http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/06/olive-and-thiel-team-up-for-a-high-end-high-priced-audio-server/ Engadget Comments for Olive and Thiel team up for a high end, high priced audio server http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/06/olive-and-thiel-team-up-for-a-high-end-high-priced-audio-server/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/06/olive-and-thiel-team-up-for-a-high-end-high-priced-audio-server/Jan 6th 2010 5:09AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/06/olive-and-thiel-team-up-for-a-high-end-high-priced-audio-server/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/06/olive-and-thiel-team-up-for-a-high-end-high-priced-audio-server/Jan 6th 2010 6:32AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/06/olive-and-thiel-team-up-for-a-high-end-high-priced-audio-server/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/06/olive-and-thiel-team-up-for-a-high-end-high-priced-audio-server/I'm one of the chief designers of the IP enabling and audio processing components of this product and wanted to note that when the source media is not 192kHz native, there is a high end sample rate converter that upconverts the audio to 192kHz. So in other words, if your source is a ripped CD - 16 bit 44.1kHz, then the system will upsample this to 192kHz (lowering the noise floor a bit and increasing the fidelity to 24 bits) - then we transmit this losslessly through your existing Ethernet network (home, office or connected directly to the switch on the back of the system).]]>Jan 6th 2010 6:50AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/06/olive-and-thiel-team-up-for-a-high-end-high-priced-audio-server/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/06/olive-and-thiel-team-up-for-a-high-end-high-priced-audio-server/
Plus, for example, I could make 24/192 recordings of my LPs and upload them to the server.

And by they way ignore the "it's too expensive" comments. Engadget readers are mostly a tin-eared lot, content knowing that the Logitech Z-2300 / Creative X-Fi is the ultimate in sound reproduction, bless their little hearts.]]>Jan 6th 2010 7:02AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/06/olive-and-thiel-team-up-for-a-high-end-high-priced-audio-server/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/06/olive-and-thiel-team-up-for-a-high-end-high-priced-audio-server/"increasing the fidelity to 24 bits"
I'm not sure, but it looks like you're implying that such upconverting would improve the sound quality.. which would only make sense if you're either trolling or selling stuff to audiophiles. ;)
But let me just explain something, for those who are not so familiar with audio technology: you can't improve the CD quality sound by "up-converting" it to 24bit and 192kHz.

In fact 192kHz is pretty much useless for the end listener altogether. Not only because humans can't hear such high frequencies, but also because there's virtually no music being made with such frequencies and because virtually no speakers or audio equipment in general can reproduce them.
192kHz potentially makes sense for audio production (when using effects during mixing/mastering) but that's it.]]>Jan 6th 2010 7:14AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/06/olive-and-thiel-team-up-for-a-high-end-high-priced-audio-server/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/06/olive-and-thiel-team-up-for-a-high-end-high-priced-audio-server/
Well, yeah, that's pretty much what I was pointing out.
People at television studios master video with HDCAM SR @ 440 Mbps, but they don't sell it or broadcast it that way, do they?

And isn't "upconverting" just making the edges sharper, so to speak? I don't see how any detail would be added.

But then, I am no audio engineer. Just my two cents.]]>Jan 6th 2010 8:41AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/06/olive-and-thiel-team-up-for-a-high-end-high-priced-audio-server/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/06/olive-and-thiel-team-up-for-a-high-end-high-priced-audio-server/
The guy is half right. You can improve fidelity by lowering the noise floor. a 16-bit resolution has 65,536 possible amplitude values per sample, yielding approximately 96.7dB dynamic range. A 24-bit resolution opens it up to 16.78 million amplitude values per quantization interval/sample. This radically increases the dynamic range to 140dB, effectively decreasing the noise floor. This is true.

However, it's also true that the signal quality of the source itself cannot be improved. Garbage in, garbage out. If the noise was captured in the recording itself, and not merely the result of artifaction from signal reconstruction (e.g. frequency aliasing, roll-off, etc.), the noise is going to get reproduced.

