24bit vs 16bit, the myth exploded!
Apr 3, 2012 at 3:06 AM Post #826 of 6,486

Locknar

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Mar 9, 2011
Posts
109
Likes
12


Quote:
 
No, I'm not a Luddite and I dont have cloth ears, but I do realise how skilful many DAC makers are in the time-honored technique of baffling us with BS. I know Head-Fi is a 'bigger is automatically better' cave, but if something sounds good to me at 24/96 (or, gasp, 16/44.1 ...), I'm not going to spend 2K on a DAC simply because the numbers excite the tech geeks among us. 

 
Ha Ha! Hear, Hear!
beerchug.gif

J
 

 
 
 
May 11, 2012 at 3:08 AM Post #827 of 6,486

kiteki

aka Theta Alpha 1
aka Alpha Zeta 5
aka Alpha Zeta 6
aka Nanocat Systems
And many other aliases
Joined
Jun 7, 2010
Posts
10,619
Likes
174
gregorio said:
 (post #001) /img/forum/go_quote.gif

So, if you accept the facts, why does 24bit audio even exist, what's the point of it? There are some useful application for 24bit when recording and mixing music. In fact, when mixing it's pretty much the norm now to use 48bit resolution. The reason it's useful is due to summing artefacts, multiple processing in series and mainly headroom. In other words, 24bit is very useful when recording and mixing but pointless for playback. Remember, even a recording with 60dB dynamic range is only using 10bits of data, the other 6bits on a CD are just noise. So, the difference in the real world between 16bit and 24bit is an extra 8bits of noise.

 
 
OK, so the thread starter says 24 bit is superior and very useful for recording.
 
Let's see, it takes up one third (1/3) extra disk space over 16 bit.  Last time I checked, a 2 TB external hard-drive now costs a little over $100 at my local supermarket, last time I checked... you can fit 70 CD's on a dual-layer blu-ray disc.
 
Keep it in 24 bit for playback too, then you don't need to discuss all this theory.
 
 
It's true 16/44.1 is very very satisfactory, it's not true it's the ultimate.
 
May 11, 2012 at 3:31 AM Post #828 of 6,486

stv014

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jul 17, 2011
Posts
3,493
Likes
271
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiteki /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 
Let's see, it takes up one third (1/3) extra disk space over 16 bit.

 
With FLAC or other lossless compressed formats, it is actually more, because the additional 8 bits per sample contain mainly noise, and compress poorly.
 
May 11, 2012 at 3:34 AM Post #829 of 6,486

grokit

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Nov 1, 2009
Posts
11,732
Likes
586
Location
The North
I just downloaded a copy of the new Norah Jones Little Broken Hearts from HDtracks:

"Mastered at New York’s legendary Sterling Sound by Norah Jones’ longtime mastering engineer Greg Calbi, Little Broken Hearts is available in master-quality 24-bit audio from the original flat mix sources, the highest quality format available. Little Broken Hearts (44.1kHz/24bit)
 
May 11, 2012 at 4:19 AM Post #830 of 6,486

kiteki

aka Theta Alpha 1
aka Alpha Zeta 5
aka Alpha Zeta 6
aka Nanocat Systems
And many other aliases
Joined
Jun 7, 2010
Posts
10,619
Likes
174
When I read the first post in this thread a second or third time, it makes it sound like 16 bit is unecessary and we should downsample recordings to 12, 8 or 4 bit.
 
...if the only difference is unecessary dynamic range since the most we'll ever listen to is ~60dB. (?)
 
May 11, 2012 at 4:36 AM Post #831 of 6,486

khaos974

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Mar 19, 2008
Posts
2,085
Likes
119
When I read the first post in this thread a second or third time, it makes it sound like 16 bit is unecessary and we should downsample recordings to 12, 8 or 4 bit.

...if the only difference is unecessary dynamic range since the most we'll ever listen to is ~60dB. (?)


