or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Why would 24 bit / 192 khz flac sound any better than 16 bit / 44.1 khz flac if both are lossless (if at all)?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Why would 24 bit / 192 khz flac sound any better than 16 bit / 44.1 khz flac if both are lossless (if at all)? - Page 5

post #61 of 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by ag8908 View Post
 

Partly because the bigger number fools your brain into thinking it sounds better. There is no substantive difference with respect to the vast majority of audiophile stuff, and many audiophile things sound worse. For example, the best headphone won't sound anywhere as good as the sweet spot of a basic 5.1 surround system, but that won't stop people from wasting money on the headphone.

 

There is general agreement that even not-so-high-end headphones have higher resolution than many of the better speaker systems.  So it depends on what you prefer.

 

But why listen to others.

 

I have done my own tests comparing 16/44 to even 24/48. I used same quality 24/96 source with large dynamic range to generate 16/44, 16/44 dithered, 24/48 and  16/44 upscaled to 24/48. I used quality conversion software with floating point resolution so the conversion error is well below the 24 bit noise floor.  On my 24 bit headphone chain I CAN TELL A DIFFERENCE between 16/44 and 24/48 versions.

post #62 of 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by ralphp@optonline View Post


Not that I know of, however here are two things to keep in mind when looking for a reliable source of information.

1) Avoid reviews and opinions from any source (print or online publications) that have any of the vendors of high resolutions downloads (e.g. HDTracks, Linn, Acoustic Sounds, etc.) as advertisers - their "opinions" will be more press release than actual opinions plus for these publications ANY and ALL high resolution downloads, especially DSD downloads, will sound great.

2) Public or semi-public forums are a much better source of quality opinions although these too have their drawbacks (e.g. fan boys, people who need to justify their purchases) but by taking an average of the opinions one can draw some reasonable conclusions.

So for example the sound quality of new Beck recording "Morning Phase" has been highly praised in the press and overwhelmingly trashed in online forums.

Thank you for this.

It's a shame there isn't a simple database resource that lists recordings, the various releases of each, and a way for listeners to give a rating and/or review, to serve as a way for others to isolate the best possible option for each recording. It's the sort of thing that is common in many other realms, and it seems odd to me that the "high res aficionado" community hasn't created something similar. Has this been suggested or attempted in the past? If so, what were the results?
post #63 of 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cannikin View Post


Thank you for this.

It's a shame there isn't a simple database resource that lists recordings, the various releases of each, and a way for listeners to give a rating and/or review, to serve as a way for others to isolate the best possible option for each recording. It's the sort of thing that is common in many other realms, and it seems odd to me that the "high res aficionado" community hasn't created something similar. Has this been suggested or attempted in the past? If so, what were the results?

 

SA-CD.net has user reviews forums.

post #64 of 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by Digitalchkn View Post

There is general agreement that even not-so-high-end headphones have higher resolution than many of the better speaker systems.  So it depends on what you prefer.

But why listen to others.

I have done my own tests comparing 16/44 to even 24/48. I used same quality 24/96 source with large dynamic range to generate 16/44, 16/44 dithered, 24/48 and  16/44 upscaled to 24/48. I used quality conversion software with floating point resolution so the conversion error is well below the 24 bit noise floor.  On my 24 bit headphone chain I CAN TELL A DIFFERENCE between 16/44 and 24/48 versions.

That's not true.I defy you to identify any part of a song on a headphone that you can't identify on the speaker system.

What happens with headphones and their lame 1 to 2 inch drivers is that they cause an instrument or sound that was intended to be subtle background noise to be pushed way forward and dominate the song in a way that the artist never intended. So you're listening to this distorted and disproportional version of the song and thinking it's better in just because that subtle sound is now dominating the track at the expense of stuff you were supposed to focus on. A large speaker driver can blow a headphone driver away in every objective technical aspect as you would expect based merely on the physical characteristics. The hd800 is the closest to replicating the speaker sound but even that fails woefully.

That's why beats and their heavily distorted sound dominated the market. If people want accurate natural sound they'll just listen to their speakers.
post #65 of 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by ag8908 View Post


That's not true.I defy you to identify any part of a song on a headphone that you can't identify on the speaker system.

What happens with headphones and their lame 1 to 2 inch drivers is that they cause an instrument or sound that was intended to be subtle background noise to be pushed way forward and dominate the song in a way that the artist never intended. So you're listening to this distorted and disproportional version of the song and thinking it's better in just because that subtle sound is now dominating the track at the expense of stuff you were supposed to focus on. A large speaker driver can blow a headphone driver away in every objective technical aspect as you would expect based merely on the physical characteristics. The hd800 is the closest to replicating the speaker sound but even that fails woefully.

That's why beats and their heavily distorted sound dominated the market. If people want accurate natural sound they'll just listen to their speakers.

 

This is just totally wrong on all levels. There are many headphones out there (given they're amplified properly) that rival speakers that cost much much more.

 

Beats dominated the market because young people today listen to bass heavy music and like a subwoofer on their ear, but that doesn't mean hi-end headphones can't achieve a level a neutrality that cheaper speakers can - in fact it's usually the opposite. Go listen even to a Bose speaker setup and see if it's more neutral than the HD800 :rolleyes:


Edited by elmoe - 3/20/14 at 9:53am
post #66 of 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by elmoe View Post
 

 

This is just totally wrong on all levels. There are many headphones out there (given they're amplified properly) that rival speakers that cost much much more.

