[kstuart]

Originally Posted by Baldr /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 
[...]
 
Back to the bits - I know of no DAC that decodes any kind of reality beyond 20 bits and those get really expensive (Like the Yggy).  You can use two per channel and get 21 real, honest to God bits.  The megaburrito filter's DSP chip runs at 32 bits - not that is any bragging right other than it puts the computational errors at least 12 bits below the rounded output of Yggy, 14 bits below the rounded output of Gumby, or 16 bits below the rounded output of Bimby.
 
Numbers for numbers sake are fairy tales translated into marketing.

All that is true.... and I am enjoying your "megaburrito" as I type this.
 
However, there are very good reasons for 24 bits in recording and consumer file formats, as explained by recording and mastering engineer Barry Diament (whose Bob Marley and Led Zeppelin CDs are still highly sought after):
 

 In a 16-bit recording, one is making the most of all 16 bits when the signal is loudest -- at the top 6 dB of the possible levels (6.02 dB for those who want more precision). Now of course, with real music the signal is not always at the top of the level scale. In other words, not every part of the song is at the loudest point. Further, there are things in the background that are lower in level than things in the foreground. Instrumental harmonics (the things that differentiate a Steinway from a Baldwin or a Gibson from a Fender) are considerably lower in level and spatial cues (whether real or studio generated) are lower still. To put it into numbers, the harmonics might be 20 dB lower in level than the loudest sounds. Spatial cues might be 40 dB lower in level. (I'm just picking the numbers arbitrarily to illustrate the point.) With a 16-bit recording, those harmonics that are 20 dB lower in level will be encoded using about 13 bits, not 16. The spatial cues that are 40 dB lower in level will be encoded using about 10-bits, not 16. This accounts for the coarsening of the sound and thinning of instrumental harmonics many have notices with 16-bit audio since the beginning.
Now let's look at the resolution of the same items with a 24-bit recording. The harmonics, at -20 would be encoded using about 21 bits. The spatial cues, at -40 would use about 18 bits. Both still exhibiting more resolution than a full level 16-bit recording. So if you make the same recording at 16/44 and at 24/44, you'll find the complexity of instrumental harmonics much better preserved on the latter. Same with the spatial cues: where the 16-bit version defocuses the space, the 24-bit version makes the room boundaries clear and easy to hear by comparison.

 

[Baldr]

Perhaps I failed to make one point:  The 24db is 144db of dynamic range.  The attendant A/D would have to be a DS design with some sort of inherent hallucinated math and tons of missing codes.  The gain system unit I built for Mobile Fidelity was based on no missing codes at a 16 bit level some 20 years ago.  Today state of the art SAR A/D with no missing codes for a proper low slope anti-aliasing filter is 20 bit.  No missing codes is a must.  Anything else, is a misrepresentation.

 

[joespride]

Does anyone perceive a slight edge to the Multibit ?  
 
My reason for the Multibit purchase was to compare it to MHDT Havana, IMHO they sound more the same than different, but 1 thing stood out after approx 4 hours on Bifrost with a few breaks I began to experience some fatigue
 
Putting the Havana back in the loop and the fatigue resided and no further perception of edginess
 
I am sure with a different system this would likely be non existant but my setup,  JRMC > Dac > ampsandsound Kenzie Headphone amp > Sennheiser HD800, is pulling it out
 
Anyone ?

 

[wahsmoh]

  All that is true.... and I am enjoying your "megaburrito" as I type this.
 
However, there are very good reasons for 24 bits in recording and consumer file formats, as explained by recording and mastering engineer Barry Diament (whose Bob Marley and Led Zeppelin CDs are still highly sought after):
 

 
I own this Barry Diament CD. It is a fine mastering and one of the best CDs I have. It doesn't have that added loudness of the other CD mastering I have and you can turn it up louder and get nice dynamics.

 

[tomatoshoe]

Well I think the Bifrost Multibit is quite superb paired with the Burson Soloist for the Fostex TH-900.

 

[kstuart]

  Perhaps I failed to make one point:  The 24db is 144db of dynamic range.  The attendant A/D would have to be a DS design with some sort of inherent hallucinated math and tons of missing codes.  The gain system unit I built for Mobile Fidelity was based on no missing codes at a 16 bit level some 20 years ago.  Today state of the art SAR A/D with no missing codes for a proper low slope anti-aliasing filter is 20 bit.  No missing codes is a must.  Anything else, is a misrepresentation.

So Barry is saying that every bit of extra bit depth, helps harmonics and spatial cues be more clearly audible.   And you are saying that the technology is not yet capable of excellent 24 bit ADC or DAC.
 
However, while the Multibit Bifrost does 16 bits, you went to a lot of trouble to produce 20 bits from the Yggdrasil and 18 bits from the Multibit Gungnir.  There would be no point to doing so, unless the point was playing 24-bit recordings.
 
So, I think both you and Barry agree that higher bit depth produces better results.  If I understand correctly, you are just cautioning that 24-bit files do not really have 24-bits of resolution (and the best DACs only produce 20 bits of that).
 
But if they have 2 or 4 bits more resolution than 16/44.1, that still should produce better sound quality.