Background noise would be audible if we reduced bit depth, I have ABX'ed successfully 16 and 14 bit files.
(same origin, volume and time aligned)
 
May 11, 2012 at 5:10 AM Post #832 of 6,486

xnor

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
May 28, 2009
Posts
4,092
Likes
227
@kiteki: See LossyWAV/FLAC for reduced bit depth where it most probably cannot be heard.
 
May 11, 2012 at 6:53 AM Post #833 of 6,486

Baxide

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
May 7, 2012
Posts
423
Likes
32
Quote:
Background noise would be audible if we reduced bit depth, I have ABX'ed successfully 16 and 14 bit files.
(same origin, volume and time aligned)


Are you sure? My first CD player was a 12 bit design from about 1984. My next one was a 14 bit unit, which I then replaced with a 14 bit/4x oversampling Marantz. The 12 bit CDP sounded quite good actually as did the 14 bit one. I think one was a Fisher and the other a Hitachi.
 
May 11, 2012 at 7:17 AM Post #834 of 6,486

khaos974

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Mar 19, 2008
Posts
2,085
Likes
119
Background noise would be audible if we reduced bit depth, I have ABX'ed successfully 16 and 14 bit files.

(same origin, volume and time aligned)


Are you sure? My first CD player was a 12 bit design from about 1984. My next one was a 14 bit unit, which I then replaced with a 14 bit/4x oversampling Marantz. The 12 bit CDP sounded quite good actually as did the 14 bit one. I think one was a Fisher and the other a Hitachi.


I didn't say it sounded bad, merely that I ABX'ed it,
Also, most delta sigma dac operate only on a depth of a few bit, using oversampling to reject noise out of the audible band, I'm not familiar with the CDP you talked about but how a DAC operates has little to do with the bit depth of the recording.
 
May 11, 2012 at 5:49 PM Post #835 of 6,486

maverickronin

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Posts
7,390
Likes
420
Quote:
With FLAC or other lossless compressed formats, it is actually more, because the additional 8 bits per sample contain mainly noise, and compress poorly.

 
That should be the proof right there that those extra bits only serve to more precisely define the noise floor.
 
Then you realize that if they reject Shannon-Nyquist sampling theorem out of hand then they're likely to reject Shannon entropy too...
 
May 11, 2012 at 6:56 PM Post #836 of 6,486

bigshot

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Nov 16, 2004
Posts
25,201
Likes
5,682
Location
A Secret Lab
Keep it in 24 bit for playback too, then you don't need to discuss all this [COLOR=0000FF]theory.[/COLOR] It's [COLOR=0000FF]true[/COLOR] 16/44.1 is very very satisfactory, it's [COLOR=800080]not true[/COLOR] it's the ultimate.


I like to mail letters in refrigerator boxes just to make sure they don't get any creases in the mail.
 
Jul 20, 2012 at 1:42 AM Post #838 of 6,486

joe_cool

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
Dec 8, 2002
Posts
1,151
Likes
13
Quote:
I just downloaded a copy of the new Norah Jones Little Broken Hearts from HDtracks:
"Mastered at New York’s legendary Sterling Sound by Norah Jones’ longtime mastering engineer Greg Calbi, Little Broken Hearts is available in master-quality 24-bit audio from the original flat mix sources, the highest quality format available. Little Broken Hearts (44.1kHz/24bit)


and......
How about a review or some opinions?
(I'm a big fan of Norah Jones. I have the SACD of her first album and look forward to more.)
 
Jul 20, 2012 at 7:18 PM Post #839 of 6,486

grokit

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Nov 1, 2009
Posts
11,732
Likes
586
Location
The North
It's very good, at least for my tastes. I sometimes wonder about her direction and influences but not here, this seems to be all Norah. It's a pop fusion of blues jazz & rock so not for the purist, but right in her creative wheelhouse IMHO. The SQ is quite good.
 
Thanks for reminding me to go back and listen again. I need to get a file converter going because it takes a "special procedure" to play FLAC ATM with iTunes/Pure Music. I probably have one downloaded already, just haven't used it yet.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top