[bigshot]

Quote:

Originally Posted by scompton /img/forum/go_quote.gif I remember hearing stories back in the 80s about turntables having problems tracking the Telarc digital LP of the 1812 overture. Supposedly, the needle would jump the track when the cannons went off. Who knows if it was true, but it did make a good story.

It was actually the Carmen suite. I had that record and there was a bass drum wallop that distorted no matter how you tried to track it. It was cut so far out of spec it was pitiful.

See ya
Steve

 

[bigshot]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crowbar /img/forum/go_quote.gif Again, only some music types depend on mixing.

Yeah, right. Some music records itself untouched by human hands.

See ya
Steve

 

[gregorio]

Crowbar - "Again, only some music types depend on mixing." You are talking about revolutionising recording technology but you don't even have the level of knowledge of a school child. If you don't mix music you have two choices, output it using ethereal osmosis or record the two mic input straight to CD. The first of course doesn't exist and the other would put recording methodology back 50 years.

It's really unbelievable. "You're so entrenched in your old ways of thinking". That's right, I'm entrenched in cutting edge technology and methods of production and your progressive idea is to take recording methodolgy back to the 1950's. If having a good understanding of how the most cutting edge recording studios work is an old way of thinking, I'll take that over complete and utter ignorance any day!

Your problem is that you are trying to consider advanced recording technology and methodology when you haven't got even the faintest idea of the basics.

Others on here have said that 50dB is perfectly sufficient yet you crowbar want to increase this a few thousand times. Who on earth is going to buy a recording which could not be played back even in a world class recording studio. If you could design somewhere to play it back then whoever listened to it would not just slightly damage their hearing but would utterly destroy it forever. Your true 24bit master would put most people in hospital and kill a percentage. So you carry right on developing a system which no one in their right minds would listen to and which is far too dangerous to be allowed in the marketplace.

Just to make it clear from what Daverose wrote, upsampling 16bit to 24bit is not going to make a blind bit of difference. Can anybody explain to me the difference between a 16bit audio file and a 24bit audio file with the 8 least significant bits set to zero? Another question, hands up anyone who thinks that 24bit gives any more audio resolution than 16bit or 8bit.

Scompton - I've worked with the NSO and know Mahler's 2nd pretty well. These big post-romantic symphonies provide some of the biggest challenges to recording. If you think 115dB was too loud, multiply that by a factor of 50 or so and you're approaching the level that 24bit digital (144dB) is capable of encoding. See how ridiculous the argument about putting out recordings in 24bit really is.

 

[Crowbar]

50 dB? LOL! That's a range covered by 9 bits. By your logic, it's not about 16 vs 24 bit; we should be going back to 8 bit audio really!

You seem to be confusing the envelope of the music, which indeed may only vary 50 dB or less in many cases. I'm talking about the range of individual components, which is much greater. The ear masks low order harmonics of a given component, but has little masking of other components of the signal even if they're quieter--and even when not perceived as independent components, they can be perceived as a different coloration of the sound.
Your comments about consumer listening setup limitations are misleading because you are not including the fact that signals can be heard below the noise floor, because noise is spread throughout a wide spectrum, whereas individual signal components are narrowband and it's been proven the ear can hear them several dB below the noise floor. This has already been pointed out.

By the way, if a binaural recording is to preserve proper sound, it needs to do exactly that--go straight from microphone to CD. At most it will be attenuated and dithered down to make the best use of 16 bits, if that's the output format. If you mix it with anything else, then you immediately ruin the soundstage--and a binaural recording listened through headphones is the ONLY way you can capture and reproduce the 3D sound environment to a high degree.

 

[P_A_W]

Hi Guys,

Really interesting thread... My ears aren't even good enough to require 16/44 for music.

I guess the sensitivity of our ears falls precipitously at the edge of the audible range (20Hz-20kHz). While no one needs the dynamic range of 24bits for a middle c, what about sounds at the lower end of the spectrum where we have very low intrinsic sensitivity? I guess I am thinking explosions in movies played in home theater more than music.

--PAW

 

[Crowbar]

People like gregorio/Bigshot are what's holding up back progress in audio. The crappy recordings they make means when you make some improvement in your playback system, you get to hear more how crappy their recording is, and think why bother. gregorio/Bigshot and their kin are the fountain of mediocrity.

