possible for a variety of reasons.
Sorry if I was a bit harsh, but I'm becoming impatient with common misunderstandings about the digital domain that so many people seem to have. Vinyl (analog) may sound better to you for various reasons but I assure you it is not more analog that digital when either is being played back. The sound wave your speakers create, whether the source be analog or digital, is purely analog.
Edit: I know 90% of people here hate this website - but they do a good job of explaining why digital audio isn't discontinuous, stair-stepped, or connect-the-dots: http://www.audioholics.com/education/audio-formats-technology/exploring-digital-audio-myths-and-reality-part-1 -
yepimonfire wrote: »honestly CDs dont sound that bad, 44.1khz will give you a 0hz-22khz response, theres no reason to increase sampling rate, now bit depth, of course. this was the original complaint of vinylphiles is the music was not as "smooth" the bit depth has alot to do with how much accuracy you have, its just like pixels, the more the better. in reality if you could look the sine wave of a recording and freeze it and view only 1/44100th of a second, you would see the wave is making sharp square transitions, where as vinyl makes perfect curved ones.
SACD/DSD is 1 bit with a sampling rate of 2.82 MHz. It's the sampling rate that makes it sound better.Political Correctness'.........defined
"A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a t-u-r-d by the clean end."
President of Club Polk -
This isn't how digital playback works. A digital recording is a set of samples that get converted into an analog signal with the use of a DAC (this required for digital playback) and the output is a continuous wave. There are no stair steps or connect-the-dots going on. The original sound wave is reproduced exactly the way it looked when it was recorded. (Well, that's the goal anyway)
If your explanation was correct, (it's not) then you are implying that your speaker cones do not move in a continuous fashion. They would jump from point to point. This simply is not possible for a variety of reasons.
Sorry if I was a bit harsh, but I'm becoming impatient with common misunderstandings about the digital domain that so many people seem to have. Vinyl (analog) may sound better to you for various reasons but I assure you it is not more analog that digital when either is being played back. The sound wave your speakers create, whether the source be analog or digital, is purely analog.
Edit: I know 90% of people here hate this website - but they do a good job of explaining why digital audio isn't discontinuous, stair-stepped, or connect-the-dots: http://www.audioholics.com/education/audio-formats-technology/exploring-digital-audio-myths-and-reality-part-1
i understand that, i was stating why vinylphiles say it sounds better. the real reason why most people hear a difference is not because of the medium, but because sound engineers have brutally murdered and raped dynamic range.
and audioholics is full of a bunch of wanna-be know it alls, first i buy sony speakers, they destroy my rep and name call me and label me as a "certified bose consumer" then i buy a polk sub, same thing. as far as know-it-alls go, some moron tryed to convince me that the polk sub was a mid-bass woofer because it did not extend down to 20hz, when i corrected him and told him mid-bass was roughly 100-200hz, i was threatened with a ban.
