restorer-john
Grand Contributor
A 13th order passive Chebyshev filter with ferrite core inductors is probably more damaging to the audio than allowing some imaging. Just because he wrote “the book” doesn’t really mean much. It’s not like he invented sampling theorem.
Probably more damaging? What does that mean? Probably? Having a bet each way? By all means, regale us with your evidence. I have plenty of 1st generation CD players which offer spectacular HF performance with 90dB brick wall filters and nobody who has heard them A/Bd with equally well designed modern players or standalone D/A converters can perceive any difference on 16/44 (obviously).
And, as for Heitaro Nakajima (R.I.P.) "not meaning much", that just goes to show how phenomenally ignorant and utterly disrespectful some people can be. Japan recognized him with their highest civilian honour for his achievements in digital pioneering/recording and the invention of the Compact Disc (among other things). Go do some research, read some actual books, study the achievements and come back.
The reason we have lazy 24kHz filters is because of lazy implementations using D/As and digital filters primarily designed for AVRs and the 48kHz bitstream of PCM they mostly deal with. But 2ch audio is mostly delivered at 16/44.1.
It is very clear to me that given that 99.9% of all DACs have filters allowing some images through, there is no real issue here. The few products that do it correctly aren’t even universally preferred among subjectivists.
99.9% huh? Where did that statistic come from? I know the answer.
And the universal preference of subjectivists thrown in as well?