Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › 24bit vs 16bit, the myth exploded!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

24bit vs 16bit, the myth exploded! - Page 151

post #2251 of 2263
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post
 

You're the one arguing that numbers matter, not us. Perhaps you could tell us which system is the best for mathematicians? I'm going to guess it's whatever system has the biggest numbers, regardless of whether it sounds any better or not.

 

My impression is that mathematicians like small and concise numbers, engineers like round numbers and astrophysicists like huge numbers.

 

By that reasoning a mathematicians system would be the bare minimum, implemented really elegantly, though sadly completely impractically. An engineers system would be the the required minimum, rounded up, so maybe 20bit/50kHz? And a an astrophysicist wouldn't really care, as sound can't travel in a vacuum anyway.

 

Following from this I think it is reasonable to claim that the current redbook standard was devised by a mix of engineers and mathematicians, and not astrophysicists.

post #2252 of 2263
Cool
post #2253 of 2263


i'm not alone with pono, almost all musicians and recording engineers can hear it. they might not think it's needed for the average consumer, but they can hear it. most have been tracking and mixing at 24bit for over a decade now. and when played through a proper signal chain, oh looky there, sounds better. who cares about math. you should work on sorting out mathematically why it sounds better instead of telling people who hear it in the simplest terms that they are crazy. you are flat earth types here, relying on common sense to disguise the flaws in your argument.

 

the quickness that you people dismiss people who make, record, and mix music for a living is amazing to me. they are the experts in music and emotional sound, not you, yet because they don't can't translate it to high-end physics and formulas you disregard them. do you think the people who provide enjoyable sound for you have math degrees? very few of them.

 

but we can all hear and can understand quality if it's provided to us. we all get ear fatigue and can detect digital distortions, and we can all detect spatial differences. maybe you don't care, maybe you haven't figured out how to hear it yet. but you can and whether or not you've figured out how to get your antiquated formulas rewritten in enough time for anyone to care, we shall see.

post #2254 of 2263

I can get on board with that. Corporate-driven science often has to find "good enough".  Why not rely on voice and hearing loss studies to determine our hearing limits, and ignore all music and biology experts that hear deficiencies at 16/44?

 

Because in the late 1970's they knew that a 24bit DAC was going to cost over $1k per chip. No one would buy a CD player if it cost over $2500 retail, no matter how cool the new technology was, or how great it sounded.

 

Gotta get that cost down. Gotta make compromises. First there is cost of DAC, 16bit far cheaper than 24bit in 1980's.

 

Also there's storage -- Redbook could hold about 760mb of data per disc, which would have translated to about 5 songs @ 24/96. Shorter run-time than cassette or vinyl. Nope.

 

All great arguments for 16/44. All tied to ancient tech and ancient practices. All expired in 2015.

post #2255 of 2263

I knew I wouldn't regret subscribing to this thread :-)

post #2256 of 2263

:popcorn:

post #2257 of 2263

He's just mad because he knows if we down-sampled some hi-res Ponostore material to 16/44.1, put it on the speakers, had him walk in the room, and told him "hey listen to this hi-res Pono track, isn't is so good!", he'd go "oh yeah, way better than Redbook!"

post #2258 of 2263
Quote:
Originally Posted by FFBookman View Post
 


i'm not alone with pono, almost all musicians and recording engineers can hear it. they might not think it's needed for the average consumer, but they can hear it. most have been tracking and mixing at 24bit for over a decade now. and when played through a proper signal chain, oh looky there, sounds better. who cares about math. you should work on sorting out mathematically why it sounds better instead of telling people who hear it in the simplest terms that they are crazy. you are flat earth types here, relying on common sense to disguise the flaws in your argument.

 

the quickness that you people dismiss people who make, record, and mix music for a living is amazing to me. they are the experts in music and emotional sound, not you, yet because they don't can't translate it to high-end physics and formulas you disregard them. do you think the people who provide enjoyable sound for you have math degrees? very few of them.

