Converting file to higher resolution

[mjock3]

I just converted a 16/44 to a 24/96 and it seems to have a fuller bass, and the female vocalists voice is less shrill and seems to be more detailed. Can anyone explain why this would be? :confused:

[bhoar]

Re: Converting file to higher resolution

I just converted a 16/44 to a 24/96 and it seems to have a fuller bass, and the female vocalists voice is less shrill and seems to be more detailed. Can anyone explain why this would be? :confused:

You need to perform a blind test, preferably an ABX test, in order to work around psychological factors that may predetermine the test outcome above.

See:

http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=Blind_test

and

http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=ABX

[mjock3]

Re: Converting file to higher resolution

Went and did blind test and it was identifiable everytime. Both by me as well as by my wife. Interesting.

[mjock3]

Re: Converting file to higher resolution

Update on this post. I had an audiophile friend over and he too heard the difference immediately. How ever when he went home and tried to do what I did with a file (not sure if it was the same file or not) he heard no difference at home. Hum, I am going to have to try this on a couple more files.

[garym]

Re: Converting file to higher resolution

if you and your wife are hearing a clear difference, something *must* be different other than the file (or you have the ability to do something that hundreds of serious users in controlled tests have not been able to do!). There are often slight, almost unnoticeable volume differences that can make the louder track sound "better". Are these FLAC files? Do they have ReplayGain information added? If so, is the player using the RG info in both playback situations. And you should install foobar2000 and the ABX component to do a true double-blind ABX test of the two files (this will also control your volume correctly, if this is the issue).

[Porcus]

Re: Converting file to higher resolution

Assuming that there are actual differences (i.e. that you didn't skrewup the 'blind' in the 'blind test'), then a couple of educated guesses:

- volume, as suggested. The software might play them back at different volumes. Have you tried foobar2000's ABX test component? It aligns volume. If you can hear differences with other software but not with that, it could be volume. (But: if you still hear differences, it could still be volume -- the OS might process 44.1 different from 96).

- (is there replaygain?)

- your soundcard converts to 48 kHz, and the way it converts 44.1 to 48 is bad. Test: convert 16/44.1 to 16/48 and listen for differences. If 16/48 sounds like 24/96, then this is a possible explanation.

Actually I would suggest that you also try converting 16/96 and 24/44.1 in order to find out whether it is upsampling or word rate that makes the difference.

[DIDI]

Re: Converting file to higher resolution

I upsample from FLAC 24/96 to WAV 32/192 and got a lot of improvement in sound quality, also with FLAC 16/44. But I am not able to convert FLAC 24/88 to WAV 32/192, and on also no possibility to convert from 88 to 176. only to 192. Is there any technical problem that make conversion to 176 impossible? Files was downloaded from HDTracks.