On Sat, 2011-10-08 at 11:57 +0200, CC wrote: > > > > > > I'm curious -- do you notice a perceivable difference between the two? > > > I haven't built the system yet. I'd like to set it up correctly the first > time. > > I would assume to not notice a difference right away. I imagine it similar > to getting used to MP3 compression: at first, you don't notice anything > weird with 128kbps, then you learn to recognize the artifacts, then you hate > them. Or pictures that are blurry because they were resized and not > postprocessed. I guess generically the best resampling filter is a windowed > sinc filter, and I know that they are noticeable in image processing. I > don't know yet if it's noticeable in audio, though. I have always thought that it works the other way around - if you're used to CD quality, you'll easily get annoyed by 128 kbps MP3 files, but over time you'll get used to it and don't notice it anymore. I think there was even a study that found out that young people who have been listening mostly to the poor quality MP3 files for their whole life, actually don't like better quality audio - they complain that it's missing the artifacts that they have been used to. I believe the best way to find out whether you can tell any difference between resampled and non-resampled is to make a setup where you can quickly switch between them and try to hear the difference. For more reliable results, do it with a friend so that only he knows which mode is being selected. (Or turn it into science and do double blind testing...) -- Tanu
