That confirms it, Justin, and thank you for reminding me why I hate that place.

Edited January 5, 201412 yr by roadtonowhere08

[WARNING]

There's a new product coming: http://www.stereophile.com/content/light-harmonic-sire-dac

 

[/WARNING]

Edited January 8, 201412 yr by blessingx

Hey I wonder where they got the money to make this new DAC....

They're only making 24 a year

i know it takes me a long time to build products that DO already exist, but maybe selling products i haven't even started to design yet is the future

"32/768 PCM and DSD 256"

 

we're up to 32/768 now? and i guess 'regular' DSD isn't enough anymore? 

I'd like to apologize up front to any non-fucktard chin beards out there, but this picture just doesn't inspire a ton of confidence for me.

 

Edited January 9, 201412 yr by blessingx

"Hands deployed. Please position ass in order to begin reaming."

He has a EE and worked for MIT Cables. Seems legit. He at least knows how to put magic into a box and charge a lot for it. Hmmm so did some of the other members of LH....

 

Experience selling BS in a box. 

i'll sell the BHSE for $120k each, and i'd like to announce i will ONLY make 24 per year, so get in line now. Also, i will include a femto clock

I'd like to apologize up front to any non-fucktard chin beards out there, but this picture just doesn't inspire a ton of confidence for me.

 

 

I was thinking the exact same thing.  Look at that smug fucker.  He knows there are 24 dumb bastards out there.

do they only work 24 days a year or something?

^ since there are more than 1 of them, I would think the goal would be to build all 24 in one day; 364 days vacation. What's not to like?

^ since there are more than 1 of them, I would think the goal would be to build all 24 in one day; 364 days vacation. What's not to like?

 

You mean 364 days to work their shill network

"32/768 PCM and DSD 256"

 

we're up to 32/768 now? and i guess 'regular' DSD isn't enough anymore? 

32/768 has existed in the professional world for a while now, albeit only at the top end when I was still reading about it regularly (over a year ago).

32/768 has existed in the professional world for a while now, albeit only at the top end when I was still reading about it regularly (over a year ago).

 

I have never read anything credible that sways me into believing anything more than 24/192 for playaback is even worth pursuing.  I can get behind 32 bit for mixing and whatnot, but 768kHz sampling?  People rave about LP realism, but at 32/768, that's like 3-4 times the resolution of even the best pressed LPs.  Please do not confuse me for a "640k is enough for most people" person (I am definitely not), but that strikes me as recording for greater wax moths rather than humans.  Any merit to this practice, Dusty, or is it tech gamesmanship?

I have never read anything credible that sways me into believing anything more than 24/192 for playaback is even worth pursuing.  I can get behind 32 bit for mixing and whatnot, but 768kHz sampling?  People rave about LP realism, but at 32/768, that's like 3-4 times the resolution of even the best pressed LPs.  Please do not confuse me for a "640k is enough for most people" person (I am definitely not), but that strikes me as recording for greater wax moths rather than humans.  Any merit to this practice, Dusty, or is it tech gamesmanship?

How does that math work? 44k captures all information in the realm of human hearing (22khz).  44x4 = 176.  768 is closer to 20x.  

 

There's no merit to 192, let alone 768.  Especially for playback.

How does that math work? 44k captures all information in the realm of human hearing (22khz).  44x4 = 176.  768 is closer to 20x.  

 

There's no merit to 192, let alone 768.  Especially for playback.

 

I was referring to whatever the general consensus of the resolution of the analog information within the LP grooves were if it was put into PCM terms.  I have heard that it is somewhere between a 96kHz and 192kHz sampling rate (but probably lower than a 16 bit depth), but I have not really devoted the time to explore it further.  Going with that (perhaps erroneous assumption), I posted the above.  Looks like more than 4x the resolution, but I digress.

 

I think my setup is good, but there are no room treatments to speak of, so a well recorded redbook is more than fine with me.

Edited January 9, 201412 yr by roadtonowhere08

I have never read anything credible that sways me into believing anything more than 24/192 for playaback is even worth pursuing.  I can get behind 32 bit for mixing and whatnot, but 768kHz sampling?  People rave about LP realism, but at 32/768, that's like 3-4 times the resolution of even the best pressed LPs.  Please do not confuse me for a "640k is enough for most people" person (I am definitely not), but that strikes me as recording for greater wax moths rather than humans.  Any merit to this practice, Dusty, or is it tech gamesmanship?

There's some merit to higher sampling rates (contrary to Dan's contrarianism), but yeah, they lose me somewhere around 192 also.  For playback, I don't see the point behind more than 96kHz, myself, but when mixing tracks, I understand the necessity of higher resolutions on the individual tracks as long as the mixdown software doesn't waste it -- you don't want to compound rounding errors.  I'd have to do the math (which I have no interest in doing) to see what the necessary individual frequencies would need to be to get moar betr sound at the final mixdown.

 

I personally believe it reduces to phase accuracy, but that's just a SWAG.

I was referring to whatever the general consensus of the resolution of the analog information within the LP grooves were if it was put into PCM terms.  I have heard that it is somewhere between a 96kHz and 192kHz sampling rate (but probably lower than a 16 bit depth), but I have not really devoted the time to explore it further.  Going with that (perhaps erroneous assumption), I posted the above.  Looks like more than 4x the resolution, but I digress.

 

I think my setup is good, but there are no room treatments to speak of, so a well recorded redbook is more than fine with me.

 

This was years back but somebody simulated the ideal vinyl playback setup and figured out that it was the equivalent of 14bits.  Sampling rate was something close to 80kHz if my memory doesn't fail me.  This is naturally never going to happen in real life as the records wear, so do the pickups, the tables are never 100% accurate, the RIAA eq never 100% correct etc. 

Which fits nicely with the common perception that somewhere between 24/96 and 24/192 is where digital "works" . if you postulate that vinyl was evolved until it "worked", it makes a lot of sense.

I tend to hold the notion that the same principle applies in photography. 35mm film was accepted because it was the minimum thing that generally "worked". so then you have the very fuzzy task of deciding at what point digital "works". Which certainly wasn't made any easier by the low sighted who claimed that 2MP was all the resolution that the human eye/brain could perceive and what not. It's very sad now to look at photos from that era. We we're a lot luckier in audio because a lot of the mess that was early digital was in the playback, so music from that period turned out to be just degraded, rather than lost altogether.

http://www.stereophile.com/content/light-harmonic-sire-dac

I came here for the discussion and it was worth it.  

I have no idea, what anyone can put in there that will cost 120k or even make it an improvement over the best from Dcs And MSB.

the clock actually goes back in time 88 femtoseconds.

 

 

*refrains from making jitter joke*

Edited January 9, 201412 yr by aardvark baguette

http://www.stereophile.com/content/light-harmonic-sire-dac

I came here for the discussion and it was worth it.  

I have no idea, what anyone can put in there that will cost 120k or even make it an improvement over the best from Dcs And MSB.

coconuts and crystals