Originally Posted by Ronnie
Originally Posted by VirusKiller
Apodizing vs. non-apodizing upsampling. In my opinion, this depends very much on source material. The human hearing system evolved to be sensitive to the smallest nuances in a natural (live) acoustic. It is logical, therefore, that material recorded in a live environment, rather than unnaturally "produced" in a recording studio, stands to gain the most from apodizing.
I agree with this

Well recorded Live music and also Studio Sessions which have as little as possible Processing and Reverb going on. "Live" Session in the Studio so to speak

Adding to the above, I think the following Music types or instruments are good for identifying sound quality differences (at least to my ears)

- bare bones Female Vocals (including Opera)
- Jazz and Classical Piano
- Jazz Trumpet & Saxophone recorded in a "live" unprocessed session
- certain Classical / Orchestral pieces which explore a wide dynamic range and presentation

That's not to say that these are the Only music types that differences can be heard on, it's just that in my experience, differences are easier to detect with those types of recording

YMMV
yES yES yES, exactly I to agree with VK & Ronnie. I recall we clearly established this when the HD621 first came out. Apodizing varied depending on the music type, recording and treatment didn't necessarily make things better.

Carl and everyone thank you for all your contributions. I echo Carl's request too, has anyone out there run the 808.3 against the C15?

Best,
Jay

861v4 & v6, 800v4, 808.3, pr of 8k's, 5.5k 24/96(x3), HD621, Velo15, Modded OPPO BD83, Pioneer DVL-91combi, Technics SL-1200MK2, Musical Fidelity XLP, Kuro151FD, MIT & Kimber, 519, & Harmony 1K, member since July 2000