 

Beats dominated the market because young people today listen to bass heavy music and like a subwoofer on their ear, but that doesn't mean hi-end headphones can't achieve a level a neutrality that cheaper speakers can - in fact it's usually the opposite. Go listen even to a Bose speaker setup and see if it's more neutral than the HD800 :rolleyes:

 

Sure, if you like to have tiny drivers of a size you find in clock radios pump a subtle background harp so loudly that it dominates the song. If you like distorted sound, whether it's extra bass, or exaggerated detail, then headphones are the way to go.

 

But if you want a person to sound like they sound when singing in front of you, in real life, a headphone will never get close to a speaker.

 

P.S. that line about how "this $1,500 headphone is so good that it'll sound like a $20,000 speaker system" is a misleading marketing spin that needs to stop. it won't even sound as good as a $600 speaker system.


Edited by ag8908 - 3/20/14 at 10:00am
post #67 of 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by ag8908 View Post
 

 

Sure, if you like to have tiny drivers of a size you find in clock radios pump a subtle background harp so loudly that it dominates the song. If you like distorted sound, whether it's extra bass, or exaggerated detail, then headphones are the way to go.

 

But if you want a person to sound like they sound when singing in front of you, in real life, a headphone will never get close to a speaker.

 

P.S. that line about how "this $1,500 headphone is so good that it'll sound like a $20,000 speaker system" is a misleading marketing spin that needs to stop. it won't even sound as good as a $600 speaker system.

 

Clearly you haven't found proper synergy in your headphone based system.

 

I personally prefer speakers - no doubt about it. As far as details go however, my speakers do not beat any of the headphones in my signature. (I have Dynaudio Audience 62 floorstanding speakers). Don't get me wrong, my speakers are awesome and I love them, but if I want to listen to Nina Simone and feel like she's in front of me, I put on my SA5000s and close my eyes. My speakers can't achieve that at the same level.

 

And yes, I would say 1500usd headphones (for the most part) can sound as good as a 20k speaker system. Headphones today are just that good, nothing to do with a marketing spin.

post #68 of 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by ag8908 View Post
 

 

Sure, if you like to have tiny drivers of a size you find in clock radios pump a subtle background harp so loudly that it dominates the song. If you like distorted sound, whether it's extra bass, or exaggerated detail, then headphones are the way to go.

 

But if you want a person to sound like they sound when singing in front of you, in real life, a headphone will never get close to a speaker.

 

P.S. that line about how "this $1,500 headphone is so good that it'll sound like a $20,000 speaker system" is a misleading marketing spin that needs to stop. it won't even sound as good as a $600 speaker system.


Just a brief reminder - this is a headphone forum and your posts are pretty much telling everyone that you are behaving just like a troll. You have been warned.

post #69 of 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by ralphp@optonline View Post
 


Just a brief reminder - this is a headphone forum and your posts are pretty much telling everyone that you are behaving just like a troll. You have been warned.


To be clear, stating that speakers sound better than headphones is a bannable offense on head-fi? I want to make sure I know the rule (I assume you are speaking as a moderator who represents this site's policies and not merely impersonating one.).


Edited by ag8908 - 3/20/14 at 10:19am
post #70 of 386

I'll add to that that if you feel your HD800s aren't worth 200usd speakers I will be glad to trade you my Logitech computer speakers for it :biggrin:

post #71 of 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by elmoe View Post
 

I'll add to that that if you feel your HD800s aren't worth 200usd speakers I will be glad to trade you my Logitech computer speakers for it :biggrin:


The most expensive logitech computer speaker I'm aware of is about $100 MSRP new, and not on sale.  What model do you have?

post #72 of 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by ag8908 View Post
 


The most expensive logitech computer speaker I'm aware of is about $100 MSRP new, and not on sale.  What model do you have?

 

I don't know, but they're crappy I can tell you that. By your logic they should make a nice HD800 replacement though. :D

 

They're kinda like these:

 

 

Check out the size of those drivers, and 4 of em too, double the fun of your HD800. :D

post #73 of 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by elmoe View Post
 

 

I don't know, but they're crappy I can tell you that. By your logic they should make a nice HD800 replacement though. :D

 

They're kinda like these:

 

 

Check out the size of those drivers, and 4 of em too, double the fun of your HD800. :D

 

This is actual trolling, in case anyone didn't understand the difference between trying to add accurate information to a discussion, and a post designed to upset another person in a childish manner (either by impersonating a moderator as ralph did or stuff like this).


Edited by ag8908 - 3/20/14 at 10:19am
post #74 of 386

How am I trying to upset you? Sound quality is relative to size of driver, I am adding on to the accurate information of your post above. I don't blame you for not wanting my Logitech speakers though.

post #75 of 386

Speakers as loudspeakers, and little speakers as headphones sound different in all levels. There are crucial factors as the distance from our ear to the source of the sound ( membrane of the driver), for example. and how are this frequencies reproduce.

 

As an engineer I can discuss all of this but as an audiophile I Can as well say this is all wrong.

 

The basic genesis of the music is the recording of the instruments, as far as the theory goes, if you have enough information in the master tape you can, of course listen to everything your ears and body (psychoacoustics) let you.

 

Regarding the theory it is, in fact , not only a theory but a scientific fact and is called the Nyquist rate, this is twice the bandwidth of a bandlimited function or a bandlimited channel, Ergo, if you hear 22 kHz, as a function you need twice the bandwidth or 44 kHz,.

 

I am sure everyone here knows this in many ways and it is not an issue, but then again, if you master track has enough information, as an analogue support or digital support, you are going to have and maybe heard more information.

 

 

In terms of electroacoustics not all the fancy speakers on the market can reproduce everything that's why we try and try until we find what we are looking for.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Why would 24 bit / 192 khz flac sound any better than 16 bit / 44.1 khz flac if both are lossless (if at all)?