Zp 24/96
A
Ability to play 24bit/96 files (like the competition: slimdevices transporter)
This topic has been closed for further comments. You can use the search bar to find a similar topic, or create a new one by clicking Create Topic at the top of the page.
Page 4 / 41
^ Please PM me with your Bluesound experiences. Thanks!!!
Under consideration seems more like it from the posts above. Anyway, with all the ultra-negative talk and notion that there's no chance SONOS will implement, I sold my gear and bought a Bluesound system. I bet Bluesound, which is gaining momentum, wouldn't even exist as competition if SONOS would've implemented higher bit rates.
This will be my last post (notifications off). Thanks for all those who added constructive feedback!
This will be my last post (notifications off). Thanks for all those who added constructive feedback!
Userlevel 1
Jesus, get over yourself mate, he said they're looking at it, he didn't say they would do it, he didn't even say they COULD do it, there's a lot of technical obstacles to overcome in order to implement it whilst still maintaining basic functionality, such as volume control.
What the status of the 24-bit requests over on ask.sonos.com? Not Planned or Under Consideration?
What the status of the 24-bit requests over on ask.sonos.com? Not Planned or Under Consideration?
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/sep/03/sonos-drops-price-music-systems-high-resolution-wireless-mp3
I quote from the guardian:
As part of Sonos’s pursuit of music streaming, it has recently been looking at high resolution 24-bit music; the kind that Neil Young’s Pono Player and Linn records have been pushing about recently.
“It’s a big technical challenge for us, but it’s one we’ve definitely been working on,” explained Spence. “We’re looking at overcoming the limitations of streaming 24-bit in the home, as there seems to be a lot of momentum around it at the moment, so stay tuned.”
Hi-res audio files, also known as studio master tracks, are much larger than the highly compressed MP3 and AAC files commonly streamed and downloaded from Spotify, iTunes, Google Play and Amazon. Albums of studio master tracks can take up between 2GB and 5GB of space, while MP3s typically take up 5MB per track.
The increased file size and subsequent data rate required to stream hi-res music over a Wi-Fi network causes issues for bandwidth and technology.
But Spence is positive about Young’s moves. “Anything anyone’s doing to help bring high quality music listening back is a great thing,” he said.
I quote from the guardian:
As part of Sonos’s pursuit of music streaming, it has recently been looking at high resolution 24-bit music; the kind that Neil Young’s Pono Player and Linn records have been pushing about recently.
“It’s a big technical challenge for us, but it’s one we’ve definitely been working on,” explained Spence. “We’re looking at overcoming the limitations of streaming 24-bit in the home, as there seems to be a lot of momentum around it at the moment, so stay tuned.”
Hi-res audio files, also known as studio master tracks, are much larger than the highly compressed MP3 and AAC files commonly streamed and downloaded from Spotify, iTunes, Google Play and Amazon. Albums of studio master tracks can take up between 2GB and 5GB of space, while MP3s typically take up 5MB per track.
The increased file size and subsequent data rate required to stream hi-res music over a Wi-Fi network causes issues for bandwidth and technology.
But Spence is positive about Young’s moves. “Anything anyone’s doing to help bring high quality music listening back is a great thing,” he said.
And more relevant to me is the fact that I can't hear any differences once mastering variations are taken away.
I can hear differences caused by speaker upgrades, placement or room changes.
Given the above, there is no reason why I would spend money on either the content or the equipment needed to play it. Or give up more relevant features available in the Sonos platform in that pursuit.
People that think different aren't wrong, but they aren't the Sonos target market at this time. And Sonos seems to be doing fine so far without them.
If that changes, Sonos will adapt - which is fine by me as long as I am not affected. Given the evident care that Sonos takes with the installed user base, I don't worry about that happening.
HiRes is very handy in the studio because it reduces the likelyhood of recorder noise and overload issues and minimizes computational difficulties while the music is processed during production. I have no issues with those who have the resources and record at 384/32. And, I'm sure that the audiophile community will drop 192/24 into the quaint history bin as they discover that 384/32 is available.
But, is it really necessary to render beyond 44.1/16 as we distribute to the livingroom?
If HiRes (higher than 44.1/16) in the livingroom is as superior as many very vocal advocates claim, it should be very easy to design a well controlled study and prove the point. I have an open mind and can accept good science. So far, no one has been able prove that we need to go beyond 44.1/16.
And it is possible that some really good science will show that small children and teens might benefit from HiRes, but older folk cannot. This would be awkward because the very young probably don't have the HiRes passion and cannot afford to purchase the required playback systems that could take advantage of HiRes. But, this would not be the first time that we will discover that mother nature is not fair.
But, is it really necessary to render beyond 44.1/16 as we distribute to the livingroom?
If HiRes (higher than 44.1/16) in the livingroom is as superior as many very vocal advocates claim, it should be very easy to design a well controlled study and prove the point. I have an open mind and can accept good science. So far, no one has been able prove that we need to go beyond 44.1/16.