 

but we can all hear and can understand quality if it's provided to us. we all get ear fatigue and can detect digital distortions, and we can all detect spatial differences. maybe you don't care, maybe you haven't figured out how to hear it yet. but you can and whether or not you've figured out how to get your antiquated formulas rewritten in enough time for anyone to care, we shall see.

 

But the earth is flat. As θ approaches 0, sinθ approaches θ.

Simple, even Archimedes knew that.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by FFBookman View Post
 

I can get on board with that. Corporate-driven science often has to find "good enough".  Why not rely on voice and hearing loss studies to determine our hearing limits, and ignore all music and biology experts that hear deficiencies at 16/44?

 

Because in the late 1970's they knew that a 24bit DAC was going to cost over $1k per chip. No one would buy a CD player if it cost over $2500 retail, no matter how cool the new technology was, or how great it sounded.

 

Gotta get that cost down. Gotta make compromises. First there is cost of DAC, 16bit far cheaper than 24bit in 1980's.

 

Also there's storage -- Redbook could hold about 760mb of data per disc, which would have translated to about 5 songs @ 24/96. Shorter run-time than cassette or vinyl. Nope.

 

All great arguments for 16/44. All tied to ancient tech and ancient practices. All expired in 2015.

 

 

Audiophiles have been singing this song for as long as CDs have existed, and yet no-one has managed to demonstrate the purported shortcomings.


Edited by limpidglitch - Today at 12:36 pm
post #2259 of 2263
Quote:
Originally Posted by FFBookman View Post
 


i'm not alone with pono, almost all musicians and recording engineers can hear it.

 

Did you know that you were speaking to a person who has worked professionally as a sound engineer right now?

post #2260 of 2263

my mom payed me 5 francs(old frog money) when I was a kid so that I would stop playing the recorder at home. being payed made me a professional by definition.

fear the cursed tool of evil!!!!!!!:veryevil:

post #2261 of 2263
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post
 

 

Did you know that you were speaking to a person who has worked professionally as a sound engineer right now?


Congratulations, friend. I too have made and published music, I don't doubt the size of your multitrack. Can you tell me what dither is?

 

I'm sure you use it, please explain to me what it is doing and why I need it when going from 24bit audio to 16bit audio?

post #2262 of 2263


Do you doubt my redbook breakdown?  

 

Do you really believe that it was scientifically proven by "pure science" that there was a digital sampling rate that represented all that humans could ever detect

 

or do you believe there were real limitation to both storage on the small optical disc as well as DAC cost that drove 16bit as the standard.  Phillips wanted 14bit and smaller discs but Sony cockblocked and moved it to 16bit with larger discs. Phillips had already retooled their factory for their size 14bit discs, Sony scored some points. 

 

All cool and logical in a business sense, but this farce about there is nothing more than that in the DSP realm is crazy. We all know it's there, that's why sound cards and every mixing gear in 15 years has done 24bit. Are you calling every person that works in audio anywhere where 24bit is used guilt of snake oil? 

 

Crazy. It's 2015. We were hearing the 24bit difference in the studio by the mid,late 90's. 

post #2263 of 2263
Quote:
Originally Posted by FFBookman View Post


Do you doubt my redbook breakdown?  

Do you really believe that it was scientifically proven by "pure science" that there was a digital sampling rate that represented all that humans could ever detect

or do you believe there were real limitation to both storage on the small optical disc as well as DAC cost that drove 16bit as the standard.  Phillips wanted 14bit and smaller discs but Sony cockblocked and moved it to 16bit with larger discs. Phillips had already retooled their factory for their size 14bit discs, Sony scored some points. 

All cool and logical in a business sense, but this farce about there is nothing more than that in the DSP realm is crazy. We all know it's there, that's why sound cards and every mixing gear in 15 years has done 24bit. Are you calling every person that works in audio anywhere where 24bit is used guilt of snake oil? 

Crazy. It's 2015. We were hearing the 24bit difference in the studio by the mid,late 90's. 
Can you provide any evidence to back up your claims?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › 24bit vs 16bit, the myth exploded!