I'm as anti-audiophile as they come, but the guy is half-right... even if only accidentally.]]>Jan 6th 2010 10:40AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/06/olive-and-thiel-team-up-for-a-high-end-high-priced-audio-server/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/06/olive-and-thiel-team-up-for-a-high-end-high-priced-audio-server/
wow! - do you really think that because something is sampled at 192 khz that the signal it carries must also be at 192 khz.

furthermore, everyone should take a look at a 20KHz sin wave sampled at 44khz to get some idea of the possible benefits of upsampling.

the gaps between the samples are always going to be filled in - they might as well be filled in intelligently by a known algorithm.

whether or not you can hear a difference is another story - you can certainly see it the difference with real musical content on a oscilloscope.]]>Jan 6th 2010 10:43AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/06/olive-and-thiel-team-up-for-a-high-end-high-priced-audio-server/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/06/olive-and-thiel-team-up-for-a-high-end-high-priced-audio-server/
You didn't read what I wrote. I know perfectly well that 24bit audio [from 24bit or higher source] has its benefits. But 24bit audio made from 16bit audio sounds exactly like 16bit audio. The guy I was replying to seems to imply that it's not so, that you can benefit by converting 16bit audio to 24bit.]]>Jan 6th 2010 11:13AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/06/olive-and-thiel-team-up-for-a-high-end-high-priced-audio-server/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/06/olive-and-thiel-team-up-for-a-high-end-high-priced-audio-server/
OK, upsampling can have its benefits in theory. But eventually it's all just a DAC process, which should include specific components to work properly and some form of "intelligent upsampling" is just an optional part of it, which can lead to a better sound IF implemented properly. What got me started was more the fact that they pack it with "up-bitting" to 24bit, which can't have any benefits even in theory.

FWIW tho, I'm still willing to bet with anyone that they won't hear the benefits of upsampling. At least not without a mastering studio environment and unless they can hear frequencies above, let's say, 18kHz (which excludes most adults).]]>Jan 6th 2010 11:28AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/06/olive-and-thiel-team-up-for-a-high-end-high-priced-audio-server/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/06/olive-and-thiel-team-up-for-a-high-end-high-priced-audio-server/
Hi just chiming in again after reading the feedback on my initial reply.
I think Rubin nailed it, garbage in garbage out. A great quality 16-bit recording will audibly outperform a decent 24-bit recording.

As far as upsampling you really need to hear to believe because I also used to think there wouldn't be a perceivable quality difference, however when we did an A/B listening test it was clearly superior when upsampled. There was more presence a larger soundstange, and the simple explanation for this the reduced noise floor.
If you are at CES, stop by the Venetian in the High Performance Audio Area, we're in room 2601 and we can show you the difference.
]]>Jan 7th 2010 12:26PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/06/olive-and-thiel-team-up-for-a-high-end-high-priced-audio-server/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/06/olive-and-thiel-team-up-for-a-high-end-high-priced-audio-server/Jan 6th 2010 5:11AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/06/olive-and-thiel-team-up-for-a-high-end-high-priced-audio-server/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/06/olive-and-thiel-team-up-for-a-high-end-high-priced-audio-server/Jan 6th 2010 5:17AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/06/olive-and-thiel-team-up-for-a-high-end-high-priced-audio-server/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/06/olive-and-thiel-team-up-for-a-high-end-high-priced-audio-server/Jan 6th 2010 5:18AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/06/olive-and-thiel-team-up-for-a-high-end-high-priced-audio-server/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/06/olive-and-thiel-team-up-for-a-high-end-high-priced-audio-server/Jan 6th 2010 5:28AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/06/olive-and-thiel-team-up-for-a-high-end-high-priced-audio-server/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/06/olive-and-thiel-team-up-for-a-high-end-high-priced-audio-server/
......And my current system freaking ROCKS!!]]>Jan 6th 2010 6:09AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/06/olive-and-thiel-team-up-for-a-high-end-high-priced-audio-server/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/06/olive-and-thiel-team-up-for-a-high-end-high-priced-audio-server/
and that could buy my current system 50 times, ... and my system rules (a couple of Polar Bear speakers :-P )
]]>Jan 6th 2010 6:33AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/06/olive-and-thiel-team-up-for-a-high-end-high-priced-audio-server/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/06/olive-and-thiel-team-up-for-a-high-end-high-priced-audio-server/Jan 6th 2010 8:19AM