And it is possible that some really good science will show that small children and teens might benefit from HiRes, but older folk cannot. This would be awkward because the very young probably don't have the HiRes passion and cannot afford to purchase the required playback systems that could take advantage of HiRes. But, this would not be the first time that we will discover that mother nature is not fair.
Great minds questioned the status quo, and then proved their hypothesis by conducting carefully controlled experiments which showed their hypothesis to be true. Which is all we are asking.
Some light reading for you. The theorem without which digital audio wouldn't exist goes way back to 1933. Physics hasn't changed since then. 😉
The "great minds" of audio are mostly gone now (Peter Walker & Edgar Villchur among the most prominent). Today's great engineers aren't much interested in solved problems.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyquist%E2%80%93Shannon_sampling_theorem
+8
I didn't realize that knowledge was static..Last I checked we have made progress in all manner of disciplines because great minds questioned the status quo..Maybe you should change your handle here to Saint Bellarmine LOL...:rolleyes:
I think this is the response given every time us "closed minds" types are confronted by the "open minds" who consistently deny/ignore proven facts like the placebo effect, human physiology, mathmetical theory, and audio physics. Yet they keep posing the same question.
I think this is the response given every time us "closed minds" types are confronted by the "open minds" who consistently deny/ignore proven facts like the placebo effect, human physiology, mathmetical theory, and audio physics. Yet they keep posing the same question.
+8
Thanks NoBob, that's certainly a reasonable response..
Lets for the sake of discussion take the mastering or mixing out of the equation.. I think it's a given that a well produced, recorded, mixed and mastered album at 16/44 will sound better than a poorly done recording presented in a HiRes format.
So all things being equal what would it take to personally convince you (or others) that HiRes sounds better..
I would settle for a test that definitively refutes the results of the '16/44 bottleneck' paper. To me, that bottleneck is the most damning of all, because the test uses the same source, so mastering differences are not a factor.
I have no doubt that an up close recording of an Apollo spacecraft launch would benefit from the greater dynamic range afforded by 24 bits. I'd need a lot more power and bigger speakers, but wouldn't risk the damage to my eardrums.
If I were still 18, I might notice some minor benefit of the > 22khz captured range of hi-rez, but doubt it. At 60, I'm absolutely certain I won't hear a difference.
Understanding the science behind digital audio is hardly being closed minded; just the opposite, rather.
Listening to the marketing of "high end" audio makers and their proxies in the audiophile press, while ignoring the facts, is.
If I were still 18, I might notice some minor benefit of the > 22khz captured range of hi-rez, but doubt it. At 60, I'm absolutely certain I won't hear a difference.
Understanding the science behind digital audio is hardly being closed minded; just the opposite, rather.
Listening to the marketing of "high end" audio makers and their proxies in the audiophile press, while ignoring the facts, is.
+8
@chicks
Putting aside your snarky comments, and staying objective let me pose a question:
What circumstances or tests or whatever would convince you or others that HiRes files can sound better than 16/44?
Lets for the sake of discussion take the mastering or mixing out of the equation.. I think it's a given that a well produced, recorded, mixed and mastered album at 16/44 will sound better than a poorly done recording presented in a HiRes format.
So all things being equal what would it take to personally convince you (or others) that HiRes sounds better..
And if ones answer to this simple question is "There is nothing that can convince me, my mind is totally closed to even the possibility, because my rigorous training and experience says it can't, and I won't even consider the possibility" Than please don't bother answering.
Putting aside your snarky comments, and staying objective let me pose a question:
What circumstances or tests or whatever would convince you or others that HiRes files can sound better than 16/44?
Lets for the sake of discussion take the mastering or mixing out of the equation.. I think it's a given that a well produced, recorded, mixed and mastered album at 16/44 will sound better than a poorly done recording presented in a HiRes format.
So all things being equal what would it take to personally convince you (or others) that HiRes sounds better..
And if ones answer to this simple question is "There is nothing that can convince me, my mind is totally closed to even the possibility, because my rigorous training and experience says it can't, and I won't even consider the possibility" Than please don't bother answering.
http://www.audiocheck.net/blindtests_16vs8bit_NeilYoung.php
I scored 6 out of 10, using studio quality headphones through a premium soundcard. I challenge any else to truthfully post their results.
In any case if you're still around, the new-ish Bluesound system will do Hi Res.. It's very stable, and has gotten great reviews. http://www.bluesound.com
@schalliol since you say you are already using a Squeezebox you could easily upgrade your system with this: https://sites.google.com/site/picoreplayer/home
Minimal investment of a pi+hifiberry.