 

[gregorio]

Crowbar - I'd rather be a fountain of mediocrity than an ignorant moron. The real shame is that your ignorance is so deep and so complete that you don't even realize how ignorant you are. You then argue from your standpoint of complete ignorance with people who aren't ignorant. It's so ridiculous that it's funny. Have you ever heard any of mine or bigshot's recordings? Then how do you know they are crappy, just more ignorance. It's like tryng to explain to a 4 year old that even though metal is heavier than air, a plane can still fly. At least a four year old is capable of learning and can at some point get past their ignorance!

"50 dB? LOL! That's a range covered by 9 bits." Exactly, my god, we're runnning into the possibility that you might just be starting to understand the principles. Why do you think I started off by saying that even 16bit is far in excess of what even the most hardened (and rich) audiophile would find useful. There are probably very few if any recordings (analogue or digital) on the market which exceed 50dB dynamic range. At this point in time, with current playback technology, extending this range will make the music unplayable on the average home system.

 

[nick_charles]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crowbar /img/forum/go_quote.gif People like gregorio/Bigshot are what's holding up back progress in audio. The crappy recordings they make means when you make some improvement in your playback system, you get to hear more how crappy their recording is, and think why bother. gregorio/Bigshot and their kin are the fountain of mediocrity.

Seriously, where are your excellent recordings ? - I will nip out and buy a few. Do you have any published works on this topic that we can analyze ?

For an adult you have some real self control issues, that is of course assuming you are an adult, something which we have little evidence of so far. That Bighot and Gregorio mock you gently is no excuse for such childish conduct.

EDIT: I posted the above before I saw Gregorio's ignorant moron comment.

 

[Crowbar]

Quote:

Originally Posted by nick_charles /img/forum/go_quote.gif Seriously, where are your excellent recordings ?

Seriously, whether I record or not has no bearing on my argument. It's basic logic.
If my car runs poorly and I complain, do you ask me to build a better car? Of course not; yet your comment above is equivalent to that.

Quote:

mock you gently

One cannot mock gently; mocking implies contempt, and so this is an oxymoron.

 

[Crowbar]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gregorio /img/forum/go_quote.gif ignorant moron

Ran out of arguments, so has no choice but to resort to name calling.

Quote:

Have you ever heard any of mine or bigshot's recordings?

I should hope I never do.

 

[Leporello]

Quote:

Originally Posted by scompton /img/forum/go_quote.gif Who knows if it was true, but it did make a good story.

It is true. I have personally heard that happen in a record store.


Regards,

L.

 

[grawk]

For playback, bit depth is pure marketting. If you were to make use of even the dynamic range of cd, your ears would bleed. Therefore, any improvements to be found in playback won't involve more bits available for playback.

Binaural recordings will remain a niche, because they only sound good if you're listening with headphones. Most people don't listen that way, and therefore, most recordings won't be made that way.

You complain that you haven't heard a believable accoustic recording. I'd suggest that you aren't trying very hard. I've heard recordings made with even modest equipment, played back on good equipment that to my ears are indistinguishable from the original performance. So if you're going to continue down the path of insulting everyone who's ever made a commercial recording as being "part of the problem", you're going to have to do something to demonstrate that your fairyland solutions are better.

 

[Crowbar]

Quote:

Originally Posted by grawk /img/forum/go_quote.gif this is my last visit to this thread

Either you're a liar, or you have Alzheimer's.

 

[grawk]

Or I changed my mind. It's comments like that that point out just how out of touch with how adults interact you really are.

 

[nick_charles]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crowbar /img/forum/go_quote.gif Seriously, whether I record or not has no bearing on my argument. It's basic logic. If my car runs poorly and I complain, do you ask me to build a better car? Of course not; yet your comment above is equivalent to that. One cannot mock gently; mocking implies contempt, and so this is an oxymoron.

The best way to illustrate that your view of the world has some inherent advantages is to show them, in this context the best way you can illustrate the benefits of your world view is to do better than those you mock. Your comment is not like saying my mechanic is crap, to which the answer is find another mechanic, your comment is like saying ALL mechanics are crap.

MOCK

It also means ridicule, to laugh at or make fun of. Also gently mock has definitely entered common usage. Parody also makes fun of but this does not mean contempt is necessary, look at Mel Brooks' parodies, many stem from an underlying affaction for the genre he mocks.

From your failure to answer my second question can I assume that your theory of the world is still embedded in your head and not published, even as an IEEE opinion piece ?