1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.

    Dismiss Notice

24bit vs 16bit, the myth exploded!

Discussion in 'Sound Science' started by gregorio, Mar 19, 2009.
229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238
240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249
  1. NoteEater
    Proves your point how.  I think you need to read further and maybe others here can reeducate themselves since we are all so willing to learn.  This was not one test by the way.  This is data pulled from 18 studies.  The researcher himself decided he needed to start listening to 24bit audio due to this research.  If we want to trust scientists, maybe we should take one out of this researchers palybook and do some subjective 24bit listening and feel the AIR Man!!!
  2. dukefx
    I've read most of those. Do I need to start quoting? (I fear it may exceed the character limit) Your own quote also proves it. "more than 50% of people that can DBT pick the higher than CD quality file". Well, if you have to guess if A or B is better your chances are exactly 50% which is also included in that study. Take a low sample (participants) and it might deviate more, pick a large sample it gets a lot more accurate, simple statistics. Also... saying "equipment back then was crap" is pure ignorance. I can name you amps that can beat the hell out of a lot of today's high ends. A lot of people are also going back to R2R DACs (another one of those threads I like to read here). Technology hasn't advanced that much in this field except for Class D.
  3. Mikko Peltonen
    Didn't bother to read the whole discussion as it's thousands of posts long, but here's one excellent article.
    Sums it up pretty nicely. :)
    Cerastes likes this.
  4. U-3C

    It is prohibited to talk about this stuff scientifically anywhere else on the forum, and it will be deleted or banned based on the TOS.

    Indeed, Head-Fi does not allow one to have ones opinion or facts mentioned outside of Sound Science. However, you are here and you are participating in this debate, so it's welcomed for you to explain why 24 bit audio can sound better and can continue this thread.

    Anywhere else, you will be the only one not being insta-banned for voicing your opinions or facts, or everyone but you will be locked out of it. :D
  5. NoteEater
    You are missing the point of his research.  His point is how much people's perception improved after gaining some experience in how to listen better.  There is no such thing as golden ears.  But there are certainly trained ears.  He found trained ears did better than those that were untrained. If you don't know what you are supposed to perceive, your brain automatically focuses on the perception of something else.  Hence you are missing out on the feeling.  
  6. RRod
    A cherry-picked meta-analysis of a bunch of non-replicated studies that confounds bit depth with sample rate. Nothing to see here beyond the trolling at this point. Weren't you peacing-out, btw?
  7. castleofargh Contributor
    the bold part is you admitting that you can't even read the name of the section where you're posting.
    coming in this section and whine that we don't let you have your 24bit audio and leave it alone, is the pot calling the kettle black. why can't a clear subjectivist let us have this small space of objectivity and leave it alone?
    ssag likes this.
  8. U-3C

  9. uchihaitachi

    Hey, can you just upload a foobar abx log?
  10. gregorio
    1. Yep, my ears are so bad that I make a good living from them.
    2. I'm not, if I were able to hear what you hear then I wouldn't make any money at all, let alone a good living!
    You want to delude yourself, that's fine. You want to ignore the science without which you wouldn't have any recordings or anything to play them back on, OK that's rather silly but still fine. You want to come here to the science forum and talk about how you can hear magic, fairies and Jesus and quote science you don't understand and dismiss the rest of science, that's not fine. You know that's not fine because you're in the SCIENCE forum, and you call us not cool, sheesh! Do everyone a favour, including yourself, use this forum to learn how the stuff you're listening to actually works, or leave!!
  11. NoteEater
    This makes no sense.  You feel the thread owner created this thread to only hear people agree with him/her that there is no benefit to 24bit over 16bit?  Come on.  The thread was clearly started to get a rise out of anyone that does hear/feel a difference with hi res audio only to coordinate a lot of minions here in order to attack anyone that does not agree it is a myth.
  12. dukefx
    That's not really the case here. It's a science forum and you are expected to reason with us using science. Saying you have magical ears is no argument. If you really want to convince people that there is actually a difference then you have to come and say something like: "hey folks, forget all the measurements you know, here's a new, unconventional method that shows the difference." Inconclusive studies and others that prove our point won't really help.
  13. gregorio
    So, not only are you apparently incapable of understanding a very simple explanation of why 24bit as a music distribution format is nothing more than a marketing ploy but now you're completely making up nonsense as to why this thread was started. AGAIN, if you want to remain ignorant and deluded that's up to you but don't try and defend your ignorance/delusions in this forum by attacking everyone else who is not so ignorant/delusional!!!
  14. pinnahertz
    Yes, some feel that way. Not "many" with respect to the total population of those listening to digital audio. 24bit Audio doesn't "fill the air" at all. It's very analog before it gets even close to the air.
    Space for audio on BD is no longer at a premium. The above logic has no basis in reality for the BD medium.
    I'll defer to gregorio on this too, but in post 24bits does provide a lot more room for manipulation, but it's not base quality issue. It's well known that for release, 16 would be enough, but there's also no need to truncate if the original is already 24.
    Also keep in mind there are no ADCs...and I mean there's like one exotic exception...that actually produce a true 24 bit dynamic range. All are limited to substantially fewer bits of DR, like 20. The words dribbling out are 24 bits, the bottom 4-6 bits are all noise.
    Science has not proven that 24 bit audio is even clearly discernable, though.
    The conclusions, specifically, were, "In summary, these results imply that, though the effect is perhaps small and difficult to detect, the perceived fidelity of an audio recording and playback chain is affected by operating beyond conventional consumer oriented levels."
    Note specifically, "small and difficult to detect", and that percieved fidelity is affected.  He didn't say "improved".  If you look at the studies cited in the paper, you'll also find that not a single person was able to detect hi-res every time.  Not one set of "golden ears" in the whole bunch.  
    Now, if you want to apply the results in the paper and face value, then go on to claim emphatically that hi-res (not 24bit alone, BTW) is somehow a night/day thing that everybody on the planet can hear, well the paper doesn't say that at all, quite the opposite.   The results in the paper are 3% better than flipping a coin.  
    No, Reiss already held these positions:
    • Co-Chair of the Audio Engineering Society (AES) Technical Committee on High-Resolution Audio
    • General Chair of the 31st AES Conference; New Directions in High Resolution Audio, 2007
    Pretty sure he'd been listening to high-res for a bit. If anything, those positions imply a bias.
    If you want to really feel the air, go hang gliding. Trust me on that one.
  15. Ruben123

    You said it well. Wait, small correction: let you have your opinions, let us have our facts. I haven't seen one single fact from you. 24 bits filling the air differently? Are you sure my friend?
229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238
240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249

Share This Page