Here's a blind test for the true believers. Neil Young in 16-bit vs 8-bit. So much of today's pop music is so severly dynamic range limited, that 8 bits are sufficient to capture it all.
http://www.audiocheck.net/blindtests_16vs8bit_NeilYoung.php
http://www.audiocheck.net/blindtests_16vs8bit_NeilYoung.php
I'll assume you haven't read the Meridian paper, as it's behind a paywall at the AES, but have only read the biased opinion of its conclusions on a "hi-rez" touting website.
Monty Montgomery mentions Bob Stewart's earlier work in his superb white paper, along with this observation:
"Coding High Quality Digital Audio by Bob Stuart of Meridian Audio is beautifully concise despite its greater length. Our conclusions differ somewhat (he takes as given the need for a slightly wider frequency range and bit depth without much justification), but the presentation is clear and easy to follow."
https://xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html#toc_more
Monty Montgomery mentions Bob Stewart's earlier work in his superb white paper, along with this observation:
"Coding High Quality Digital Audio by Bob Stuart of Meridian Audio is beautifully concise despite its greater length. Our conclusions differ somewhat (he takes as given the need for a slightly wider frequency range and bit depth without much justification), but the presentation is clear and easy to follow."
https://xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html#toc_more
+8
Dear @ schalliol.
First off let me apologize for the (expletive) that seem to know all, or at least want to act as if they do, and like to brow beat anyone who doesn't agree with them, frankly it's a bit sad.
I don't think a new possible Sonos owner needs to be called a:
Whiner "You can complain about it like all the other whiners"
Or a Fool "Not for the audiophools, certainly"
Or a time waster "For us, this is non productive waste of time."
In any case if you're still around, the new-ish Bluesound system will do Hi Res.. It's very stable, and has gotten great reviews. http://www.bluesound.com
And again let me apologize for those here that for whatever reason believe that they know everything, that there can be no truth other than theirs..
And maybe you engineering folks might find this paper interesting.. it certainly meets all of your scientific requirements:
http://hiresaudiocentral.com/aes-award-winning-paper-says-cd-cant-capture-it-all/
First off let me apologize for the (expletive) that seem to know all, or at least want to act as if they do, and like to brow beat anyone who doesn't agree with them, frankly it's a bit sad.
I don't think a new possible Sonos owner needs to be called a:
Whiner "You can complain about it like all the other whiners"
Or a Fool "Not for the audiophools, certainly"
Or a time waster "For us, this is non productive waste of time."
In any case if you're still around, the new-ish Bluesound system will do Hi Res.. It's very stable, and has gotten great reviews. http://www.bluesound.com
And again let me apologize for those here that for whatever reason believe that they know everything, that there can be no truth other than theirs..
And maybe you engineering folks might find this paper interesting.. it certainly meets all of your scientific requirements:
http://hiresaudiocentral.com/aes-award-winning-paper-says-cd-cant-capture-it-all/
All I did is, as others recommended, post that this support is valuable for a customer and mention how strange it is that SONOS doesn't support higher bit-rate.
I checked out the information for the product I bought and didn't see that it only supported heavily limited bitrates: http://www.sonos.com/shop/products/connect I'm sure it exists somewhere in documentation, but it sure isn't front and center.
I guess you can ignore my interest in the product as I'll move on.
Long running requests that eventually get done are never given the status of 'Not Planned' at ask.Sonos. And those 'heavily limited bitrates' are the standards for the audio industry. You might also say Sonos won't play ridiculously high bitrates that are scientifically proven to deteriorate audio fidelity upon playback.
You really don't need two libraries in this scenario. Just transcode once and delete the hires source files.
....which the science tells us cater for the entire range of human hearing. I've always been fond of my pets, but not enough to buy them specialist audio equipment.
I'm not sure why you keep going to a thread you've written off. You do know you don't have to read every post on every thread, right? Calling people fools doesn't seem particularly friendly. You guys sure make it sound like SONOS will never change, but sure enough they changed the wireless communications capabilities, which I bet was a long-running request.
All I did is, as others recommended, post that this support is valuable for a customer and mention how strange it is that SONOS doesn't support higher bit-rate.
I checked out the information for the product I bought and didn't see that it only supported heavily limited bitrates: http://www.sonos.com/shop/products/connect I'm sure it exists somewhere in documentation, but it sure isn't front and center.
I guess you can ignore my interest in the product as I'll move on.
All I did is, as others recommended, post that this support is valuable for a customer and mention how strange it is that SONOS doesn't support higher bit-rate.
I checked out the information for the product I bought and didn't see that it only supported heavily limited bitrates: http://www.sonos.com/shop/products/connect I'm sure it exists somewhere in documentation, but it sure isn't front and center.
I guess you can ignore my interest in the product as I'll move on.
Not true. But the regulars are fed up of this subject, having said all there is to be said on it,endlessly on just this one thread. Perhaps you ought to have spend time reading it fully first.
For us, this is non productive waste of time.
Apparently not for people who like friendly productive forum communities either…
Page 4 / 41
Enter your username or e-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.