[TheoS53]

 
Ah, sorry, I somehow misread that as relative differences between the formats as we increase "density", so lossy vs 44/16, 44/16 vs 48/24, etc.

That is one way of doing it. But, I thought it would perhaps be more relevant to test each against the original instead 

 

[Traveller]

... 1. "garbage in, garbage out"
2. We can't hear above ~20K (and in my case, probably much less than that)
I was nevertheless very pleased to hear him state hi-res in, hi-res out:
(link goes directly to 29:10)

 
Which is why I am (still) aiming for gear capable of  ~24b96K playback.
And no, I doubt I could prove it makes a difference via A/B but when I see the "data" above 20KHz then I feel okay having spent a little more for so-called hi-res playback HW...

 

 

 
 
So now all I need is a volunteer bat...

 

 

[gregorio]

Which is why I am (still) aiming for gear capable of  ~24b96K playback.

 
You're out of luck, there is no gear capable of 24/96, in fact there's very little gear capable of 16/96 in practice. That's not a problem though as there's hardly any commercial recordings which use more than about 10 bits anyway.
 
G

 

[pinnahertz]

   
You're out of luck, there is no gear capable of 24/96, in fact there's very little gear capable of 16/96 in practice. That's not a problem though as there's hardly any commercial recordings which use more than about 10 bits anyway.
 
G

Precisely. 
 
There are also no studios capable of 24 bits acoustically (not even close). 

 

[castleofargh]

I tried to make a chart once with some range at each step of the audio chain. I gave up after 10mn. I don't know how to show something like that without taking too many shortcuts. if I use some idea of average dynamic range, it's misleading. and how do I decide that value without a lot of data crunching? if I try to get some mini/maxi, it's misleading because it goes all over the place.
I don't know how to give a fair idea so people stop masturbating over absolutely impossible resolution numbers, without objectively being full of crap myself. some stuff are relatively easy, like the maximum dynamic range of an ADC or a DAC. but when looking at microphones, recording methods, different studio environments... it becomes hard to put a number on things.
 
edit: much, many, I spik angrish good.

 

[pinnahertz]

Look at it in terms of the "weakest link".  The dynamic range of the entire system is dictated by the part of the system with the least dynamic range.  Playback environment would be it, most likely.

 

[icebear]

  I tried to make a chart once with some range at each step of the audio chain. I gave up after 10mn. I don't know how to show something like that without taking too much shortcuts. if I use some idea of average dynamic range, it's misleading and how do I decide that value without a lot of data crunching? if I try to get some mini/maxi, it's misleading because it goes all over the place.
I don't know how to give a fair idea so people stop masturbating over absolutely impossible resolution numbers, without objectively being full of crap myself. some stuff are relatively easy, like the maximum dynamic range of an ADC or a DAC. but when looking at microphones, recording methods, different studio environments... it becomes hard to put a number on things.

ROFL

Marketing is a powerful tool, they spew out stuff that has no solid relevance whatsoever, still people like to believe they get something better, something to make their listening experience great again. It's almost as bad as politics these days.

Come along with scientific reasoning and you are painted as fake news bearer. You don't have a fair chance if the majority wants to believe the other message.

 

[TheoS53]

  I tried to make a chart once with some range at each step of the audio chain. I gave up after 10mn. I don't know how to show something like that without taking too much shortcuts. if I use some idea of average dynamic range, it's misleading and how do I decide that value without a lot of data crunching? if I try to get some mini/maxi, it's misleading because it goes all over the place.
I don't know how to give a fair idea so people stop masturbating over absolutely impossible resolution numbers, without objectively being full of crap myself. some stuff are relatively easy, like the maximum dynamic range of an ADC or a DAC. but when looking at microphones, recording methods, different studio environments... it becomes hard to put a number on things.

I think you've got the right idea going there, but perhaps thinking about it in too much depth. 

Really, all we need to consider are the limitations of the devices on the consumer's end. Does the player/DAC have the capability to take advantage of the "extra" dynamic range offered by 24-bit? Can the player/amp/headphones reproduce the sounds present at >20kHz?

 

[spruce music]

Don't you guys realize this thread is passe now. We have 32 bit DAC chips widely available. Need to start a new thread. 24 bit vs 32 bit myths.

 

[Peti]

And 8X DSD!
 
A brave new world indeed!

 

[pinnahertz]

  And 8X DSD!
 
A brave new world indeed!

"There is a fine line between bravery and stupidity. If you get away with it, you are brave. If you don't, you are stupid." (Francisco Escario)

 

[castleofargh]

  And 8X DSD!
 
A brave new world indeed!

"take a Soma holiday!"

 

[Peti]

DSD 1024 will be the new trend soon, I predict. I'm just wondering where is the limit here? 32/192 is getting obsolete. This hobby (personal audio) has been getting out of control like the Hi-Fi audio world with 500k speakers, 3000$ cables/meter and 600$ cable lifters along with cable burn-in devices (!). Rant over.

 

[watchnerd]

  And 8X DSD!
 
A brave new world indeed!

 
Yes, a DAC I've been eyeing does 32bit/384khz and 11.x something MB DSD.
 
Oh, and Roon can now up-sample boring old Redbook to those formats...
 
...and then I could run a DAC with no filter...
 
...whee!

 

[old tech]

Don't you guys realize this thread is passe now. We have 32 bit DAC chips widely available. Need to start a new thread. 24 bit vs 32 bit myths.

 
Wow, even if 24bit output was possible it would mean a noise floor below the noise of the electronics, ie resistors etc.  What does 32bit offer outside the field of experimental science?