- Thread Starter
- #21
Grooved, the most convincing argument in your favor is my appreciation of your much greater experience and your network of like-minded a-philes.... because I only half-understand your example above and am still wearing noob-armor when confronted with technical facts. So you get the benefit of the doubt so long as no lightning-strike revelation proves otherwise. I mean it, because in every debate, the harder I argue, the harder I am trying to lose, because losing is the only way to learn something new.
I will only point out one thing in your example that seems to be a case of each of us seeing the same fact as two, completely different things.
In your first example above, you show "device capability" at 24/192. And correct me if I'm wrong, you also seem to be saying that that fact shows that the DAC is actually running at 24/192 when playing a 48kHz track (via upsampling). However, I look at that same little table and see probable evidence that the DAC is NOT running at 24/192. I see the 24/192 as the MAXIMUM resolution that the DAC will process at native Track Quality, not as the ONLY rate it will run at .. because the table SAYS it's processing at 48. I don't see it as necessarily saying that ALL tracks will be upsampled to 192 if they're not all at that level, just that 192 kHz tracks will be processed at that native value.
But in the end, my point is not that you're necessarily wrong. At face value, I see the matched values of 24/48 for both Track Quality and Currently-Playing as Amazon's representation that the DAC is processing at the native rate of 48 while the Windows device properties limit it to 192 as a ceiling; BUT if that is NOT true, then Amazon must be somewhere on the far side of disingenuous. Interestingly, at the Amazon HD forum, I received a posting from another, jaded user who says, "I doubt you'll ever get a straight answer from Amazon or any of the moderators." I must admit that the conspiratorial tone there makes me want to believe the opposite. (When everything is a conspiracy, there are no facts left.)
(I already avoid Facebook and Google. There aren't many more places to hide.)
Anyway, that user also suggests I see if I can get my router to tell me the actual bit rate. Well, I don't think I've got that many Sundays left in my month to figure that out, so it'll probably go undone.
Final, dumb question: what exactly does the common phrase "bit-perfect" mean? Bit-perfect as opposed to what, in what context?
I will only point out one thing in your example that seems to be a case of each of us seeing the same fact as two, completely different things.
In your first example above, you show "device capability" at 24/192. And correct me if I'm wrong, you also seem to be saying that that fact shows that the DAC is actually running at 24/192 when playing a 48kHz track (via upsampling). However, I look at that same little table and see probable evidence that the DAC is NOT running at 24/192. I see the 24/192 as the MAXIMUM resolution that the DAC will process at native Track Quality, not as the ONLY rate it will run at .. because the table SAYS it's processing at 48. I don't see it as necessarily saying that ALL tracks will be upsampled to 192 if they're not all at that level, just that 192 kHz tracks will be processed at that native value.
But in the end, my point is not that you're necessarily wrong. At face value, I see the matched values of 24/48 for both Track Quality and Currently-Playing as Amazon's representation that the DAC is processing at the native rate of 48 while the Windows device properties limit it to 192 as a ceiling; BUT if that is NOT true, then Amazon must be somewhere on the far side of disingenuous. Interestingly, at the Amazon HD forum, I received a posting from another, jaded user who says, "I doubt you'll ever get a straight answer from Amazon or any of the moderators." I must admit that the conspiratorial tone there makes me want to believe the opposite. (When everything is a conspiracy, there are no facts left.)
(I already avoid Facebook and Google. There aren't many more places to hide.)
Anyway, that user also suggests I see if I can get my router to tell me the actual bit rate. Well, I don't think I've got that many Sundays left in my month to figure that out, so it'll probably go undone.
Final, dumb question: what exactly does the common phrase "bit-perfect" mean? Bit-perfect as opposed to what, in what context?