 

[cishida]

Does anyone perceive a slight edge to the Multibit ?  

My reason for the Multibit purchase was to compare it to MHDT Havana, IMHO they sound more the same than different, but 1 thing stood out after approx 4 hours on Bifrost with a few breaks I began to experience some fatigue

Putting the Havana back in the loop and the fatigue resided and no further perception of edginess

I am sure with a different system this would likely be non existant but my setup,  JRMC > Dac > ampsandsound Kenzie Headphone amp > Sennheiser HD800, is pulling it out

Anyone ?

Yes. A bit and I'm hoping it goes away over time. Only mb for a couple of days.

 

[Baldr]

The absolute state of the art in audio rate (which allow for low filter slope) converters (A/D or D/A) for no missing codes and without resorting to delta sigma approximations is 20 bit.  Period.  Just over a million codes.
 
All no missing code designs are multibit.  None are delta sigma or sigma delta.
 
No true 24 bit converters exist for audio.  Period.  It is marketing only.  Rigorous applications like medical electronics and defense recognize this as lies and exaggerations.
 
20 bits sound better than 18 bits sounds better than 16 bits as long as all else is equal, and the decode is no missing codes.  The only problem is that cost at least trebles at each step up.
 
In a delta sigma world, the immediate above is usually not true.
 
I am not a recording engineer - Mr. Diament is a damned good one.  I agree that more real bits are better - it is just that he has no more right to tell me as an audio hardware engineer that his recordings are truly 24 bit in any pedigree other than marketing than I have a right to tell him how to place microphones for best results.
 
The last point was that the megaburrito filter sounds better than traditional sample rate converters.  Therefore through Schiitschiit, try the redbook rather than hidef recordings that are not native.
 
Hope that clarifies.

 

[cherrypepsi]

My Bimby is on its way. Just wonder does Wyrd improve Bimby by any chance? 

 

[johnjen]

The absolute state of the art in audio rate (which allow for low filter slope) converters (A/D or D/A) for no missing codes and without resorting to delta sigma approximations is 20 bit.  Period.  Just over a million codes.

All no missing code designs are multibit.  None are delta sigma or sigma delta.

No true 24 bit converters exist for audio.  Period.  It is marketing only.  Rigorous applications like medical electronics and defense recognize this as lies and exaggerations.

20 bits sound better than 18 bits sounds better than 16 bits as long as all else is equal, and the decode is no missing codes.  The only problem is that cost at least trebles at each step up.

In a delta sigma world, the immediate above is usually not true.

I am not a recording engineer - Mr. Diament is a damned good one.  I agree that more real bits are better - it is just that he has no more right to tell me as an audio hardware engineer that his recordings are truly 24 bit in any pedigree other than marketing than I have a right to tell him how to place microphones for best results.

The last point was that the megaburrito filter sounds better than traditional sample rate converters.  Therefore through Schiitschiit, try the redbook rather than hidef recordings that are not native.

Hope that clarifies.

A quick question if I might.

Could you provide a definition of, or further description of "codes".

I have an idea in my mind but knowing your definition would be more insightful.

Thanks JJ

 

[MrSlim]

If I may, 20 bit resolution provides just over a million different sample values (or "codes") as per Baldr. In math speak, 2 to the 20th power or 2 times itself 20 times (1,048,567)

 

[joespride]

Yes. A bit and I'm hoping it goes away over time. Only mb for a couple of days.

I was HOPING the same but with everyone stating burn in is complete within 4 hours I am not holding out much hope, I think it is part of the sound signature,  Now depending on system it is just as likely to be smoothed over.....................But my system sounds great and I am not switching other components to accommodate smoothing something new.
 
Now if anyone wants to chime in with a new burn in figure I am all ears..................So far its like ghost town on that question, I even emailed Schiit last evening so we will see if they respond

 

[RestoredSparda]

  I was HOPING the same but with everyone stating burn in is complete within 4 hours I am not holding out much hope, I think it is part of the sound signature,  Now depending on system it is just as likely to be smoothed over.....................But my system sounds great and I am not switching other components to accommodate smoothing something new.
 
Now if anyone wants to chime in with a new burn in figure I am all ears..................So far its like ghost town on that question, I even emailed Schiit last evening so we will see if they respond

With my HE-560's yes, I'm noticing more of an edge than before (more fatiguing) ...but only on poorly mastered recordings. On the really well-done stuff it sounds out of this world great. I've had mine running for about 5 days straight. Just like you I was looking at changing other things in the chain, but I actually loved everything else prior to Multi Bit. Maybe a change of tubes would match better with the Bimby (if you're using a tube amp). 

 

[vocalstrance]

I want to try some Amperex 7308 tubes next. They seem like they'd trim the treble, but keep the mids and bass. Perfect for my HD800's and DT 990's. Oh the joys of rolling, it can be like having a new amp.

 

[Hardwired]

I want to try some Amperex 7308 tubes next. They seem like they'd trim the treble, but keep the mids and bass. Perfect for my HD800's and DT 990's. Oh the joys of rolling, it can be like having a new amp.

 
I'm running these in my Lyr2 plugged into the Bimby. They do indeed make subtle changes that make my HE-560s happier. A tad more bass, a tad less treble.