Zp 24/96

The lack of 24 bit support is the only thing keeping me from investing in Sonos equipment right now. I'm not some audiofile nut playing with uselessly expensive cables. I just have a decent stereo and can easily hear the difference between redbook and 24 bit material when using just a laptop and a fairly cheap USB DAC. Even my girlfriend can hear the difference.

So I'm frankly amazed at the obstinate denial of the obvious sonic benefits of 24/96 when so many customers are requesting it. How about listening to your customers instead of trying to argue with them? I've talked with several people in "Hifiklubben" - the only retailer of Sonos in Scandinavia and they say that more and more people come in to buy Sonos, only to turn away when told it doesn't support HD material...

..... very, very small minority of users, and for a "benefit" that is questionable at best.

The fact that this thread is by far the largest in the request board with 414 replies and >58000 views (the second largest only has 160 replies and 20000 views) hardly agrees with that statement...
:rolleyes:

Hi Draken,

First, don't put your girlfriend down by saying, "Even my girlfriend can hear the difference". There's a good chance she can hear better than you. Statisical data on hearing tests would support this.

Can you provide some details on your set-up when you've done these listening tests? What is your decent stereo and what efforts went into matching levels and what degree of blindness did you have to the sources? What was the redbook and 24 bit material and were they from the same masters?

I'm really interested in these details. Please provide/expound if possible.

The fact that this thread is by far the largest in the request board with 414 replies and >58000 views (the second largest only has 160 replies and 20000 views) hardly agrees with that statement...
:rolleyes:

Just because the topic has been debated the most (most replies) don't conclude that hires would be anywhere near the top of the list among all Sonos users for feature upgrades.

I personally would like to see support for it but would not put it at the top. Probably would not make my Top 10 list.

Hi Draken,

First, don't put your girlfriend down by saying, "Even my girlfriend can hear the difference". There's a good chance she can hear better than you. Statisical data on hearing tests would support this.
.

I'm not putting her down. It's generally accepted that girls aren't really interested in hifi or sound quality. Whether they have better hearing or not isn't relevant. They are just interested in other things.


Can you provide some details on your set-up when you've done these listening tests? What is your decent stereo and what efforts went into matching levels and what degree of blindness did you have to the sources? What was the redbook and 24 bit material and were they from the same masters?
.

Like I wrote in my previous message, it isn't up to the customers to argue and "prove" that a feature they request are valuable or not. If a large number of people request a feature, the manufacturer would be wise to listen or else lose their customers.

I'm not going to waste time being baited into a discussion over why I find something valuable. Suffice to say, I and *a lot* of other people like how 24 bit source material sounds and we are requesting it's support.

The fact that this thread is by far the largest in the request board with 414 replies and >58000 views (the second largest only has 160 replies and 20000 views) hardly agrees with that statement...
:rolleyes:

There is a difference between a vocal minority and a majority. The reason this thread has gone on so long is because there is a very loud and active fanbase for hi-rez. Loud and active in no way correlates to actual numbers or market penetration, nor should it.

obvious sonic benefits of 24/96
Sorry, not meaning to draw you out but when someone states it as you have, I'm genuinely interested in how they came to that conclusion. In my eyes, when the test involves blind ABX with levels matched, some level of credibility is reached. Until this is done, well you know, talk is cheap.:)

There is a difference between a vocal minority and a majority. The reason this thread has gone on so long is because there is a very loud and active fanbase for hi-rez. Loud and active in no way correlates to actual numbers or market penetration, nor should it.
I can confirm this. Do not care much about 24/96 support, but i am an active follower of this subject, because of the interesting arguments of the contributors.

I think of the lack of support of 24/96 the same way i think of the lack of ability to play CD's or vinyl records with Sonos. If I do want to listen to it using my Sonos equipment, I have to convert the source to something Sonos likes.

Sorry, not meaning to draw you out but when someone states it as you have, I'm genuinely interested in how they came to that conclusion. In my eyes, when the test involves blind ABX with levels matched, some level of credibility is reached. Until this is done, well you know, talk is cheap.:)

Agreed.

Personally, I cannot take anyone who claims the sonic benefits of hires are "obvious" seriously. That is simply not the case.

I'm still open minded about whether the differences are audible at all, or not but to claim they are "obvious" is simply incorrect. Even most hardened audiophiles will agree the differences are subtle and that you may require prolonged listening in a familiar environment (such as your own home) with familiar source material to detect the nuances.

If the differences were "obvious", they would have been proven beyond doubt by now in the many blind-listening studies that have been conducted. These studies have all been inconclusive (meaning statistically, no significant audio differences were detected by the study group).

And to those who think the the people on these forums who are sceptical of the benefits of hires are doing so only because we are defending Sonos, let me direct you to the following thread, on the Slimdevices forums, where despite having it as a capability on their platform, many of the regulars (at least one of whom is a professional studio Engineer) consider hires to be of dubious value.

http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=88056

Cheers,

Keith

Sorry, not meaning to draw you out but when someone states it as you have, I'm genuinely interested in how they came to that conclusion. In my eyes, when the test involves blind ABX with levels matched, some level of credibility is reached. Until this is done, well you know, talk is cheap.:)

As I explained thoroughly in another post in this thread - Blind ABX tests with human senses is simply bad science.

It is a proven fact that the human mind is incapable of comparing subtle differences in any of our senses. We just are not very good at using our senses to compare objects because we have to use our memory.

Blind tests, while good in some instances, are not necessarily a good indicator for subtle differences. The brain introduces bias, even in a blind test, add to it fatigue and nerve memory - and you've got a recipe for bad science.

A good example of this is comparing the heat within two buckets of water. One bucket is 82-degrees while the other is 86-degrees. I ask you to stick your hand in one of the buckets for 30 seconds. Then dry off and put it in the other. Do you think that you could determine which was hotter 100% of the time? More than likely, the answer is no. Our bodies and minds are simply not built for that type of comparison.

Our sight is the only sense that can reliably compare objects and that is through direct visual comparison. This is because it is the only type of testing that removes the element of memory. All other forms of sensory comparison, including non-direct visual comparison (objects with spacing between them), depend on a person's highly unreliable memory for sensory impressions. The more testing performed, the more the characteristics of the stimuli blur within the human mind.

When it comes to audible differences the brain's ability to remember sound is very poor. Probably among the worst of the senses. We can remember the overall sound, but humans tend to translate sound to feeling rather than remember the actual sonic profile.

If you want a truly scientific study rather than psuedo-science that is bound to prove the null hypothesis then I would set up a test that monitors brain activity and overall body reaction (blood pressure, breathing pattern, oxygen levels) of a listener when exposed to extensive listening of compressed vs non-compressed vs high resolution - both from a double blind and a non-blind test. I would be interested to see how the brain/body system reacts. *THAT* is pure science without the statistical variance imbued by the unreliability of human sensory memory.