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 183

post #2731 of 2737

Maybe someone can collate those links and basic answers to form the nucleus for a sticky post on the topic?

post #2732 of 2737

You guys might want to check this out and the ongoing convo. More interestingly the article on Morning Phase in HDtracks..

post #2733 of 2737
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greenears View Post
 

 

>

 

We know and accept there are mastering differences, but generally I think if 16 and 24 are offered side to side on the same site, I think it's the same mastering.  At least I've never heard anyone claim contrary.

 

Is this the unanimous opinion of the experts on this forum?

Has anybody done comparative measurements or the like?

post #2734 of 2737
Quote:
Originally Posted by gebo View Post
 

 

Is this the unanimous opinion of the experts on this forum?

Has anybody done comparative measurements or the like?

Let's be practical, who has the time and money to compare the complete offerings on all of these sites? Which site has enough resources to remaster everything on their site?

post #2735 of 2737
Quote:
Originally Posted by gebo View Post
 

 

Is this the unanimous opinion of the experts on this forum?

Has anybody done comparative measurements or the like?

"Unanimous" and "forum" in the same sentence is an oxymoron.

 

I was told by others (reasonably convincingly, with measurements) that AC/DC new Rock or Bust the 24 bit version is identical to the Europe/Australia CD release mastering, the 16 bit is the US CD which is measurably and audibly different.

 

I have seen other claims (with less detail) that some 24 bit was simply upsampled 16 bit. 

 

You can try it yourself with foobar dynamic range plugin. 

post #2736 of 2737

I hesitate to bring this up again, but I found an article that's a little confusing and I think this is still the best place to ask it.

 

I found an article about Hesitation Marks, Nine Inch Nails last album. Here's the link:

 

http://nineinchnails.tumblr.com/post/59587808317/hesitation-marks-was-mastered-in-two-different

 

Basically, if you bought the CD, you could download an audiophile version (24bits, 48khz) for free.

 

I interpret this article to say that it was impossible to have a modern "loud" album, and have good dynamic range at the same time. It seems they wanted an album that was both loud and had great dynamic range and couldn't do it on a CD. Is redbook not sufficient for this? If you want a loud album with high DR, this article indicates that you'd need more than a CD can address. Is that a correct assessment on my part? If so, is that due to the increased bits, or the increased range?

 

Regardless of what you think of the loudness wars, I really do like NIN stuff mastered loudly. I gave the Audiophile version a listen and it does have the loudness I'd expect of a modern album, and I thought it sounded more detailed and rich than the CD version.

post #2737 of 2737

This is a recent "Application Note" by John Sau, chief engineer for Benchmark Media, makers of highly regared audiophile and pro audio digital equipment.  (I didn't check if anyone posted this earlier.)  This article addresses many of the earlier comments on this subject.

 

http://benchmarkmedia.com/blogs/news/14949345-high-resolution-audio-bit-depth

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!